Check against delivery!
Thank you to all of you for joining this important meeting.
This might be the last Foreign Affairs Council that I have the honor to chair. Not only will this be the 50th formal Foreign Affairs Council session, but across various sectors including foreign affairs, defense, and development, I have chaired a total of 122 Councils. As I conclude, my hope is that this will indeed be my final session on foreign affairs.
Let me take a moment for a brief reflection before we dive into today’s discussions.
I began my mandate five years ago on December 9th, and at that time, the agenda of the Foreign Affairs Council included significant issues related to Russia and Ukraine, as well as the Middle East and the United States.
Five years ago, the focus was on the Normandy format concerning Russia and Ukraine—not centered around the conflict but the diplomatic processes involved. We analyzed the growing tensions in the Middle East, especially regarding Iran, and considered the complex relationship with the Trump administration in the United States, which was characterized by both collaboration and notable friction with the European Union.
I recall that leaders back then expressed a need for us to take our destiny into our own hands. It resonates with the sentiments we find ourselves echoing today: we must autonomously steer our future. Remarkably, these discussions echo themes present five years ago.
Today, we regularly engage in discussions on issues that dominate our agenda now such as Ukraine and the Middle East, albeit with a very different backdrop as a war now permeates Ukraine and unrest escalates in the Middle East.
Let historians analyze the conclusions stemming from these last five years; I perceive a persistent need for us to unite if we hope to communicate in a language of power. This sentiment, shared in my address to the Members of Parliament during my initial hearing, remains profoundly relevant today.
To emerge as a significant geopolitical player, we must prioritize unity, maintain close ties with our partners, and approach international matters realistically. Over these past five years, I endeavored to address the paralyzing blockages hindering the European Union’s responsiveness to global challenges.
Nevertheless, the present reality undoubtedly falls short of my ambitions. There remains an urgent requirement for us to intensify our efforts towards European unity among member states and in collaboration with EU institutions, especially during this transitional phase.
It’s crucial to underscore that even though we find ourselves navigating a transition, the rest of the world continues to evolve rapidly. Amidst our internal preparations for nominations and hearings, the external environment does not pause for our deliberations.
On the contrary, global affairs are escalating at alarming rates, often in unsettling directions. The challenges we face demand a swift, cohesive response from the European Union.
Indeed, the events unfolding globally are troubling. Three significant geopolitical tension points—namely Ukraine, the Middle East, and the South China Sea—have come to the forefront, especially with the implications of the new American administration’s policies. While the U.S. has always been a pivotal force, the latest climate suggests an intriguing turn as we scrutinize its role in these critical regions.
In today’s agenda, we initiated our discussions with a focus on Ukraine, receiving a briefing from Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha via videoconference.
During our talks, we emphasized Ukraine’s pressing need to bolster its defense capabilities in light of Russia’s recent escalation of missile attacks, which represented the most significant offensive in the past month. These strikes targeted civilian infrastructure, specifically power systems crucial for survival.
Even though nuclear reactors were not directly attacked, the assaults on substations that link these reactors to the national grid had severe implications. Despite Ukrainian forces intercepting approximately 80% of incoming missiles—partially aided by the use of F16 aircraft—cities like Odesa still experienced stark electricity shortages, demonstrating the precarious situation as civilians endure frequent assaults on infrastructure.
The implications are profound; it is evident that President Putin shows no readiness to de-escalate the conflict but instead seems intent on intensifying these military engagements to achieve his stated objectives: territorial conquest and domination over Ukraine, which aspires to become an EU candidate.
Tomorrow marks 1000 days since the onset of this war. Putin initially believed his campaign would conclude within mere weeks. Yet, after nearly three years, combat rages on in places like Donbas, highlighting an ongoing crisis that extends back even further to 2014 when initial hostilities began. It prompts reflection on whether our response should have been more robust and immediate from the outset.
As Russia escalates its military aggression unchecked, we must remain steadfast in our resolve. It is unmistakable that each instance lacking a decisive reaction from us only empowers Russia to raise the stakes further. Their approach has evolved from weaponizing food and energy to wielding Iranian drones and missiles, and even soliciting military assistance from North Korea, with the situation growing ever more dire.
