40 Amendments of Michael GAHLER related to 2024/2082(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/1525 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 2023 on supporting ammunition production (ASAP),
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 b (new)
Citation 8 b (new)
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/2418 of 18 October 2023 of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing an instrument for the reinforcement of the European defence industry through common procurement (EDIRPA),
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
Citation 12 a (new)
– having regard to the Joint Communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 18 May 2022 on the Defence Investment Gaps Analysis and Way Forward (JOIN(2022)0024),
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 26 a (new)
Citation 26 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 24 October 2024 on the misinterpretation of UN resolution 2758 by the People’s Republic of China and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan,
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas Russia’s continued armament efforts and armaments cooperation with North Korea outweighing European stocks and production capacities by far, pose a serious, unprecedented threat to the territorial integrity of the Union and its Member States, as well as the security of its citizens; whereas Russia currently produces three million pieces of artillery ammunition per year while the EU’s declared ambition within its first European Defence Industry Strategy (EDIS) aims at a production capacity of 2 million pieces per year by the end of 2025; whereas experts have repeatedly issued warnings that Russian armed forces will be in a state to threaten EU territory within three to five years;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. whereas underinvestment in defence by EU Member States on the basis of the 2% GDP objective between 2006 to 2022 led to an investment gap of 1170 billion Euro in 2024 prices; whereas an increasing amount of experts and politicians consider defence investments of 3% GDP a necessary objective in light of the direct threat Russia poses to the Union and its Member States;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. whereas the exception from the EU budget funding principle as laid out in article 41(2) TEU applies to expenditure arising from operations having military or defence implications only; whereas in all other cases the VP/HR, jointly with the Commission, where necessary, should propose funding CFSP or CSDP related expenditure from the EU budget; whereas the Articles 14(1) and 16(1) TEU establish a balance between the Parliament and the Council as regards their budgetary functions; whereas the current practice does not reflect this balance;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Considers that this volatile and increasingly dangerous geopolitical environment urgently requires the Union and its Member States to take all necessary measures to ensure the defence readiness of the Union and its Member States, notably with regard to the threat posed by Russia; criticizes the overall limited progress in European capability development since the establishment of CSDP 25 years ago; regrets that despite the ambition of establishing a European Defence Union as laid out in article 42(2) TEU concrete steps are still missing; notes with increasing concern the lack of trust of EU Member States towards the Commission illustrated by statements of an alleged “power grab” by the Commission in connection with recent legislative initiatives in defence; stresses that ensuring the security of European citizens in the current geopolitical environment requires a truly common approach and joint efforts in the area of defence beyond mere considerations of protecting national sovereignty;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for the EU and its Member States to accelerate their commitments made in the Versailles Declaration, adopted on 11 March 2022, to assume greater responsibility for their defence and security, including by achieving greater strategic autonomy; stresses that NATO and the transatlantic partnership with the United States remain the cornerstones of European collective defence; stresses the need for EU Member States to step up their efforts by increasing their spending and procuring more joint capabilities jointly, thereby strengthening their armed forces whether for national, NATO or EU operational purposes;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Concurs with the ambition of building a European pillar within NATO and stresses that the development of a European defence union canhas to go hand-in- hand with the deepening of EU-NATO cooperation making full use of each organization’s unique capacities; stresses the need for close collaboration between both organizations with regard to defence capability development and reinforcement of industrial production capacities; calls for the establishment of a permanent conference on European armaments and defence policies in order to ensure close coordination and complementarity between both organizations' and their Member States’ efforts in capability development while avoiding unnecessary and dysfunctional duplication; underlines, therefore, that European Defence Projects of Common Interest as defined within the EDIP regulation proposal should be implemented in close coordination with NATO, in particular with regard to a European missile defence shield, given NATO’s European Sky Shield Initiative in which 15 European States are participating; calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that EU efforts in defence are aligned with and reinforce the objectives of the NATO Defence Planning Process;
