 I hope you're doing fine. We are not going to start the session on peace and security. As you know, obviously, because of what is happening in Ukraine, but also because we are having this event in Poland. And Polish perspective is very important to what is happening in Ukraine, but also to us Greens. So the title of the session is, What do Polish and Ukrainian perspective mean for the debate on a green European vision for security? As you know, the war in Ukraine shaped a lot of what were Greens' certainties and positions on certain things. And we did a lot of work to, let's say, move on certain debates. So we have four speakers today. Sofia, I don't know if she is there. Yeah, please. Nice to see you. So you're the coordinator seat, wherever you like. You're the coordinator of the program Democracy Support and Human Security of the HBS in Ukraine. So by definition, you became a very qualified expert on what is happening on the ground. Then we have Agnieszka, who is here. Hello. Nice to meet you. Agnieszka is a scientist. She graduated from the Institute of International Relations at the Faculty of Journalism and Political Science at the University of Warsaw. Then she did her PhD in the field of political science, specialized in international relations. And then we have Lena, who is the leader of the Polish Young Greens. Hello. So she's the co-chair of the Polish Young Greens, as I just said. And then we have Gwendolyn Del Boscofield, who is a member of the European Parliament, who is notably working a lot on the issue of rule of law, especially in Hungary. She's the European Parliament reporter on the Article 7 procedure on Hungary. But she also knows a lot of things about the European Greens because she was in the Committee of the European Green Party for seven years, and about basically what is happening with the Greens. In the European Parliament. So Sofia, if that's OK, we are going to start with you with basically the main question being, what is happening in Ukraine? What is the state of play right now? And how do you see the Polish perspective and how what is happening in Ukraine is now shifting the debate in the EU, especially with the Polish angle. Thank you, Melanie. Good morning, everyone. And it's a great pleasure being here. But it's even the great pleasure seeing so many Ukrainian speakers and so many questions touching war in Ukraine and how it has an impact on the Greens, on the Green agenda, and not only Ukraine, but everything beyond Ukraine. What is happening in Ukraine? I mean, you're reading daily the news, and you see it everywhere. I'm starting my morning, every morning, preparing daily brief for shared the truth project that we've started on the third day of the war. And this lasts for nearly 140 days that I have these mornings. Reading the news and living with the news and what's happening around my country. One of the latest things, let's start with data. That was yesterday or day before the Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs said there were 17,000 strikes on civilian objects in Ukraine done by Russians. Daily, we read about the human rights violations. Recently, OSCE reported on 18 filtration camps in Ukraine. You learn about Ukrainian cities, not just because of their amazing architecture or the development ideas, but we learn about Ukrainian cities for the fact where the shelling has taken place. This week, we've learned about Vinnytsia, which is central Ukraine, relatively safe city. We now call everything relatively safe. Nowhere safe and nothing is safe. Vinnytsia was relatively safe city. In the end, we have 23 people killed, and among them, three kids. That was heartbreaking. When I found this news, I was standing on a cross acrossing the road in Brussels, being safe in Brussels, but reading about the news happening in Ukraine. In relatively safe Vinnytsia, we know about Mariupol, we know about Butchak, and Verpin, and dozens of other cities. Mykolaev, another case. Two universities, relatively short. Universities, the premises which meant about educating people, about educating the next generation. It's, again, civilian object. What do we have? We have destroyed the institutions. If I live there, I would like to attend this university, but most likely, there's no longer a chance to do that. Last but not least, the article from the Guardian from yesterday. 1,400 new graves identified in Mariupol. Mariupol is a city, you know, now everyone knows about it, where I was planning to have one of my projects this autumn. The idea was to bring some students to show us how the cities relive. In the end of the day, now, the project's not gonna take place because there was no word to bring them. And this is how we live, and this is how what's happening in the end of the day. It's another Saturday morning. For me, it's 143rd day of the war. What's coming next? These were the data and the latest news, but what's coming next? We got the candidate status, and I very much appreciate this, because this is quite a big push and recognition also of what Ukraine has done over the last couple of years of this transition and readiness to go. But again, just coming back from Brussels, what we see clearly, it's not gonna be a fast track, it's not gonna be easy. Everyone's telling us, that's quite a hard work that you have to do. That's reforms, these are the conditions that you have to work. This is anti-corruption, media law, national minorities law. There are sets of conditions. And this is just the beginning of the long run. The long run, which we have to implement, having shellings all across the country. So on the one hand, we still have to push the reform agenda. And we passed the law, one of the biggest achievements the civil society community has been celebrating was finally the ratification of Istanbul Convention. But this all goes, this reform agenda, which I would like to carry out in a peaceful times, it goes along with air raid alarms. And that's pretty much as it is in the end of the day. We were recently asked, so most likely you have a war in Ukraine, so you don't have to, like you don't have conditions to work in the civil society that cannot work at this moment. We said like, no, actually, everyone works like three times more, because you have to be safe and to save your clothes once. You volunteer or support any kind of humanitarian aid efforts or military. And you have to run your projects. So you have like three front lines, you care about your life, you care about your community, and you have to care about your work. So the burden and I mean like the workload that everyone is carrying is a lot. And the crucial thing is I work with civil society activists and NGOs. My two fantastic colleagues are here in the room. Olana is the founder of Green Academy and Anastasia is my partner and director of Cycling Association of Ukraine. None of them and none of my partners who are remaining in Kyiv or in Ukraine overall didn't stop working. And the idea is all of us, we were all pretty much the first pacifists, the first calling for non-violence and speaking about this during our Green Academies that we organize every year in Ukraine. But now, now we are fundraising for bulletproof twice, for year for our friends. We check who's safe, who's not. Anastasia, sorry for bringing up your case, but was 33 days in occupation. And now, and she didn't give up. And now we are all fighting and we are having all of our front lines. And we share the green values, but we reconsider these green values. I'm a democracy coordinator. I very much push for democracy agenda. And I see how this growth, how it's called, bottom up democracy is operating and the civil society have it contributes. It's amazing. But on the other hand, I feel like I want the democracy to be armed. And this is what makes me, I mean, my daily work and what I see makes me reconsider the green agenda, the values that I see in my country and also motivates me not to stop. And I see the same about the civil society that I work with, they do not stop. Because they know