Debates also on the cases against Poland and Hungary, as well as the EU strategy against anti-Semitism
Vienna (PK) – The EU subcommittee today considered a Commission communication on EU enlargement policy. Also on the agenda were a Council document on current procedures concerning Poland and Hungary, as well as the Commission communication on the EU strategy to combat anti-Semitism and promote Jewish life (2021-2030).
Debate on European Union enlargement policy
The 2022 enlargement package, published in October 2022, assesses progress in the EU integration process of the six Western Balkan states and Turkey. The package falls within the geopolitical context of the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine and highlights the role of EU enlargement policy as a geostrategic investment in peace, stability and security in Europe.
Yesterday, the European Commission presented a proposal on enlargement policy in which it proposes to start accession talks with Ukraine and Moldova. Federal Minister Karoline Edtstadler said she would examine the report in detail and emphasized that there would be no “expedited procedure”. Enlargement is important for the EU’s security. The accession process of the Western Balkan countries must therefore be boosted and accelerated, because the Western Balkans must not be left to other actors. Austria will continue to defend the Western Balkan countries, especially Bosnia and Herzegovina, Edtstadler said. She advocates a “gradual process” of integration. This means that states should receive incentives, such as participation in the Erasmus+ program or participation in informal meetings, once they complete certain areas of the admissions process.
Carmen Jeitler-Cincelli (ÖVP) asked how people’s trust in the European Union and understanding of enlargement could be strengthened and what reforms were needed in the European Union. Edtstadler stated that this was everyone’s responsibility and that the future development of the Union should take place in parallel with the enlargement process.
Jörg Leichtfried (SPÖ) wanted to know from Federal Minister Edtstadler whether the European Commission’s proposal to start accession negotiations with Ukraine came as a surprise to her. He also raised the issue of the EU’s absorption capacity. Ukraine has a large agricultural system and this would have a strong impact on the EU’s agricultural subsidy system. Edtstadler responded that this Commission proposal did not come as a big surprise to her, stressing that the inclusion criteria must be met; two classes of enlargement candidates cannot be created. Even with the best will in the world, Ukraine’s accession would not be possible in a very short period of time. However, Ukraine is very ambitious and is doing everything it can to deeply reform itself, Edtstadler said. This dynamic must be used to motivate the Western Balkans as well.
He has serious doubts about whether the EU still takes itself seriously, said Axel Kassegger (FPÖ), referring to the Copenhagen criteria for membership candidates, and submitted a request for a declaration in which the federal government was asked to demand compliance of the Copenhagen criteria. criteria and “demonstrate against an EU expansion of states that do not meet these requirements”. This affects all current candidates for EU membership. Furthermore, the FPÖ called on the federal government to speak out against the start of EU accession negotiations with states that are at war and to “unconditionally defend the preservation of the principle of unanimity” at European level. The motion remained in the minority with the FPÖ vote and was therefore rejected.
Michel Reimon (Greens) wanted to know from the European Minister what changes she believes will be necessary in European institutions in the future. Edtstadler said the Union would be strongly concerned about the question of “how we position ourselves differently” in the coming years.
Nikolaus Scherak (NEOS) asked about the speed of the accession process and how we would like to deal with it if Ukraine’s accession occurs faster than that of other candidate countries currently. Edtstadler stated that possible incentives in the accession process should, of course, apply to all countries. It does not depend on when the accession negotiations started, but on when a candidate meets all the accession criteria.
Christian Oxonitsch (SPÖ) asked Edtstadler how she assessed Italy’s asylum agreement with Albania. Dialogue with third countries is important; Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni managed to establish a partnership with a third country, Edtstadler said.
Ongoing proceedings concerning Poland and Hungary
Proceedings under Article 7 to protect the EU’s fundamental values have been ongoing in Poland and Hungary for several years. An update on these procedures under the Spanish Presidency is scheduled for next week’s General Affairs Council. The Council will discuss developments regarding the rule of law in Poland and fundamental EU values in Hungary.
Edtstadler stressed that the rule of law is a fundamental principle and applies to the European Union and candidate countries. However, the procedures set out in Article 7 would not lead to what was intended, but rather “to sub-zero temperatures in the room”, as the affected states felt “pressed against the wall”, said Edtstadler. The conditionality mechanism, which provides for the freezing of funds, is more effective. This makes change happen, says Edtstadler.
Rudolf Taschner (ÖVP) stressed that the rule of law is one of the Union’s fundamental values and asked how compliance would be taken into account in the enlargement process. Edtstadler stressed that compliance with the rule of law is a fundamental prerequisite for EU membership.