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reaffirms its unwavering support for the EU and its Member States to stand in solidarity with Ukraine in the face of Russia’s war of aggression and to provide it with the necessary military means to defend itself, end the conflict and restore its territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders; welcomes the joint security commitments between the EU and Ukraine, and the bilateral security agreements concluded by Ukraine with several Member States; strongly reiterates its call for Member States to accelerate their delivery of weapons, air defence systems and ammunition to Ukraine, including air- launched cruise missiles; calls for Member States to lift all restrictions hindering Ukraine from using Western weapons systems against military targets within Russia, as allowed byin accordance with international law;
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the importance of the European Peace Facility (EPF), which has been instrumental in supporting the provision of military capabilities and training to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, while providing coordination for all stakeholders through the clearing house mechanism hosted by the EU Military Staff ; welcomes the setting up of the dedicated Ukraine Assistance Fund under the EPF and calls for financial resources for military assistance to Ukraine to be increased through this instrument; urges Hungary to lift its veto on EPF military support to Ukraine, including the agreed reimbursements to Member States that delivered military aid to Ukraine; points out that the initial purpose of the EPF is to support partner countries and to contribute to the financing of military CSDP missions and operations and calls for securing the necessary funding in order to be also able to support European interest in other areas such as Africa;
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the visambition set out in the European Defence Industrial Strategy accompanied byto achieve defence readiness of the EU and its Member States and considers the Commission’s proposal for establishing the European dDefence iIndustry pProgramme vital in that regard; supports the objective of strengthening EU defence industrial preparedness to further enable Member States to identify and discuss joint defence programming and procurement, as well as, improve joint defence planning and further facilitate joint procurement of Member States along the priorities set out in the Capability Development Plan (CDP) and areas for cooperation identified in the Coordinated Annual Review for Defence (CARD) in order to launch European defence projects of common interest as well as to ensure security of supply;
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Welcomes the 2023 revision of the Capability Development Plan (CDP); regrets the limited progress in capability development since the first CDP in 2008; stresses that, especially in light of Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine and the threat to European security, stronger and more joint efforts by EU Member States are needed in order to deter aggressors and protect European citizens and interests; calls accordingly upon the Member States to significantly increase joint efforts to achieve timely substantial progress in that area by making full and coherent use of EU instruments such as the European Defence Fund, PESCO and the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) as well as the instruments proposed in the EDIP regulation; stresses the need to include the CDP and CARD into national defence planning processes in close conjunction with NATO’s Defence Planning Process;
Amendment 324 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9 c. Welcomes the joint efforts undertaken thus far to strengthen the EU’s defence readiness through measures reinforcing and supporting the adaption of the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB), notably through the EDIRPA and ASAP regulations and calls for their swift and unbureaucratic implementation; regrets that the financial envelope of EDIRPA remains limited and points out that the role of ASAP in relation to the ambition of supplying Ukraine with one million pieces of ammunition was restrained by the Council’s objection against its regulatory elements; welcomes the Commission’s proposal for the European Defence Industry Program (EDIP); notes with concern the assessment of the European Court of Auditors that the financial envelope of EDIP is insufficient in relation to its objectives and therefore reiterates its call for ensuring the required funding for defence;
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Highlights the importance of PESCO for improving the EU’s defence capabilities; notes with regret that tangible results within the currently 66 ongoing projects remain limited; regrets the lack of information to the European Parliament on the reasons of the closure of 6 projects and possible results; points out that participating Member States agreed to 20 binding commitments in order to meet the EU’s ambition in defence; considers it necessary to conduct a thorough review of PESCO projects with regard to results and prospects thereof that should also include the possibility of closing of projects that lack sufficient progress; proposes to establish a priority scheme within PESCO in order to effectively address the identified capability gaps and priorities; calls on the Member States to regularly, at least twice per year, provide the European Parliament with an assessment of the progress within PESCO;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9 d. Points out that joint procurement by EU Member States is essential to ensure the Union’s defence readiness as it would improve interoperability of Member States’ armed forces and would allow for effective use of EU taxpayers’ money given that no EU Member State is either willing or capable to fund a fully-fledged national defence; underlines that effective joint procurement with regard to development projects, especially in the framework of the European Defence Fund, require a joint definition of military requirements of the respective systems which should be based on a joint definition by the EU’s Military