Changes from plenary report to adopted text

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the Council conclusions of 20 June 2011 on conflict prevention and of 22 January 2018 on the Integrated Approach to External Conflicts and Crises,

– having regard to the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy of 28 June 2016,

– having regard to the Council conclusions and Concept on EU Peace Mediation of 7 December 2020,

– having regard to the ‘Strategic Compass for Security and Defence — For a European Union that protects its citizens, values and interests and contributes to international peace and security’ action plan, which was approved by the Council on 21 March 2022 and endorsed by the European Council on 25 March 2022,

– having regard to the joint staff working document from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 1 September 2023 entitled ‘Updated toolset for EU Conflict Analysis and Conflict Early Warning – Objectives, processes and guidance’ (SWD(2023)0295),

– having regard to its recommendation of 10 February 1999 on the establishment of a European Civil Peace Corps,

– having regard to the UN New Agenda for Peace of 20 July 2023,

– having regard to UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security of 31 October 2000,

– having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2020 on Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy,

– having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2019 on building EU capacity on conflict prevention and mediation,

– having regard to its resolution of 18 April 2023 on the implementation of civilian CSDP and other EU civilian security assistance,

– having regard to the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on EU Climate Diplomacy of 6 October 2023,

– having regard to its resolution of 14 June 2018 on Georgian occupied territories 10 years after the Russian invasion,

– having regard to Rule 118 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A9-0404/2023),

A. whereas preserving peace, preventing conflicts and strengthening international security are among the key external action objectives of the EU as laid down in Article 21(2) of the Treaty on European Union;

B. whereas a changing geopolitical context stemming from emerging powers confronting long-dominant actors, attacks on the multilateral system, democracy and the rules-based order, violence resurging in previously protracted conflicts, emerging technologies, cyber threats, malign third-party interference, the climate and biodiversity crises, unprecedented global levels of economic inequality, the reversal of rights, notably for women, the persistent and systematic exclusion of and discrimination against entire social groups, global backsliding on human rights and democracy, food security issues and migration are among the factors contributing to conflicts and instability around the world, especially considering Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine and the growing tensions in the Middle East;

C. whereas the UN defines ‘preventive diplomacy’ as ‘diplomatic action taken to prevent disputes from escalating into conflicts and to limit the spread of conflicts when they occur’;

D. whereas preventive diplomacy in the EU encompasses political and financial support for the multilateral system, trade, development, humanitarian assistance and human rights, focusing on identifying opportunities to address the causes of conflict and creating spaces for dialogue, often in partnership with international and regional organisations as well as concerned parties;

E. whereas frozen conflicts fuel and normalise nationalist narratives and sentiments, and perpetuate the rise of the far right;

F. whereas emerging powers are confronting traditional players and, together with new technologies and further globalisation, are leading to increased international competition, which, together with climate change, food security and migration, causes rising tensions and leads to conflicts across the world that are also challenging for the EU;

G. whereas the multilateral, rules-based order is currently under threat and being challenged in the volatile geopolitical situation, which makes it imperative that the EU responds to international conflict situations in line with its proclaimed values of human rights, equality, freedom, democracy, the rule of law and human dignity, in order not to further weaken support for multilateralism; whereas some former alliances based on the common interest of disrupting this system are beginning to re-emerge, such as Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS); whereas Russia’s unilateral actions have had a significant impact on the formation of alliances and the establishment of its spheres of influence;

H. whereas it is urgent, in the interest and for the advancement of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, to uphold and defend multilateralism and a rules-based international order;

I. whereas autocratic actors challenge the universality of human rights and undermine democratic standards worldwide; whereas a world of healthy democracies, understood as a world of strong democratic systems, is a safer world, as they have significant check and balances in place that prevent the unpredictability of autocracies;

J. whereas the main conflicts come from state and non-state actors using hybrid strategies, cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns and direct interference in elections and political processes, economic coercion and the instrumentalisation of irregular migration flows;

K. whereas the EU needs to step up its preventive tools and acknowledge the vital role it plays in preserving peace, stability and security both within the EU and outside its borders;

L. whereas the EU is the biggest international aid donor in the world, providing help to overcome poverty and advance global development; whereas it has not achieved the same impact in the public diplomacy sphere and should therefore improve its ambition and visibility in the area of preventive diplomacy around the world, primarily by communicating its achievements and success in its diplomatic activities undertaken so far, and in the outcomes of its financial support; whereas the EU is conducting a thorough evaluation of the instruments financing international cooperation;

M. whereas the EU’s approach to preventive diplomacy is aimed at preserving peace, preventing conflicts and strengthening international security, involving multi-dimensional, multilevel and multi-actor actions, while, at the same time, addressing various aspects and stages of conflicts and facilitating spaces for dialogue;

N. whereas the sole reliance on political, diplomatic or military strategies often proves to be inadequate for conflict prevention and, therefore, a comprehensive, ambitious, inclusive, gender-responsive conflict prevention and peacebuilding approach is needed, involving humanitarian aid, development cooperation, trade and foreign and security policies, restoration and maintenance of the internal legal order, the creation or re-creation of administrative structures, interethnic and inter-religious dialogue and other approaches to conflict settlement, including by fighting impunity; whereas the EU’s actions on preventive diplomacy must be primarily guided by an unwavering commitment to cooperation for democracy and development and trust-building measures between different parties;

O. whereas the EU’s international development efforts and democracy support are key EU foreign policy tools; whereas election observation missions play an important role in enhancing the EU’s engagement with partner countries, including in supporting their efforts to fulfil their international human rights obligations;

P. whereas, in accordance with the new European consensus on development, the EU and its Member States recognise the nexus between sustainable development, humanitarian action, peace and security in the pursuit of the objectives of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular SDG 16 on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies;