that it's like now having war around, we talk about already now, but on the day 140 days, we talk about reconstruction already. Because we know we cannot stop. Because we cannot wait until the end when the war will be over. Therefore, we have already the eco activists and energy activists are talking about what gonna be the next reconstruction projects that to make the cities better. Urban development activists are now discussing what are the needs and checking the needs, how to reconstruct cities better. So already now no one is waiting. People literally are already now talking about reconstruction and how to make the country livable and to work further. But the crucial thing for this that actually to implement these projects is that the country starts to be safe at least a little bit. And another idea is that to create these conditions that people return, we very much appreciate how Poland and many of other EU countries hosted Ukrainians from the very first day. I admire how literally the Polish borders were open for crossing for people and people were leaving on the very first days of the war. But also we want to create these conditions in our country that people return and they feel that it's safe enough to return. And for this, this requires quite a lot of immobilization. As I said, the EU is clearly saying there will be no shortcut to get membership, which means there should be work from the both sides. Ukrainian community, as I see, as I work, I see they are ready to do this. But it's also essential that there is support from the other side because as soon as we stop this, the sooner people will return. And also the cost of the war will be smaller for the rest. We see now the feedback we start receiving is, well, there is certain war fatigue that is coming. Winter is coming, the gas prices and the prices people will start receiving bills with pretty high bills. And we'll pay it with our bank cards, with our cash, literally from our pockets. And then this is where all of us, no matter where we live, we will feel this war in our pockets, super close. The second thing is, so we talk about the fatigue, we talk about cost of this. And also the third thing, the spending, the military spending and defense spending. These costs, of course, could go for capacity development projects, for development ideas, for building industrial parks, or just beautiful parks outside. I mean, I see how the territory next to the river has changed a lot. This is all taxpayers' money. And these taxpayers' money will now have to go for defense sector because now the whole Europe, the concept of Europe has to reconsider how to protect itself because at the moment, the military activities, the physical threat, is on the territory of Ukraine. And Ukrainians are pretty much standing to keep it there and to end it as soon as possible, but we need support. We don't ask to come and to fight instead of us. What at the moment everyone is asking, stop buying Russian gas, do they go with Embergo, sanctions, get rid of Russian media, in order not Russian media, but fight this disinformation. This is what's crucial because it's very well integrated in different spheres. There are a number of things to be done, but it's essential to stop it as soon as possible because, as I said, winter is coming, we start getting tired, talking about war and reading about war crimes, but it's also the money what could go for amazing parks around would rather go for defense sector for all of us or to support Ukraine in the end of the day. And well, I would love to have amazing projects and run seminars on green values in Ukraine, but at the moment if we don't protect, if we don't provide enough arms, there will be no one for whom to deliver these projects. And people who are right now displaced those millions, seven millions or something, people who are right now all across the Europe will be the cost to everyone and they will not return and even more people will start coming. And it's essential that we create these safe preconditions for people and save to ensure that people are willing to return. But this is, as I said, I'm saying this, first of all, as a Ukrainian, not as a program coordinator or as founder of the Green Assurance Project, I'm saying it as a Ukrainian, what we need at the moment, we need, first of all, arms, we need further support and not a fatigue because we are not tired. As Maria said, as others are saying, we are not tired, we are doing three times more now, so we don't give up. And we also ask everyone beyond Ukraine not to give up on us, even if it's gonna be a bit costly because the cost will be, it will increase, but if we don't stop it now, if we don't cut it now, it will take for long. And we drowsy prefer having it to stop it as soon as possible. Thank you. Thank you. I'm now, yeah, going to, I hope your mic is open, yeah. Now I'm going to ask you, Agnieszka, if you could, because you're a specialist of EU-Russia relationship, but so if you can talk about this, but also give us your view on the role that Poland is playing right now in this, and also maybe how you feel the positioning of EU member states towards Poland and the Polish society has changed during the conflict and what impact it has on the Polish civil society and on the fight for rule of law in Poland, et cetera. I think your mic is working. Yeah, it is. Thank you very much. It's a huge pleasure to be with you here because I have a strong feeling that we have always to repeat our message, that I have also the feeling that I am, I have been doing this since the February 2022, and I'm going to do the same today. So once again, I will explain why we, as Europe and especially also as Poland, we cannot give up our solidarity with Ukraine. We have to improve our politics because we still have much to do, but talking about Polish perspective, I was thinking what to share with you because I know that I have only 10 minutes and it's always too short, but I decided to share with you my three conclusions because talking about Poland, we, of course, my start with great compliment that Poland was the main supporter of Ukraine. We are still very solid towards our Ukrainian colleagues and friends and families, in fact, but please remember this is mostly because of Polish people. Polish government has made much, but not enough. And this is why we should remember that all these gestures of solidarity and absolute support for Ukrainian people, this is because of Polish people, because of grassroots movements. People were going onto the border, were taking the random family and giving them the shelter. So we should divide what is the, let's say, what is the success of the government and what is the success of Polish society. We should remember this because this is very important from my perspective. So let's start. I think that we should remember and we should underline that we, as Poland, we have to stress three elements and let's say three conclusions we have, let's say in July after half a year of the war in Ukraine. The first consequence for Poland is the security first. Yes, this is the first what we have changed in Poland. Poland turned out to be a frontline country and because of this, we turned out also to be a neighbor to an aggressive country, to an aggressor which doesn't hesitate to violate the UN Charter. We are next to an aggressor which doesn't hesitate to commit war crimes like Bucza, which doesn't hesitate to use terror methods like a few days ago in Vinica because bombing universities and bombing civil, let's say, sovereign things, this is terrorism and we should call Russia a rogue state. Finally, don't be afraid to use proper terms. So this is very important and for Poland, the very immediate change is the militarization and I am going to expect more militarization in public, more militarization of public language, more militarization in, let's say, Polish politics. That's more than sure then. Today we spent 2% of GDP on our armies and it's going to be even more next year. So we have a very populist government so