Committee in order to achieve an adequate level of economies of scale; strongly suggests to translate non-binding NATO standards, especially for ammunition and components, into EU legislation in order to improve interoperability and foster industrial cooperation; calls upon Member States to conduct joint procurement with a view of establishing pan-European values chains by distributing production throughout the Union in order to increase the economic attractiveness of joint procurement while building strategic redundancies of production capacities for improved resilience in case of an armed conflict;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9 e. Welcomes efforts and investments of companies of the EDTIB done thus far to reinforce industrial capacity, also through the support of EU instruments; highlights that further and lasting reinforcement of the EDTIB’s capacity requires foremost orders by EU Member States which should be conducted jointly in order to improve interoperability between Member States’ armed forces and to achieve economies of scale, thus making most of EU taxpayers’ money; calls, accordingly, on Member States to intensify joint procurement efforts in line with the capability gaps identified in the Defence Investment Gaps Analysis and the capability priorities of the Capability Development Plan (CDP); stresses that the reinforcement of the EDTIB’s production capacity also requires conducive regulatory framework conditions, especially with regard to reducing the bureaucratic burden on companies but also with regard to existing EU legislation that produces counterproductive effects for the EDTIB’s performance and the security of supply; suggests, therefore, a review of existing legislation and thorough prior assessments of future legislative proposals in that regard; highlights in particular the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, as their reporting obligations allow hostile actors to identify vulnerabilities in the defence supply chain that endanger the defence readiness of the Union and its Member States; points out, additionally, that defence exemptions within the REACH regulation are insufficient to ensure security of supply as demand from the EDTIB does not necessarily provide for a profitable business case for suppliers, thus causing them to relocate outside EU creating new dependencies;
Amendment 338 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights the need to overcome the fragvital necessity to finally achieve full implementation of the EU’s internal market for defence products, as it leads that is undermined by a lack of uniform application of its legal base by EU Member States and unreasonable invocation of the exemption provided by article 346 TFEU, leading to unnecessary duplications and the multiplication of inefficiencies in defence spendinginvestments; calls on the Commission to present proposals to complete the EU internal market for defence, based, in particular, on an assessment of EU rulesthoroughly review directive 2009/81/EC for defence procurement and 2009/43/EC for transfer of defence-related products, and that constitute the EU internal market for defence with a view on the identification and analysis of limitations and loopholes in the current legal frameworkorder to propose a recast of the directives;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the importance of ensuring a balanced effort between strengthening existing EU armament industrial capabilities in the short and medium-term, and supporting research and development for new and innovative military equipment and armament tailored to the needs of the armed forces of the Member States; highlights the particular importance of emerging and disruptive technologies in that context that requires the ability to provide funding in a fast, unbureaucratic manner which is not possible under the current European Defence Fund regulation with its long implementation cycles; calls, therefore, for a more flexible and faster approach on research projects on emerging disruptive technologies reflecting the increasing pace of developments in that field building on the work of the European Defence Agency’s Hub for European Defence Innovation (HEDI) and drawing on the work of the US Defence Advanced Research Project Agency;
Amendment 364 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Stresses that the threat the Union is facing requires true and ambitious joint efforts making most effective use of Union instruments and funding in order to address capability gaps and priorities in a timely manner as laid out in the Defence Investment Gap Analysis and the Capability Development Plan; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to align and prioritize EDF projects and funding along the EU's urgent capability needs as well as to focus on the most relevant and promising research activities; underlines the need to further support the transition of development projects to marketable solutions and welcomes the provision in the EDIP proposal in that regard; deplores the unnecessary and dysfunctional duplication of efforts with regard to the projects on the future main battle tank and the hypersonic interceptor; raises concern that such duplications counteract the ambition laid out in EDIS to procure 60% by 2035 from the EDTIB as scattered resources will prolong achieving marketable solutions, thus leading most likely to procurement from the US; regrets similarly the increasing delay of essential capability projects outside the EU framework, notably the Franco-German project on the Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) and the Franco-German- Spanish project on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) which also risks future procurement of US solutions; stresses that all possible synergies with the EDF should be used while avoiding duplication of efforts;