Q. whereas the Council has appointed nine EU special representatives for different unstable and conflict-affected regions, with some of them acting as mediators and peace facilitators to prevent disputes from escalating and to limit the spread of conflicts when they occur, but their initiatives and the effects of their actions are not always sufficiently visible or effective; whereas it is important that EU special representatives have a broad, flexible mandate, capable of adapting to evolving geopolitical circumstances in order to promote the EU’s policies and interests in specific regions and countries and to play an active role in preventive diplomacy efforts;

R. whereas the EU does not have the necessary confidence, means, resources or tools to develop its full mediation potential in areas of strategic importance and might not be considered unbiased by one or more of the warring parties; whereas this could lead to a rise in anti-European narratives in the EU’s immediate neighbourhood and non-EU countries;

S. whereas Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine, and against Georgia in August 2008, and its consequences around the world highlight the need for stronger and more ambitious, credible, strategic, tangible and unified EU action on the world stage, and accentuates the necessity of the EU autonomously setting its own strategic objectives and developing and using the capabilities needed to pursue them in order to avoid repeating prior mistakes and learning from them for future challenges; whereas the EU should commit all the necessary financial resources to tackle the rapidly increasing geopolitical challenges and invest more in preventive diplomacy and other conflict prevention measures to prevent conflicts from spreading, as they are detrimental to the social and economic development of the affected areas;

T. whereas security in the Eastern neighbourhood and the Western Balkans, and the Sahel region, West Africa and the Horn of Africa is greatly threatened by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its hybrid malign actions, and the possibility of this aggression spilling over into neighbouring countries; whereas the destabilisation of our immediate neighbourhood threatens the stability, peace and security of the EU’s external borders and thus of the EU and its Member States; whereas the EU needs to increase the effectiveness of the EU’s security and defence policy, in particular in the Eastern Partnership countries;

U. whereas the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine is a wake-up call for the EU, as it presents an immediate threat to the European and global security order and to the security of the EU and its Member States, as well as its candidate and potential candidate countries; whereas Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and its consequences around the world have galvanised the momentum towards achieving a geopolitical redefinition of the EU’s foreign policy, including a reconsideration of its response mechanisms, including its preventive diplomacy toolbox, as well as triggering public calls for the EU to act in a consistent manner in response to international conflicts;

V. whereas the EU should actively pursue preventive diplomacy in regions of frozen conflict to prevent escalation and promote stabilisation;

W. whereas the EU has always strived to facilitate direct talks and reduce the risk of escalation in different regions of the world, offering support for peace processes, peacebuilding initiatives and regional early warning systems in a complex geopolitical context;

X. whereas the lack of will on the part of the Member States to step away from their individual, political or economic interests in external relations in order to build joint capacity together and fully develop strategic autonomy is one of the main obstacles to the EU’s global leadership in preventive diplomacy;

Y. whereas the EU should continue moving forward towards fully developing its own autonomous and permanent instruments in its external action, common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and common security and defence policy (CSDP);

Z. whereas civilian crisis management is a fundamental component of the CFSP;

AA. whereas coordination between the European External Action Service (EEAS), Parliament and the Member States needs to be reassessed and strengthened in order to build joint capacities and modernise current approaches to deliver tangible results and launch meaningful initiatives in preventive diplomacy, peacebuilding and peacemaking; whereas the EU needs to speak with a single voice and its action on the ground should be aligned with that of its Member States, in terms of early warning, conflict prevention and crisis management; whereas conflict prevention is a common objective of all Member States;

AB. whereas the EU’s credibility is a paramount requirement for the correct implementation of its preventive diplomacy actions as it reinforces trust towards the EU among the different actors involved in a conflict; whereas, in this regard, it is necessary to ensure the highest level of coordination and coherence in the EU’s external action, particularly by ensuring the leading role of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP / HR) as a bridge builder between the CFSP and EU external relations; whereas the Commission needs to strengthen its coordination with the EEAS, including in the EU’s preventive diplomacy initiatives and actions, by guaranteeing full compliance with Articles 3(2) and 9 of the EEAS Decision;

AC. whereas global funding for conflict prevention and peacebuilding is at a 15-year record low;

AD. whereas, within the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation (NDICI – Global Europe) instrument, there is a thematic programme on peace, stability and conflict prevention; whereas the Commission has published a multi-annual indicative programme that allocates EUR 870 970 044 for the 2021-2027 period to this thematic area, of which only 13 %-18 % will be allocated to conflict prevention;

AE. whereas the EU’s civilian and military operations have a mandate for conflict prevention, peacekeeping and crisis management; whereas their preventive toolbox capacity should be expanded and additional staff training should be provided;

AF. whereas, regretfully, the EU has demonstrated on different occasions a lack of clarity in its external representation, clearly affecting its coherence and, therefore, its credibility worldwide; whereas it is necessary to clearly define the competences of the VP / HR, the President of the Commission and the President of the European Council on the EU’s external action and representation, as the current regulatory framework is unclear concerning the competences of each institutional figure;

AG. whereas research shows that women and men experience, engage in and are affected by violent armed conflict differently and have a different understanding of peace;

AH. whereas the implementation of the Women, Peace and Security agenda represents an essential tool for confirming that a meaningful and equitable role in decision-making is secured for women of all ages during all stages of conflict prevention, peacemaking, peacebuilding and post-conflict rehabilitation; whereas, in the EU Strategic Compass, Women, Peace and Security forms an integral part of the document;

AI. whereas emblematic and cultural heritage monuments in war-affected areas contribute to peacebuilding and reconciliation among communities;

AJ. whereas supporting culture and clearly targeted resources for international cultural relations would greatly enhance the EU’s ability to fully develop and support its intercultural relations with partners as a valuable component of the preventive diplomacy toolbox;