we are going to have a populist and militarized government next year so we have to be afraid that Poland will have such a face very soon but of course we also should remember that next year we are just having parliamentary elections so there is a very small chance for a new government. So this is the first consequence. The second one is that alliances do matter because in Poland for a long time we had very long lasting discussions what to do with Polish security whether to organize our defense on ourselves like Israel but luckily, I'm sorry for saying this, but luckily because of war in Ukraine, now we as the society we understood that this is very naive to think about building our security only independently without NATO, without further integration with European Union. So for me, this is the very positive consequence that we understood that Poland is not the lonely boat on the global ocean so we have to be more integrated with NATO and we have to think twice what to do with our European policy because this is the problem our government is facing now what to do whether to give up the conflict with European Union because of violating the rule of law in Poland or to go on. And here I am not so optimistic. So this is the second conclusion that in Poland we finally understood that international cooperation really matters and it doesn't mean that we are losing our independence or as many of our politicians claim. And the second lesson learned is unfortunately very pessimistic and this is what I am afraid of that however we are facing the war the next door but it doesn't impact our populist government. That means that Putin's aggression on Ukraine has become the perfect cover for populist government. And today we have the problem that for example the next year we are going to have the highest inflation in Europe and what is our government explaining? This is because of Putin not because of our policy failures yes of our wrong decisions. This is Putin's because of Putin aggression. What's more we are just waiting we are expecting new prices increases on electricity for example. And what is our government talking to Polish people? This is not because of us this is not because we have wasted millions of euros for green transition but this is because of Putin. So this is why I am absolutely afraid that instead of let's say starting to think about a country instead of starting to think started thinking about security and how to defend Poland from economic crisis we are just going on into more populism into more demagogy in Polish politics. And these are three conclusions regarding to Polish let's say agenda and let's say Polish politics vis-à-vis the war in Ukraine. And I was thinking also what is important to what the message as Poland we should give to our European colleagues how they should understand what's going on in Poland. And I think that what is very important and this is also how we in Poland understand the war in Ukraine. We stress that and we have noticed that our European colleagues have divided into two camps. The first camp is the peace camp and the second one is the victory camp. And Poland belongs to the victory camp. That camp understands that the most important is to allow Ukraine to win. Not to stop the war immediately but to win because Polish diagnosis on Russia was not naive it was not Russophobia but it was absolutely based on our historical experience and we as Lithuania, as Baltic countries we understand Russian nature of aggressive politics. And we understand in opposition to some of our European colleagues that we have to bring Russia to how to say to have two defeats. The first one in the military and the second one to make Russia collapse economically. Because only this way we are able to avoid the situation when Russia a few years later will go back with a strong feeling that it has survived spectacular historical sanctions and nothing and no one will be able to stop it. So that's why we in Poland and in Eastern flank understand that peace for Europe, security, European security are absolutely dependent on what we will do now with Russia. Either we will make Russia collapse military and economically or we will give Russia time to leak the wounds and go back with the feeling that no one might stop it. So this is very important lesson not only to Poland but to our European colleagues. And now I'm just finishing. The second and the third lessons are important but the first one was the basic one. So also as Europe we should understand that the illusion that Russia might be a reliable partner has ended. It's no more time for Russia first policy. We have to invest our money, time and energy to strengthen post-Soviet republics in democratization, in integration with Europe, just to give them chance to be a part of the Western world, not a part of Russian Bliśnija Zarubieża which is a close neighborhood. So and this is our role to do this. And the last message is that this is also for us and I was talking this with Maria in Berlin last time. This is site and vendor. This is site guys. We should really take this occasion just to make a huge step forward as Europe. I understand and everyone who is dealing with Russia understands that Russia is afraid of only of a naked power and is afraid of stronger and more powerful partners. So in our interest is to strengthen European Union, to improve decision making in European Union and to go farther with green transition because Russia depending on oil and gas has wasted the occasion to modernize. Instead of modernizing, Russia has chosen the path of militarization. So that's why cutting all these ties in energy with Russia, we might weaken Russia very successfully. And this is the first step to our security and the first step to independence and sovereignty of Ukraine. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I think it is very interesting that you show this paradox between a situation that is actually unifying Europe but at the same time strengthening a government that is participating to the weakening of the EU. So it's a paradox that I think we have to think about. Len, I'm going to give you the floor now. Basically the question, yeah, I hope it still works. Yes. Cool. Yeah, what we would like to hear from you is what is the perspective of the youth and how you are politically active in this moment in Poland but also between different young green movement across the EU. Yeah, so give you the floor. You also have 10 minutes. But it's pretty fine to monitor the planet with women only because they more or less keep their time. So that's cool. Yes, I will try to stick to the 10 minutes or less. Good morning, everybody. So to answer the question, the perspective of the youth on the situation on what security actually means. When it comes to European youth and our Polish perspective, definitely I think this analogy of this term that was said today, so the victory camp and the peace camp, definitely we can also see it among the green youth. Of course, Poland, also Polish green youth, we belong to this victory camp. But the discussions on security because the discussions on the European level about security, we see the same division as we see when it comes to just green politics in general. So we discuss what security actually means, how we should approach it. And I think when I realized there is this big division, once we started discussing among the green European youth the question of NATO, whether we are for or against, because as Greens, in principle, we are pacifists. And NATO for many countries represents war and aggression, which we as Poles, I don't think Polish people look at it this way because to us, alliances, international cooperation equals security. This is the certainty that we won't be left alone and that there will be a bigger brother to just help us defend in case, for instance, Russia decides to attack us next. And I think it really struck me when I learned the arguments of the Western youth when we were discussing NATO because to me, it was always obvious that yes, I wish we