Amendment 398 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that geopolitical developments have evolved rapidly since the Strategic Compass was adopted by Member States in March 2022; calls, therefore, for a review of the Strategic Compass based on a comprehensive joint threat assessment from which priorities of EU actions should be deducted; calls, furthermore, for the Commission and the VP/HR to present an updated version of the Strategic Compass, following this review exercise and for this to inform the preparation of the white paper on the future of European defence;
Amendment 413 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Suggests that the Council review the institutional settings of its decision- making bodies competent for defence and security, and consider setting up a new permanent decision-making body made up of ministers of defence from Member States; stresses, however, that effective cooperation on the European level based on the agreed capability priorities as agreed in the Capability Development Plan level requires coherence between the different structures, policies and instruments of the Council and the Commission in order to make best use of EU taxpayers’ money; calls, therefore, to establish a reinforced link between the Council and the Commission by the Council naming the Defence Commissioner its Special Representative for the Defence Union and adapting the Council decision on the European Defence Agency (EDA) and on the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) in order to make the Defence Commissioner Head of the EDA and coordinator for PESCO;
Amendment 417 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Calls on Member States to assess the reform of the decision-making process in CSFP/CSDP with a view to realising untapped potential within the Treaties, in particular by activating Article 31 TEU extending qualified majority voting (QMV) to areas relating to the CSDP and pursuing full use of the ‘passerelle clauses’ and scope of articles that enhance EU solidarity and mutual assistance in the event of crises; proposes changes to the Treaties in the CSDP, to be discussed and decided upon within a convention following up on the Conference on the Future of Europe, which should address (1) primarily focusing on switching from unanimity to QMV for Council decisions with military implications with an exception for the mutual defence clause in Article 42 (7) and on defence matters for situations where passerelle clauses do not apply, requiring 72% of Council members representing at least 65% of population, (2) introduction of provisions in Articles 42 and 46 TEU enabling the joint procurement of defence equipment and other security-related spending from the budget of the Union as well as the establishment of joint and permanently stationed military units including command structures and (3) revision of Article 346 TFEU in order to limit possibilities for EU Member States to deviate from the provisions of the procurement directive (2009/81/EC) as well as to introduce the requirement of justification for such deviations to be assessed by the Commission and communicated to the European Parliament;
Amendment 424 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. RStrongly reiterates its call to strengthen the EU mand achieve full operational readiness of the Military pPlanning and cConduct cCapability and to achieve full operational capability(MPCC), including through the provision of adequate premises, staff, enhanced command and control, and effective communication and information systems for all CSDP missions and operations; stresses the necessity to achieve timely results with regard to the MPCC given the ambition of the Strategic Compass that the MPCC should function as the EU’s preferred command and control structure that is capable to plan and conduct all non-executive military missions and two small-scale or one medium-scale executive operation/s, as well as live exercises; calls furthermore for the establishment of a joint civil- military headquarter on the European level that combines the civil and military instruments in order to make full use of the EU’s integrated approach in crisis management right from strategic planning to the actual conduct of the respective mission or operation; reiterates its full support for the Rapid Deployment Capacity to achieve full operational capability in 2025, with at least 5 000 troops available for rescue and evacuation tasks, initial entry and stabilisation operations or temporary reinforcement of missions; welcomes the planning and realisation of live exercises under the framework of the Rapid Deployment Capacity and encourages the continuation of such initiatives;
Amendment 434 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Considers the RDC as a key element for achieving the EU’s level of ambition which should form a nucleus for a joint EU military corps by gradually assigning additional troops and force elements aiming at establishing a European Corps in reference to the Helsinki Headline Goal of 1999 that should also be included in tier 2 of the new NATO force model given the single set of European forces; raises concern that the rotational, voluntary provision of forces by EU Member States as it is the case with the EU Battlegroups could lead to a situation where the RDC is not fully staffed and rapidly deployable; reiterates that the RDC needs to provide added value in comparison to EU battlegroups and should therefore be set up as a standing force which is permanently stationed and trains together; highlights that a standing RDC and a future European Corps could also contribute to the development of a common European strategic culture; reiterates its call on the Council and the Commission to thoroughly assess this option, especially by taking into account funding possibilities under Article 41 TEU or by amending the financial regulation in order to include the RDC as an EU institution; calls on Member States to commit to substantially narrowing critical gaps in strategic enablers in a timely manner, in particular linked to the RDC, such as strategic airlift, space communication assets, medical assets, cyber-defence capabilities and intelligence and reconnaissance;