Without the patronage of nations like North Korea, Iran, and China, it is questionable how Russia could sustain its military endeavors. Reports indicating the supply of significant military assets to Russia from these nations are increasingly alarming, especially as North Korean and Iranian entities bolster Russia’s capacity to wage war.
It’s essential to consider potential ramifications if we allow escalating actions to proceed without consequence—a topic that multiple Member States underscored during our discussions today.
It is imperative for Europe to step forward, to assume strategic responsibilities in support of Ukraine, particularly in the aftermath of harrowing waves of missile attacks that starkly illustrate the Kremlin’s true intentions.
After extensive dialogue with colleagues, including Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defense today, I assert that our support for Ukraine must remain unwavering—this encompasses military assistance, financial aid, and sanctions. This commitment is equally vital for our interests. History will undoubtedly evaluate our actions during these tumultuous periods.
We transitioned our discussions to the Middle East, which we similarly began exploring yesterday.
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to host an informal dinner with former Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and former Palestinian Foreign Minister Al Qidwa to discuss their peace plan. Their ideas represent a sliver of hope amidst the ongoing turmoil, and encapsulate a unified call for peace from those deeply entrenched in the conflict.
Gathering both Palestinian and Israeli former officials to deliberate on peace plans was a rare but meaningful event. The work undertaken by our Special Representative, Sven Koopmans, and my team in facilitating civil dialogue has been commendable. It’s essential to foster empathy for the struggles faced by others in this situation, reinforcing the notion that peace is attainable.
With collaborative efforts in venues like Barcelona and Brussels, we must continue to capitalize on opportunities that promote peace. Our discussions highlighted the importance of garnering public support and momentum towards returning to a viable peace process, reflecting on near agreements achieved previously, particularly around 2008, only to be thwarted by subsequent conflicts.
We now confront a critical moment that necessitates collective effort to mitigate the suffering experienced by people in Gaza and Lebanon, as we witness hostages still unaccounted for amid widespread devastation. The civilian toll in Gaza continues to rise, with an alarming 70% of casualties being women and children, underscoring the humanitarian crisis unfolding. To date, the predominant demographic among those affected are children aged 5 to 9 years.
It’s profoundly disheartening to confront the severity of suffering endured by civilians, particularly the ongoing plight of remaining hostages and those enduring dire conditions.
Urgent calls to action extend to the UNRWA head, Philippe Lazzarini, and those able to report on the ground realities emerging from Gaza, elucidating the despair and complications arising from this conflict.
This brings me to propose to the Council the suspension of a segment of the Association Agreement with Israel. More explicitly, this will pertain to the areas under the exclusive purview of the Council, bearing in mind that the Commission has yet to present proposals following Spain and Ireland’s requests regarding Israel’s adherence to this agreement.
During our discussions, I put forward findings from our Special Representative on Human Rights. Many Member States felt continuity of diplomatic relations with Israel was paramount despite the ongoing situation, contributing to the decision not to pursue my proposal deeper. However, I have presented ample information from relevant United Nations bodies and various organizations, prompting discussions surrounding the ramifications of Israel’s military actions.
We also deliberated on the sanctions proposed against Hamas and those engaging in violent acts against Palestinians residing in the West Bank. The West Bank remains on the edge, beset by Israeli military operations amidst rising violence from settlers. Although a consensus among Member States remains elusive, I remain hopeful for a resolution, particularly in light of recent U.S. administration decisions prompting a reevaluation of my proposals concerning extremist settlers’ actions.
We analyzed the ramifications of the International Court of Justice rulings regarding economic relations with illegally occupied territories, as Member States must determine appropriate measures following these judgments relating to the labelling of goods originating from such areas.
Discussion extended to Lebanon, where Member States have been advocating for urgent ceasefire measures, given the catastrophic humanitarian crisis affecting nearly a million displaced individuals and rampant destruction of civilian infrastructure, leading to a humanitarian threshold that must not be ignored.