had the world without armies, without weapons, but it's impossible. And we see the war in Ukraine really show that it is impossible to just pretend we can live without defense and investing into armies because yes, there is a need for defending ourselves. And I feel that being in anti-NATO is a sign of privilege, which on one hand, I wish Polish young youth could also have because that would mean that we are strong on our own and we don't need to worry about defending ourselves, just in case. And I think that yes, as I mentioned already, for Polish people and for Polish youth, security means cooperation on the international level, unification and setting specific boundaries, not pacifism at all costs because, as I said, we are realists and we realize that it's not possible to just close our eyes and say yes, we won't fight, we don't want any armies, we don't want any weapons because yeah, we can just deal without it, no we don't. Since the war broke out, there are multiple times myself, I was worried that what would happen in case I would wake up just as I did on the 24th of February and I learned that something happened in Poland. I live in Germany right now and I cannot count how many times I was trying to come up with a plan. What if it happens, how I can get my family, my parents, to meet with Germany because I have also this privilege, I could quickly just arrange transport and they would be safe. But so of course this is not comparable to the stress that the Ukrainian nation goes through but the threat is very close to us as well and this is something that is not reflected in the opinions and arguments that Western youth presents which is understandable again, the threat is farther away but when we are discussing and somebody's questioning my stand or the stand of Polish young greens on this, I just, I cannot help but just think this is privilege which nobody should be shamed for but at the same time, when you are privileged, you need to realize that you need to understand your privilege, you need to know what it entails and why you should listen to others who might understand the situation a bit better. And this is something I wish we could, I think on all levels, not only among youth but also just in the general discussion, international discussion, to just say that what you can do is just listen and rely on our translation of the situation because we're closer, we understand this better and I keep stressing this every single time when we are discussing this on the European level among the youth that we need to not just close your eyes and tell us you know better because, yes, you can, for you, this NATO is a sign of this and that but you don't have to worry, you don't have to come up with this plan, how to transport your parents away from the war and what you would do in just in case. So that's essentially the message I think Polish young greens would like to send to just please listen and realize what we are saying because the threat is just, it's close and without essentially just without the victory of Ukraine we won't be able to have peace in Europe at all and then there won't be question whether we should have NATO or whether we should have armies it will be just a question who can survive. Pathways that youth could explore to exert pressure on the politics and the general status quo is a very difficult point and question to answer because if we knew I think we will be in a different place right now but there are a lot of youth movements that are very vocal right now and are just trying to push a change and they are mostly, as I see, activist-based movements it's usually, I mean, political movements are also pretty prominent and we are trying to do our best but of course at the forefront are the activists who are usually climate activists or just young people who are fed up and I trust trying to do just unite and just change by doing and at first I was very skeptical because there's always this debate whether activists should be political whether we should, politics should be concerned with activism and activists should be concerned with politics and of course things are not always black and white there's always this gray area and things are intertwined in many ways but I was wondering because there's this debate whether we should change how politics is done because activism is about getting 100% if you're asking for something and you're not looking for a middle ground you just want it because you understand there's this sort of pressure and I think the best example to illustrate this is the climate movements they ask for 100% they are not trying to ask for 50 as politicians often do and so the question is whether we can actually do politics asking for 100% even if we have this sort of choice and privilege to actually still talk about 50% if our houses on fire is often said and at first I was very critical because I thought that many activists even though they are quite effective they often turn out not to be great politicians and it comes down to preparation I feel but I personally have a very idealistic outlook on politics for me this is a service and many people who just get into politics they execute their own vision and sometimes it's very hard for them to function in the system where we have to compromise but we see that this is not helping and even this 50% creates tensions and creates conflicts and that means that the system is starting to work and I think soon we will have to decide and re-evaluate whether politics as it is done right now can even function and I think for my generation it cannot because we already expect different things and we are already asking for 100% and we are trying to do more radical politics and we use this word radical but in a very positive sense here so I think we will see big shifts and maybe this is also in the context of security of this situation and this war in Ukraine maybe this is like another push to just to a change and at the end of the day I wish we didn't have to have this situation but it might just turn our politics and put it on a different path which might be more effective for the future because the world as I see it is just only getting worse and we have more and more complications and my generation might change it but we need different tools and different setups and what the youth can also do and I wish it would is just to prepare again if we are going to do activist politics and I really hope we do because again we cannot be asking for 50% anymore the youth to do it well needs to learn, learn and learn needs to learn new skills and prepare for being a politician just being this greater every generation says that there will be a better one than the previous one and it's usually not the case because we are all just repeating the same mistakes but I really hope that if not my generation my children will be those who will actually do things the right way in the better way and not repeat the mistakes we've been making and I think that my generation that's why I'm still hopeful even though I'm just very critical when it comes to this idealistic ideas is that my generation we have this very natural way of just grouping and associating ourselves and I think that the way we can win is just to stand together and not just play everybody for themselves so and we do it very well as the climate strikes as different movements shown that we are very good at organizing ourselves and asking for what we want and we can exert pressure so this is definitely how we can move forward and again I wish we didn't have to do it right now and I wish so many young people didn't have to sacrifice so much to just basically ask for security and for air to breathe in the future also for their children but if this is needed we will do it and we will do it together in a group and hopefully this will just change how everything is done in 50 years if I will be ever sitting in a panel like that again I will be just talking and reflecting back on how certain bad events in the 20s or 21st century actually created a situation that