Amendment 444 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the increased budgets and investment in defence by Member States and the increase, albeit modest, in the EU budget for CSDP in 2024; calls on the Member States that have not yet reached the minimum threshold of 2 % of their GDP devoted to defence expenditure to resolutely commit to gradually increasing their military budgets; recommends that, on the basis of continuous analysis of in light of the serious threat the EU and its Member States are facing, the estimated need for 500 billion of defence investment until 2035 and persisting substantial capability needgaps, Member States further increase thisdefence investments beyond the 2% threshold, in particular for joint procurement of defenceactions aiming at closing capabilitiey gaps;
Amendment 470 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Underlines that the decades-long political, financial and conceptual underinvestment in our defence has led to serious gaps in military capabilities, in industrial capacity and in the defence- readiness of the EU, the Member States and European citizens; underlines that the financial means needed to rebuild and expand our defence capabilities in the decade to come will have a significant impact on the soundness and sustainability of public finances and therefore requires cooperation and coordination at EU level through a genuine defence economic policy;
Amendment 473 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Recalls that the Union objectives of solidarity, cohesion and convergence also apply to defence; therefore calls on the VP/HR and the Commission to make defence a priority under the next MFF; is convinced that for funding the Defence Union, the Commission should be empowered to borrow funds on capital markets on behalf of the Union in order to readying the EU, the Member States and the citizens for the most extreme military contingencies; underlines that defence investment from the EU budget can only complement but not substitute financial efforts of Member States, especially with regard to Member States ambition of 2% GDP defence investment; recommends the exemption of defence investments of EU Member States which provide added-value to the overall defence readiness of the EU from fiscal stability rules;
Amendment 475 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)
Paragraph 16 d (new)
16 d. Welcomes the further extension of the eligibility criteria of the European Investment Bank (EIB) towards dual-use goods as an attempt of signalling to the private market; stresses the EIB’s objective is to foster European integration, promote the development of the EU and support EU policies in line with article 309 TFEU; considers, therefore, the dual-use extension of the lending policy as insufficient given that defence is a core EU policy priority and the EDTIB’s financing needs and therefore strongly calls upon the EIB and foremost its Board of Governors consisting of Ministers of Finance of EU Member States to adapt the EIB's lending policy and eligibility criteria so that military equipment that goes beyond dual- use application are no longer excluded from EIB financing; states that possible reservations towards a further extension of the EIB's lending policy and eligibility criteria to military equipment due to a suspected risk of withdrawal from investors endangering the EIB's financial stability require a comprehensive justification as it hampers the EU's policy priority of strengthening the defence readiness of the Union and its Member States and carries major implications for the overall political independence of the Union; calls, accordingly, upon the EIB to conduct and provide the European Parliament with a thorough and quantitative assessment of its investor's policy towards defence investments and the impact of a possible withdrawal of these investments on the EIB's financial stability without, where applicable, compromising its confidentiality agreements with its investors;
Amendment 478 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16 c. Highlights that reinforcement of the EDTIB’s capacity also requires access to private funding and financial services for companies of the EDTIB; deplores that private financial actors discriminate companies of the EDTIB based on narrow interpretations of sustainability requirements in the context of the so- called environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria derived from the United Nations Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs); states clearly that the fulfilment of the SDGs requires foremost security and resilience which can, especially under the conditions of an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment, only be ensured through a credible defence based on a capable and adequately funded EDTIB in order to deter potential aggressors; strongly calls upon the Commission to take timely and concrete measures to remedy that situation such as the provision of a Commission interpretation of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Institutions) clearly stating that defence does not obstruct that goal but even reinforces it, a review of the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation ensuring that interpretations of the defence industry as socially or environmentally harmful by private actors will be excluded as well as the resumption of the work on the EU Ecolabel for Retail Financial Products with a view of specifically including the EDTIB;
Amendment 674 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Expresses serious concern over the growing security challenges posed by cyber and hybrid attacks, and foreign information manipulation and interference, which are aimed, inter alia, at undermining the stability of democratic societies, especially in the run-up to elections; calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service to strengthen their capabilities to address these challenges and increase resilience against disinformation; highlights the success and significance of the PESCO project Cyber Information Domain Coordination Center (CIDCC) with regard to situational awareness for CSDP mission and operations as well as for strengthening general resilience of the Union in this area and calls, therefore, for its permanent integration in CSDP structures;