Overall, we must rejuvenate efforts towards addressing hostilities in Lebanon, the West Bank, Gaza, and the peace process at large. The Global Alliance aimed at implementing the two-state solution, initiated during the United Nations General Assembly session, convened recently in Riyadh, with a follow-up meeting scheduled for November 28, my final day in office here in Brussels.
Implementation is key, not merely recognition of aspirations. We must translate our words into tangible actions; inaction will only perpetuate this prolonged crisis wrought with human suffering over recent years.
During today’s discussions, we also emphasized the importance of reinforcing our relationship with the United States, necessitating an unprecedented level of coordination among European nations to effectively engage with the new American administration.
Secretary Blinken’s recent visit to Brussels underscored the numerous conversations we’ve had aimed at preventing war in Ukraine while simultaneously seeking ceasefire possibilities in Gaza. As we anticipate another meeting in Rome later this month, the context in which we operate has drastically evolved.
North Korean soldiers now engage against Ukrainians near Europe’s borders, supported by Iranian military processes and ongoing alliances bolstered by China’s backing of Russia. The political climate has shifted dramatically, requiring our meticulous approach to relations with the incoming American administration.
This undoubtedly presents both challenges and opportunities for Europe to assert itself as a credible partner on the world stage, promoting rationality alongside adherence to international laws and climate responsibilities. The emergence of upheaval, especially considering past administrations, highlights how essential it is for Europe to dynamically embrace its global role.
Since I first articulated that ‘Europe is in danger’ in 2022, a sentiment echoed in my call for a comprehensive Strategic Compass, we have recognized the urgency of enhancing defense capacities, including ammunition production, to bolster Europe’s overall security and defense mechanisms. The role of High Representative must encompass diplomacy, security, and defense, and I take pride in developing this crucial facet of my responsibilities.
We transitioned into various pressing matters presented, including discussions surrounding Georgia, the Horn of Africa, Venezuela, and COP29 in Azerbaijan.
Beginning with Georgia, recent parliamentary elections have alarmingly revealed significant democratic backsliding under the current government.
The leadership of the Georgian Dream party has distanced the nation from its path toward EU integration, diverging from the aspirations of the Georgian populace who seek closer ties with Europe. While we all share the same desire to rectify this alignment, substantial changes through decisive actions are necessary. We aim to send a mission to thoroughly investigate the observed irregularities during the elections, ensuring the government undertakes necessary reforms.
Insisting on adherence to rule of law and basic democratic principles is non-negotiable. Georgia’s prospects for advancing its relationship with the EU hinge on implementing these pivotal changes.
We will extend an invitation to the Head of the ODIHR election observation mission to provide insight into the observed electoral irregularities to our Member States. We intend to update the Political and Security Committee on these vital matters regarding electoral concerns.
To the people of Georgia, I wish to reaffirm my statements made during my visit last year: the door to the European Union remains open for Georgia. Nevertheless, the government’s actions regarding electoral integrity and rule of law must pivot towards respect for democratic principles to facilitate further EU integration.
We invested considerable time elucidating the situation in the Horn of Africa, particularly regarding Sudan, where a humanitarian disaster is escalating rapidly. Ethnic cleansing is reportedly taking place, necessitating our full attention as we advocate for civilian protections amidst rising fatalities.
Countless individuals have witnessed horrifying turmoil, with 14 million fleeing from their homes in search of refuge. As these individuals attempt to reach safety at neighboring borders, it is imperative that Member States facilitate initiatives designed to protect civilians.
Moreover, Russia’s recent veto concerning a United Nations Security Council Resolution pertaining to this crisis signifies their support for ongoing hostilities. Meanwhile, we advocate for a cessation of fighting in Sudan while reinforcing our support for Somalia in maintaining stability amidst regional complexities.
Shifting focus to Venezuela, we conversed extensively about the domestic political climate, reiterating our firm stance against recognizing Maduro’s legitimacy as a leader amid ongoing disputes regarding electoral integrity. Our discussions emphasize the necessity of revisiting sanctions, ensuring they target leadership rather than the Venezuelan populace.
While it was encouraging to hear of significant releases of political prisoners by the Maduro government, our calls for the liberation of those unjustly detained—especially Europeans—remain paramount. This Council meeting has reiterated our main points, which echo sentiments voiced previously, revolving around Ukraine, the Middle East, and relations with the new American administration.