we are living in a better world right now better because finally somebody took put their foot down and created different infrastructure for how politics and activism is done Yes, I think this is, I hope I answered the question on the perspective of the youth Thank you very much So yeah, that's good that you also talked about the debate on NATO that's I think something that came across all different youth organizations out of the Greens but also Green Parties in general and that you talked about how we do politics and whether we are to what extent we can continue to try to compromise and what is the price for this because now I'm going to give the floor to someone who first had to discuss about all these things including NATO in the European Parliament which is a place where you can ask for 100% but you always get something around 50 because that's the place for compromise So basically the question is Gwen can you tell us all the like when the war started it obviously shaped a lot of positions of the Greens and I guess there were a lot of debates inside of the group on sending weapons on spending suddenly a lot of money on military expenditures on NATO So could you explain us how it went the debates inside of the Green Family in the European Parliament and maybe also if you could tell us what impact this debate had on other issues like what we do with the rule of law what we do with the enlargement procedure like how this situation when it comes to the war also impacted the way we deal with all the topics we were already dealing with before I think you have a mic, yeah, great Yes, thank you, hello everyone Yeah, indeed the Ukraine war of course was something that triggered new debates accelerated some, degraded some in our group in the Parliament and then into institutional discussion between the three institutions of course For our group, I think that the first thing has to be said is that we enforced or at least deepened a number of positions that we had already and that we then pushed even more and on these aspects there were basically no debate but there was even more the wish to push on this Of course it's the idea of cooperation the idea of unity and the idea of political coordination because if you are to put more money for military at least you want a European coordination and not a 27 national coordination and it comes back to something that you talked about about every country thinking it's defending itself and for once there was this idea of a European defence Of course it strengthens unity I will come back on some aspects that have been said maybe sometimes with the sacrifice of some foolish specific debates for example and we ask for even more cooperation We also of course used the situation to focus on the fact that we needed transparency every time we needed scrutiny of parliaments on how the money is used and how these military aspects come in and control of arms and of course we always say that even in war human rights are a fundamental thing It also of course but that I think comes without saying it also of course strengthens our debate on climate issues and energy and it has the paradox that it has brought back some call to be functioning again in Germany and France and the winter is coming and we don't exactly know how it will turn but it had the effect that suddenly everyone was saying we need to get out more quickly from fossil fuels so this is of course it made our discourse relevant also on autonomous energy and all of this and then of course it strengthens our positions on the enlargement the question of the Balkans the fact that they had been put on the side for a long time and with Ukraine asking for a quicker step to the European Union it allowed us, Greens, to recall that we needed to address the situation of Montenegro and of Macedonia which are two member states that are fully complying with a number of what we are asking and are still not seeing their path to the European Union's going speedy so these are the main things where we were basically just reinforcing and enriching our positions and then of course those topics where it was more difficult it doesn't mean that we were fighting or anything but it did make us debate the first one and I think it was really the sentence Maria said was very nice all of the question of arming peace indeed, history of Green parties in a number of our member states is from pacifist parties it is a very common history of our parties in France, in Netherland, in Germany, I mean very, very often and it is one of our main trends and it doesn't mean that it's a naive way of seeing peace and it doesn't mean that we haven't had for years discussions about wars because wars have been happening everywhere sadly on the planet and we had to decide what we would do about it in each of our parties but of course for the first time it became very relevant and very close and very urgent to take decisions which we could have always a bit put on the side and have in a very ferritic way for the first time it was no more ferritic honestly it didn't make that much debate in the group it was very clear for everyone that the situation meant that we had to put more money for arms and for security and it's not indeed what we think is the priority in time of peace, we always defend other means of other use for money but this was a particular moment and once again we would always say but this means first that we need political coordination second that we want not France to go on increasing its own budget but it's a more coordinated money and free of course parliamentary scrutiny but we had to come to this very difficult realistic consideration that we had to arm peace yes it happens, we had the discussion on NATO there again on a geopolitical debate we often have these different point of views in France and in a certain country as you said in a very nice way we have this privileged way of saying things that America is not a protection and we have been always very criticizing America and then you might have heard of some of important French member, politics members from all political sides in France being very sort of in a defiant position towards USA for years now and NATO is symbolizing the domination of USA for a lot of our green or leftist people in France and a number of other member states. So this is indeed a complicated discussion we always have very prudent words on NATO even today when we did our last paper on security and peace that was the major discussion days you have to not forget also that we have member states that are still not wanting to align in any way, yes Finland has changed its position for example Denmark but it's not the case of Austria for example which is still a country that doesn't want to align and Austrian greens are very close to this position so the wording that we use for NATO is always very prudent but there again I don't think it stood that much disagreement we just needed to find the prudent wording and I think we acknowledge the fact that it is a privileged way of saying things that as you said we shouldn't be ashamed but we should enlarge it that it's because we could see things like that for years and hopefully this debate will always exist because it's healthy that the debate exists. Now the third issue which was not a debate between us at all but is a difficult situation for us greens in the European Union debate and the inter-institution discussion is the rule of law issue. This is an issue where we greens have been at the forefront a lot, we have the reports on that we are the one pressuring commission council and all of this we are the group really always fighting on Hungary and Polish and trying to be the voice other groups are but we even more than others are trying to be the voice of Polish and Hungarian society. And of course in this debate in this very specific moment since you quinoa the Polish situation has considerably changed on the European Union stage. When I became a member of the European Parliament in 2019, it's my first term, Poland was very, very isolated it