Amendment 750 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26 b. Points out that the EU’s defence policies should reflect the principles of gender equality and diversity, promoting inclusive military environments that reflect the values and diversity of European society while ensuring that all members of European armed forces, regardless of gender or background, have equal opportunities and access to support;
Amendment 751 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Stresses that the EU and its Member States must address critical recruitment and retention challenges in the military by developing coordinated national and EU-level actions in order to ensure a sustainable military workforce; recommends, that the EU should support the Member States in developing policies that enhance career attractiveness and long-term retention strategies; stresses the need for the EU Military Committee (EUMC) to provide a follow-up on its task of gathering and analysing data across the EU Member States on the issues of recruitment and retention, in order to identify possible counter-measures; highlights that supporting mental health and well-being of military personnel, with a focus on professional development and long-term care for veterans, must be adequately taken into consideration in the further development of the Defence Union;
Amendment 780 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Stresses the importance of NATO and the EU playing complementary, coherent and mutually reinforcing roles in supporting international security and thus avoiding the duplication of defence efforts; welcomes the accession of Sweden to NATO in 2024, following Finland in 2023, representing a historic step forward in strengthening security in Europe; raises concern about unnecessary and dysfunctional duplication between both organizations, especially with regard to defence industrial policies and measures, as this might result in contradictory results and risks reducing effective impact of European taxpayers’ money as it is, for instance, the case for the EDF and NATO project on the next generation rotorcraft; calls for the set-up of a regular defence capability and industrial capacity conference between both organisation in order to ensure coherence and improve effectiveness of measures taken by both organizations; calls for stronger linkage between both organisations with regard to defence planning by establishing a double function of the Director General of the EU Military Staff as EU Deputy SACEUR in NATO;
Amendment 811 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29 a. Highlights the importance of the EU’s close relationship to the United States which is based on shared values of democracy and freedom, the rule of law as well as a broad range of common or converging interests; values the United States’ and the current administration’s unwavering and strong commitment and engagement to the territorial defence of Europe, especially in light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine that threatens the whole continent; takes note that the United States are also challenged in the Indo-Pacific to counter China’s increasing military posture; stresses that EU Member States need to step up their efforts to improve European defence capabilities in order to pave the way for a burden shifting in the long run with the EU taking more responsibility for its defence and allowing the United States to allocate the necessary resources to the Indo-Pacific;
Amendment 813 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29 b. Takes note of the National Defence Industry Strategy of the United States of January 2024 and its ambition to deepen industrial cooperation with partners; acknowledges the vast range of possible mutually beneficial areas of cooperation in defence and its positive implications for a stronger transatlantic partnership in times of increasing geopolitical competition; stresses, however, that such a cooperation requires a level playing field which is incompatible with the provisions of the US International Trade in Arms Regulation; calls, accordingly, upon the Commission to launch a dialogue with the United States exploring possibilities of developing a mutually beneficial defence industrial cooperation based on a legal framework ensuring a transatlantic level playing field;
Amendment 824 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Welcomes the Trinity House Agreement between the United Kingdom and Germany to deepen defence cooperation; strongly calls upon the Commission, the VP/HR and the Council to actively engage with the United Kingdom to achieve such an agreement between the Union and the United Kingdom including provisions for the mutually beneficial participation of the United Kingdom in EU defence instruments and programs;
Amendment 846 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 22 a (new)
Subheading 22 a (new)
Partnership with Indo-Pacific
Amendment 847 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Considers it’s essential to strengthen the EU’s presence and partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region as a means for promoting peace and security in the region, which lies at the core of the EU’s interests, with particular caution regarding China’s threats in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea; is also aware of Taiwan’s leading role in high- tech development, and its abundant experience defending Chinese hybrid attacks, disinformation, and FIMI, which should be a foremost consideration when assessing the possibilities of strengthening multilateral exchange and cooperation, with the aim of achieving an enhanced and mutually beneficial partnership;