The Hungarian Council Presidency is just around the corner, recalled Jörg Leichtfried (SPÖ). He asked Edtstadler whether she trusted Hungary, as the country that holds the presidency, to act as a mediator of the rule of law in the EU. It is not legally possible to exclude someone from the presidency and it would not be politically sensible, Edtstadler said. The Presidency of the Council holds the respective country of the Presidency accountable; So far, each country in the Presidency has had ambitious goals and worked to make progress. Active involvement has positive effects, says Edtstadler.
The rule of law can be seen in several faces, said Martin Graf (FPÖ). He had the feeling that the rule of law was being interpreted politically and explained that, in his opinion, criticism of Hungary was not justified.
Michel Reimon (Greens) asked about the involvement of the European Parliament in Article 7 procedures and asked how the outcome of the elections in Poland would affect the procedure in Poland. In this context, there is an exchange with the European Parliament, said Edtstadler. As far as the outcome of the elections in Poland is concerned, it is still too early to draw conclusions. She hopes that a stable government will be formed quickly in Poland. Poland is an extremely important country, not only due to its size and geographical location, but also in terms of the economic power that is developed there.
The election results in Poland open a window, said Nikolaus Scherak (NEOS). He considered it useful to continue the Article 7 procedure in order to demonstrate the impact of this instrument.
EU strategy to combat anti-Semitism
In October 2021, the European Commission presented a strategy against anti-Semitism, the implementation of which will extend from 2021 to 2030. National strategies against anti-Semitism are expected to be determined by the end of 2022. To date, 18 States have Members, including Austria, have adopted holistic strategies or at least measures to combat anti-Semitism in their action plans or strategies to combat racism. The European Union intends to publish comprehensive implementation reports in 2024 and 2029.
“Since the terrible events of October 7, we have once again seen a significant increase in anti-Semitic incidents,” said Edtstadler. She could never imagine that a situation like the one we are experiencing now would happen again. The federal government therefore presented a bill to tighten the prohibition law. But even the strictest law won’t work if the population doesn’t rise up against anti-Semitism, Edtstadler said. Austria is the first country to have a strategy against anti-Semitism and the European Union’s strategy is very important.
Martin Engelberg (ÖVP) emphasized that all forms of anti-Semitism must be combatted and asked which measures should be particularly focused on. Edtstadler said all of society must stand up against anti-Semitism. The strategy against anti-Semitism works, but one should not expect a miraculous cure.
If Jews in Austria had to be afraid, it would be a shame for our country, emphasized Jörg Leichtfried (SPÖ). Anti-Semitism must be combated by all means possible. Schools are particularly challenged.
Eva Blimlinger (Greens) also emphasized the importance of the education sector, but highlighted that schools and universities in particular have recently become hot spots when it comes to anti-Semitic incidents. She also raised the issue of equalizing the status of refugees from Ukraine and Israel at the European level.
Mario Lindner (SPÖ) said that anti-Semitism has existed in Austria for decades and he sees the lack of a global strategy against reactivity and hate crimes.
Nikolaus Scherak (NEOS) said that increasing punishments would not make a big difference; the underlying phenomena were hatred and hostility to democracy. There have been failures in combating these phenomena for decades, especially in the context of integration measures.
Lukas Hammer (Greens) said that he has difficulty when it is said that foreigners are bringing anti-Semitism to the country, because anti-Semitism is closely linked to Austrian culture. Austria took a long time to accept its own responsibilities and, as a society, looked the other way for a long time. He warns against shifting responsibility and acting as if anti-Semitism was “imported” into Austria.
When Jews are under pressure, we are all under pressure, Edtstadler said. To combat anti-Semitism, the education sector is obviously important, which is why the Ministry of Education provided teaching materials on the conflict in the Middle East. Police also hold workshops in schools to combat extremism.
Martin Engelberg (ÖVP) said that schools are the “decisive front” in society and called for teacher training. They would need support if students behaved completely disrespectfully and parents would also support their children’s bad behavior.
Eva Blimlinger (Greens) recalled that anti-Semitism was not just a question of education, as the leading National Socialists were highly qualified. Rudolf Taschner (ÖVP) said that knowledge alone is not enough; it is mainly about building awareness. It is important to be aware. (EU Subcommittee Conclusion) bea
Questions and contact:
Press service of the Parliamentary Directorate
Parliamentary correspondence
Tel. +43 1 40110/2272
[email protected]
http://www.parlament.gv.at
www.facebook.com/OeParl
www.twitter.com/oeparl