was the isolated member state. All the groups would be very unhappy with Poland except from ECR, the group where the government party is. All the in council, I would always hear very bad thing about the Polish government and basically it was the isolated government and Hungary was not because at the time Fidesz, Orban's party was still in the big group in parliament, there was still a lot of chief of government that would have good relationship with him even Angela Merkel was a bit sometimes a prudent with Viktor Orban and basically he was very good in dealing with things so he would be still in the big group. And in three years we have been seeing a complete shift. Now Hungary is very isolated and Poland is no more and in fact even Poland government has managed to be a bit in the center of things these last month and this is of course very, very concerning for us and dangerous. How do we do with this? How do we do when we also know all the hypocrisy that's behind it? I mean in the month, yeah it was one month after the beginning of the war when all the refugees were coming in Poland and we had this discussion with lawyers and judges these very lawyer judges that have been fired by the government or so sanctioned that their life is so hard and all of these lawyers that are fighting and you know they were the ones saying I have a family in each of the rooms of my house the government is not doing anything about the refugees and we are being told yes but we should basically be indulgent with your government because now you are welcoming all these refugees so we should do something about you and we were in this very bizarre situation where in fact the government it was instrumentalizing a very specific situation and there was sort of a double punishment for the leftist activists that were at the same time the one fighting the government and at the same time the one, the more fighting next to the refugees and on this. So this is something we have to be very careful of. We have a real threat that civil society in Poland would be sacrificed in the name of unity, in the name of facing the Russian Putinization and the Russian fight against rule of law which is as you said very paradox. So this is one of our big threat and this is a debate we have a lot. How do we, Greens, be careful in this debate to find the path where indeed we need Poland to go on being this fighter against Russia at least in the symbols and the values and all of this and what they say but we still go on criticizing what is happening very strongly and we are not indulgent and we are not giving money to a government if it's for them to badly use it and not use it for the welcoming of the refugees and for restricting things and for recovery, et cetera, et cetera. Three quick issues that I wanted to focus on is the gender issue. I think that how rape in Ukraine was used once again and we know that it's for centuries millionaires been uninhabited but how rape has been used as a war weapon has not made I feel enough debate in France and has not been used and also how the, what's the, how immediately women and children came to all of our countries and then men stayed and how women are facing and coping with the situation. I think that this gender issue is not enough, we're not working enough on it, women in war, how do we deal with this? I think it's even more relevant to talk about this topic in Poland where the attack against women is one of the worst attacks on human rights of this government and how they are the one really being sacrificed. There's a, I just wanted to also tackle the issue of very specific, bizarre dynamics at the moment in all member states. We are in a moment where discussions are going to be different and situations are going to be strange. We have all the fugal countries that they don't want to put money anymore in European Union and how are they going to deal with the situation. We have indeed the reinforcement of the discussion of we need to open our arms to Balkans and Europe is also there and it's, and we need to protect them from a version. It has also meant that countries like the Baltic countries have stepped in the debate much more than they had always been. The Baltics country would be very silent in most of the debates in council, in commission and all this and the Baltic countries are really speaking up much more. So we're seeing an involvement of these three countries that I think is very interesting and will maybe also help shaping things with the Eastern countries. And then the last thing I wanted to signal is of course the discussion on refugees. We manage with this crisis to use this thing that existed for a long time in our text, the temporary protection, it had, we had not managed to use it for the Syrian people, we left them on the side. For the Ukrainian we managed, it's absolutely amazing. You have to, in a country like France, there is one place where Ukrainian refugee will arrive and you will get all info. And these info goes not only from how do you do your papers, but how you can find a job, how we can help you with housing, how can we send your children to school, how can we help you with benefits, welfare benefits and all this, something that we have never been able in this European Union to provide to any refugees before, even those that manage, they manage after 20 years of very hard difficult situations. For the Ukrainian we used it, I do hope that this will be an example that we can and that it facilitates everyone's life in fact, that it's not that difficult and that we should use it more often. Thank you. Thank you very much to the four of you. I'm now opening the floor for questions. We are basically on time, I mean, we kept our time. People before us were late, but that's not, yeah. So if anyone has questions, I see a lot of people, that's cool. So maybe I will collect three maybe and then we answer and we take another round. Oh, okay. Hi, I'm Tomasz Ganoff from Poznań in Poland. On an occasion of talking about the rule of law, I have my remark that we should not understand it in a narrow sense, that it's only about courts and tribunals, because if we treat it seriously, we see that in Poland, because I know this politics the best, better than other countries. So in Poland, I see that the ignorance of rule of law is not only in the governing party, but also in the biggest oppositional party, like it's Platforma Obywatelska, because the European programs like infrastructure and environment have certain goals. And we can complain that these goals are not enough green and we think about new programs, but the practice was that even such a minimum green program, which is included in this big operational programs, they are just ignored and the European Union believes that the people on the place care about this program and control does not exist because this document for money are accepted by the ministry or a province, governance, and in Poland, they are just happy that the capital is coming to the country and they don't care about development, they care about the growth. So the local companies are not interested in this development, they care about the growth. So the local companies are happy because they build something, but they build, for example, city highways and the projects are done with the pretext. So we improve a little bit a tram truck, but we built a huge auto highway and so this is like this. Thank you. Thanks a lot for the floor. My name is Efthymis Raffael Angelis and I live in Athens, in Greece. So I would like to state that even if I acknowledge the need that the Eastern countries have for NATO, I would like to state that it's not a privilege for some countries. It's also like NATO criticism, it's not a privilege because, for example, in Greece, when both Greece and Turkey are in NATO and NATO funds for weaponry in both countries and actually it's NATO behind the tension and Greece spends a lot of partition of the GDP for weaponry when we could invest the same money in alternative, in sustainable resources, in sustainability. I