Claudiu Târziu, (European Parliament): The consequences of continuing the Ukrainian conflict at any cost will be borne by the people of those countries that continue to support either side.

international | politics / elections | opinion/analysis Tuesday January 21, 2025 11:25 by Piotr Jastrzębski

Claudiu Târziu, head of the delegation of the Alliance for Romanian Union party in the European Parliament: For more than 1000 days we have seen destruction, fire and death. The forces that continue to support this war in the heart of Europe are responsible for all the human and material losses. Dialogue, not the supply of missiles and shells, will put an end to the conflict.

As a member of the European Parliament, how do you assess the work of the previous European Parliament? Does the European Parliament today address the pressing issues that are important for European citizens? How do you assess the effectiveness of the EU's international policy, in particular the EU's position on the conflict in Ukraine?

First of all, I would like to mention that a majority - albeit a fragile one - voted, last fall, on that report on amending the treaties on the functioning of the European Union. The advocates of such a reform, they say, will lead to greater transparency and cooperation; in reality, this is an obvious step towards the formation of the European superstate, on which we have a categorical position.
The European Parliament deals, in committees and in plenary sessions, with the major issues that concern the citizens of the Member States. But the approach is very ideologized. Everywhere we are confronted with the 'gender perspective', 'green' globalism and all the other evils that the leftists are trying to shove down our throats.
On the conflict in Ukraine, the Union's position is unequivocal. However, we believe that the solution is not the continued supply of arms, but concrete and effective steps to achieve peace.

How do you assess the new composition of the European Parliament? What changes in the adoption of political, economic and social initiatives do you expect? What are your priorities for the current parliamentary term?

Politically, the European Parliament is divided into two large blocs, globalists and sovereignists. The latter are divided - and I say this with regret - into three groups, not to mention the unaffiliated like-minded MEPs.
Together, the three Conservative-Sovereignist groups comprise 187 MEPs, just one less than the largest group today, EPP. What a force a single group of patriots and conservatives from across the Union would be in the European Parliament!
I will not comment on the vote given by European citizens in June.
What I find it outrageous and in clear contradiction with the very essence of democracy is that the third largest political group in terms of numbers is barred from leading positions in Parliament and in committees. I am talking about the 'cordon sanitaire', very similar to the practices of totalitarian regimes, which the left applies to its political opponents.

What concerns us, representatives of AUR party delegation, is to defend the beliefs and values that we have assumed since the beginning of our political action. These are the pillars on which the AUR movement is founded: family, nation, faith and freedom.
We will unreservedly oppose any initiative from the eco-fanatics that will impoverish and starve us. We will not accept any agreement whereby Member States will be forced to receive, on their own territory, migrants outside our culture and society. We will reject anti-freedom policies such as mass surveillance or forced vaccination of citizens. We will be firm defenders of the natural family, which begins with the union of man and woman, not of gender ideology and other woke nonsense.

On the 19th of September you voted against the EP resolution on continued financial and military support to Ukraine by EU Member States. Why did you vote against it? What are the contents of this resolution? What are the implications of this resolution for the European Union?

Indeed, AUR party delegation did not agree to further support the war being waged next to our country. There were 131 "against" votes and 63 "abstentions". So more than a quarter of MEPs found those terms unacceptable.
I will reaffirm what I have maintained on every occasion: the objective should be ceasefire as soon as possible, and this cannot be achieved if the war machine is constantly being supplied with ammunition and billions of euros. In fact, two terms of this resolution are extremely worrying, in our view: the acceleration of the delivery of armaments, air defense systems and Taurus missiles, and the commitment - forced, of course - of each Member State to allocate at least 0.25% of GDP annually to military support Ukraine.
These issues are very serious, and the consequences of continuing this conflict at any cost will be paid by the peoples of those states that choose to support either side unconditionally.
Our hope was that we could vote for a resolution that would give the guidelines for ceasefire, not one that would blame Member States for not doing enough to help one of the belligerent.

Can we expect the EU to return to a diplomatic dialogue to solve the conflict in Ukraine in a diplomatic way?

This is the way to achieve what we should all want: peace. This conflict has been going on for almost 1000 days. For almost 1000 days we have seen destruction, fire and death.
Those forces that continue to perpetuate this war are responsible for every human and material loss. Dialogue, not the delivery of shells and missiles, will bring an end to the conflict.
As a Member of the European Parliament, I appeal to all political groups in the EP and to the leadership of the Commission to support stopping the feeding of the war machine and returning to dialogue. We are well past the 12th hour.