A Latin American song encapsulates the sentiment perfectly: “cinco años no son nada”—though it famously states “twenty years is nothing,” I’d like to modify that perspective and assert that five years, while swift, profoundly impact our world today.
Thank you.
Q&A.
Q. I would like to ask you about the elections in Georgia. Could you please go into a bit more detail about exactly why you feel the conduct of that election is going against the will of the Georgian people and turning away from the European Union?
We are dispatching a political mission to Georgia for a comprehensive examination of these irregularities. We have suspended planned support from the European Peace Facility to the armed forces, along with canceling €121 million earmarked directly for the Georgian government; instead, these funds will be channeled toward initiatives benefitting civil society.
Q. I want to ask you about reports indicating that Russia is producing lethal drones in China. Although China vehemently denies this, do you believe such production could occur unbeknownst to central authorities and President Xi Jinping? Should further evidence corroborate these claims, what sort of sanctions do you envision the EU imposing on China, given the calls not to supply lethal equipment?
I cannot attest to the reliability of the report in question. However, it’s verifiable that China supplies dual-use goods to Russia, a matter I have definitively acknowledged.
Q. Do you feel that in relation to the Gaza war, you have remained on the right side of history? Additionally, it is perplexing why some Member States turn a blind eye to the genocide unfolding with impunity. Do you have reasons to explain this contradiction while providing humanitarian aid that seems ineffective?
This is a profound question. I have endeavored to fulfill my responsibilities. Two countries have urged a review of how the conflict adheres to international humanitarian law, which I have sought to address through appropriate channels. The reports compiled reflect the humanitarian circumstances on the ground; however, at this juncture, Member States have opted for continued diplomatic engagement with Israel despite the crises.
Q. What’s your explanation regarding Joe Biden’s authorization of missiles to be deployed within Russian territory? Why this decision now, particularly post-Trump’s tenure? Did this discussion arise during today’s meeting?
The Biden administration has sanctioned military support to Ukraine to operate up to 300 kilometers within Russian territory. This decision has sparked discussions, and I have expressed support for it as a reasonable military response. Each Member State will decide its course of action based on national interests, but it’s vital to acknowledge the shift occurring in U.S. policy.
Q. With regards to Georgia, what constitutes a viable solution to the current crisis? Given the President’s firm stance against the recent election results, how do you view the demands for international investigation, snap elections, and sanctions against oligarchs?
I cannot provide specifics beyond what I’ve shared. The technical mission will analyze the circumstances surrounding the contested elections and report accordingly, as it’s crucial to ensure transparency and democracy remains at the forefront of these processes.
Q. What discussions transpired regarding the Horn of Africa, particularly the escalating tensions between Ethiopia and Somalia?
We acknowledge the complexities spanning Somalia, Sudan, Ethiopia, and Eritrea. The EU has historically committed financial resources towards supporting missions in Somalia but must share the burden among international partners now, recognizing the need for a multipronged approach to sustain stability.
Q. Regarding the next High Representative/Vice-President, will Kaja Kallas maintain a focus on the Middle East, especially concerning Gaza?
It’s assured that my successor will dedicate appropriate attention to all unresolved conflicts globally.
What are the potential risks associated with providing military aid to Ukraine in the current geopolitical climate?
Pressed the need for careful consideration of the implications of such actions. We understand that the military dynamics in the region are complex, and it is crucial to maintain open lines of communication with our allies to navigate these circumstances effectively. While the intention is to thwart any further aggression and support Ukraine’s defense, we must also be vigilant about escalating tensions that could lead to broader conflict. These discussions are ongoing, and our collective approach will aim to balance robust support for Ukraine while working towards de-escalation in the region.
Our focus remains on ensuring that military aid aligns with our strategic objectives and adheres to international law. This is an important point of dialogue among Member States, as we seek a unified stance on providing support to Ukraine while promoting peace and stability in the surrounding areas. The situation remains fluid, and we will continue to evaluate our strategies in light of new developments. Thank you for your insightful questions.