mean, in this case, it's not that we criticize NATO because we have an anti-USA narrative. It's just that we criticize NATO because for us, it causes a problem because if there is an invasion of Turkey in Greece, no one is going to help us from NATO. And I think that this criticism is more than, like, it's, you know, you can use it in order to find alternatives as an alternative might be a European army or common safety policy, but in a real pan-European federalistic level and not just creating mechanisms like front-ext, for example, front-ext is a mechanism that violates human rights in borders, like front-ext participates in pushbacks of refugees. So instead of, in European level, creating useless mechanisms, we might use the anti-NATO criticism in order to improve our union and find common realistic solutions to our problems for all European countries in a pan-European level. Thanks a lot. Eva Soufiste Fajilani, first of all, I'm very happy to have 100% female debate on this issue because I believe that we have some issues and topics and positions and lights that we probably would not have if we had 100% male debates, as it's usually the case in this topic. So I have just one question for Gwendolyn and one question for Lena. For Gwendolyn, what do you think about European defense if there is some progress? Because there are so many years that we are speaking about this European defense. Is it still a new top year, or are we a little bit going progress on this topic? To Lena, I know that you are interested and you work on digital security and we have this digital war of information and we have a lot of articles in Poland about the ideology of Dugin, Alexander Dugin, who is one of the advisors of putting on this how to use this digital war of information in this Cold War or war for power. So what do you think about this protection, about this disinformation and using the Internet for that? Thank you. And one more here. Sorry, I don't remember who was first. Thank you. My name is Evadrienska, I'm from Warsaw. I would like to comment about Ukraine and Russia that it was kind of obvious if you observed the history and the moves of Russia, that the aggression will be just going forward. So since the Chechen Wars, since the aggression on Georgia and then the Crimea, and there was this famous letter of the Polish intellectuals, including Professor Bartoszewski, which was warning the West, so as not to repeat the mistake of appeasement, which was made towards Hitler. So they were warning not to appease Russia because it will end like this, that Russia will move forward with this aggression. So I would like to turn your attention to the fact that European companies, despite all these hostile acts of Russia and aggression on the neighboring countries, they pursued with making business. And I mean not only gas, but also in very sensitive areas like the fence. And even now, this year, after the start of the war, they say, okay, we will not make business in gas, but why not make some nuclear deal, I mean one of the French companies. So I think our task now is to make this huge pressure on the politicians and on business and on the companies so as not to make this happen again, that we have such ties of the companies and so on. And when the crisis comes, they say, oh, we cannot afford to cut connections with Russia because we are so financially dependent. And the other issue I would like to rise here is the issue of human rights and in the context of the COVID. So I see this huge threat that the vaccine mandates how there is such a big risk of human rights violations and they took place in European countries and also in other democracies like Canada and Australia. And I think that our biggest strength and the future of the citizens of Europe is the human rights and is the main value which we should defend. So we should take care of that. Thank you. Oh, thank you. I'll be very quick. Okay, so hello. My name is Jun. Oh, it's weird hearing my voice. So apologies for my pronunciation, but I'm just going to go back to Anjesa. You were talking a lot about how, for example, governments like to push the blame on external factors such as the war in Ukraine and then they abandon their responsibility for citizens because I feel, similarly, about the situation in the UK because we had a lot of corruption with COVID scandals and just spending like it was $33 billion on a contract-tracing system that didn't work, for example, And that is a factor in inflation. So my question would be like, how do we get governments to take responsibility to care for their citizens while also keeping support for Ukraine as well, and not just blaming Russia as the boogeyman and actually doing something about it rather than just blaming it? Okay. Thank you very much. I propose that we start the other way around. So I'm going to first maybe give you the floor, Sophia, for the, I think, the question before the last question on whether it's actually accurate to say that the aggression was obviously coming and that we had elements to foresee it, one you prefer? Well, that's a very fair point because in 2014, we saw that how it all started. Then we had Minsk agreements, and there was sort of a, there are going to be a ceasefire, but ceasefire never happened. That was like constantly violations of the ceasefire, and that was like literally believing Russia that they will stop at one point, no, that's quite a risky business. But it's not only about that it was, indeed, it was clear something like this is going to come. Me personally, I would still trying to deny the fact that they will attack Kyiv. Maybe it's my tunnel vision, but I was still like trying like, I didn't want to accept this fact, but it happened. And now I know like, yes, it was pretty clear that they will never allow and they will never recognize Ukraine as an independent state and moving into European Union direction or any other direction than Russia. Another aspect was crucial to talk about today's war is colonial ambitions that Russia had. And now we understand that what's happening at the moment, this is this imperialist approach that Russia was having for years, literally for years. So we talk here from 1990 and even before, because we talk about how Russia was fostering this energy dependence, industrial dependence, how they were eradicating any signs of identity. Even in art, you will often see Russian artists, but rarely said saying Ukrainian artists. And now when we look today, we see this, what we have the situation, the attack, is something that was happening already preparing for many, many years. Because again, Russia would never, would like to accept or take any other direction that Ukraine would take than Russia. And therefore, indeed it is. One maybe more remark, this is also to the panelists, because we talk about this, we cannot sacrifice right now the civil society and the human rights. I mean, sacrificing, making any concessions in terms of land, of human rights, equals the same. If we say like we give up on human rights, it's a victory to Russia. If we give up on civil society, it's a victory for Russia. If we give up on Ukraine, I mean, this is a victory for Russia, but a big loss for everyone. Therefore, here I would say like we should be really having this unity as it is at the moment, but rather than divide, because the divide will mean, again, this is a victory for Russia, but a loss for all of us. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm now going, yeah, to give the photo to Aniashka, I think basically the first and the last questions were more for you. More or less. Full of flow. But the last one was absolutely for you. But let's start with Poznan question. You know, what you were mentioning, it's absolutely a very important issue for Poland. Because just imagine, when Poland was joining the European Union in 2004, we were believing that this is the end of history, yes, that we are just stepping the heaven and our life will be good for rest of our life, our life. So what we have wasted, this is an occasion to work on civic education. Yeah, we forgot to teach our young generation that European Union is not only money, this is not only about, let's say, comfort life, but these are human rights, this is, let's say, rule of law, and we spoiled that occasion, yes. I do not blame exactly only peace government, but I blame all our governments that were ruling our country for so many years, since 2004. They were talking about everything, but about education, about critical thinking. This is the problem, we have to go back to the roots and start talking about, not only about constitution, but also about basic rights, basic human rights, and our obligation as citizen. So this is the problem, this is the failure we have to make up. Very quickly, because if not, we have to be ready for more populism, for more right wing parties, for more, let's say, radicals. I am really afraid of our next elections because I predict that peace government will win, but not with the majority in the parliament, but I am afraid about the support for our extra, our alt-right party, which is Confederation, and Confederation, this is absolutely not only populist, but these are very dangerous people because they are very influenced by Dugin, by Kremlin, they are talking about not only conservatism, they are talking about making Russia in Poland, yes, about making Russia be similar to, let's say, yes, Aga is, yeah. That was a pretty large question. Okay, so this is one thing, and another thing, the answer to you is that I am asking the same question, because I would like my government, okay, these are right wing politicians, but they should think about people and the country, and I think that they should take responsibility in our upcoming elections, so we have to vote, let's say, like, do you remember Navalny, intelligent, smart voting, yes, we have to vote smart, you know, the idea of Navalny is very actual in Poland, so I think that this is one thing, but... Don't vote for the Tories, that's the solution. And you know, these both answers are combined because without civic education, Polish people very often, they are not prepared for voting, we don't read programs, political programs, we do not understand what is the difference between the left and the right, what does it mean, peace government, whether it is not only conservative, but these are much more than conservative, they are ready to implement traditional values like in the past, President Putin was implementing in Russia, peace government is ready to violate human rights, to fight opposition, to close independent media, of course I do not expect that we will have Navalny and such activists will end up in a jail, but you know, we are very close to Russian path, and this is why I am absolutely afraid and I am calling my Polish colleagues, my Polish friends and Poles, generally, to vote smartly next year, yes. Thank you. Lena, I'm going now to ask you if I think the question on NATO and Greece was directly directed to you, and then the question on digital security and the role of Internet in peace and security. Yes, so when it comes to NATO and the Greek-Turkish conflict, I think of course the situation is very complex and saying that every single country that's anti-NATO has the same sort of reasoning would be oversimplifying it, but it's still, I think that of course, even though there are different reasons, still in this debate right now, when we are talking about the defense and defending Ukraine and Baltic countries, Poland, it's still a privilege to say, no, it's still a privilege to say that we can do without it. Of course, I agree with you that we should be looking for better solutions and maybe have the European Army, maybe just find another way and ideally find a way so that we never have to have this debate again. But I think right now we cannot, I think it would be very irrational or irresponsible to spend time looking for new solutions when we need to act now and we need to take certain steps right now. And again, I'm not saying NATO is an ideal organization and I love everything about this, but it's a promise of security for me as a Polish citizen. So that's, I think, even though I agree with you, and this is not as simple as we can just put into word privilege, it is still a privileged position in a way to just maybe not be aware of certain reasons and certain phenomena and to say, no, we don't want it, but what then we do instead? NATO is currently supporting the war efforts or the defense of Ukraine and saying no to it and just cancel it is wrong. I mean, in Germany, for instance, I live in a fairly political city and there's a lot of students who are interested in politics. It's mostly green, mostly leftist options. And I see a lot of banners saying the legalized NATO, fact NATO, different things. And for me, it's just very interesting to see just after the war broke out. The banners weren't there or maybe they weren't so prominent before and they are there now and we're talking about defending a country in Europe, which is very close to Germany. So this is the big dissonance I see and something I just don't understand because maybe I'm just aware of too many things and I have to be aware of too many things. That's what I mean by privilege. And when it comes to this information, this is a very interesting topic. First of all, there's a difference between disinformation and misinformation. Disinformation is spreading purposefully information that is wrong for different purposes. Whereas misinformation is spreading information that is wrong, but by accident, by believing that for instance something is this or that, but it's actually not that, but you just haven't checked or you haven't done your research and you're just passing the information on. Russia has been excellent at spreading disinformation for years. And it was mostly visible in the Balkans where there was this big full-fledged campaign on an anti-EU essentially. So there was a big infiltration of information just spreading anti-EU communications and information and it was working. There are studies done. It was working. It was really changing the narrative and the public view on the EU. And right now, during this war, disinformation is essentially one of the bigger weapons because it influences our responses all around the globe. And we can see it in the changes also Polish debate. There's a lot of disinformation that people believe in because it's usually very black or white, very simple messaging, something that it's easy to fall for. And people just don't have this sort of tools to distinguish what's right or wrong. And they're just too lazy to do their research. But of course, if we have media, we want to just get the information from there. Not everybody has time to do some research. And I think the key here, and that's what the EU has been doing for years as well, is to just educate people on critical thinking and on finding information that's correct. Yes. Thank you. I've just learned that we really have to finish soon. So, Gwen, if you can answer in one sentence about the European Defence Union in one sentence. Okay, there was a few other questions, but I can answer only this one. We're not advancing that well, no. It's still more about just adding money to buy weapons. A bit of thinking of autonomous supply chains and all of this. And a bit of thinking about coordination. But then we would go in a lot of discussion on unanimity and all of this. But of course, what happened with the Hungarian government, especially on the sanctions and all of this, I think is, on the other hand, opening the mind of a lot of governments on the fact that we need to advance on some political coordination that are not threatened by one member state when it wants to take our stage a topic. So, I think that we have hope on a work that would be holistic with a lot of criterias of human rights and all of this thinking behind it. But for the moment, honestly, it's more just about adding money. Thank you very much. That's, yeah, you won't say, thank you very much, all of you.