Text · Amendment list
Military mobility
Document CJ57-AM-777035 · 2025/2090(INI)
- Kind
- Amendment list CJ57-AM-777035
- Date
- 17 September 2025
- Committee
- Committee on Security and Defence Committee on Transport and Tourism
- Dossier
- 2025/2090(INI)
More facts (2)
- Formats
- Official page PDF Word
- Reference
- 2025/2090(INI)
Text
The text as parsed from the official Word file. Every paragraph has a link (¶) and can be saved to a project as a passage.
Jump to an amendment (371)
- Amendment 1
- Amendment 2
- Amendment 3
- Amendment 4
- Amendment 5
- Amendment 6
- Amendment 7
- Amendment 8
- Amendment 9
- Amendment 10
- Amendment 11
- Amendment 12
- Amendment 13
- Amendment 14
- Amendment 15
- Amendment 16
- Amendment 17
- Amendment 18
- Amendment 19
- Amendment 20
- Amendment 21
- Amendment 22
- Amendment 23
- Amendment 24
- Amendment 25
- Amendment 26
- Amendment 27
- Amendment 28
- Amendment 29
- Amendment 30
- Amendment 31
- Amendment 32
- Amendment 33
- Amendment 34
- Amendment 35
- Amendment 36
- Amendment 37
- Amendment 38
- Amendment 39
- Amendment 40
- Amendment 41
- Amendment 42
- Amendment 43
- Amendment 44
- Amendment 45
- Amendment 46
- Amendment 47
- Amendment 48
- Amendment 49
- Amendment 50
- Amendment 51
- Amendment 52
- Amendment 53
- Amendment 54
- Amendment 55
- Amendment 56
- Amendment 57
- Amendment 58
- Amendment 59
- Amendment 60
- Amendment 61
- Amendment 62
- Amendment 63
- Amendment 64
- Amendment 65
- Amendment 66
- Amendment 67
- Amendment 68
- Amendment 69
- Amendment 70
- Amendment 71
- Amendment 72
- Amendment 73
- Amendment 74
- Amendment 75
- Amendment 76
- Amendment 77
- Amendment 78
- Amendment 79
- Amendment 80
- Amendment 81
- Amendment 82
- Amendment 83
- Amendment 84
- Amendment 85
- Amendment 86
- Amendment 87
- Amendment 88
- Amendment 89
- Amendment 90
- Amendment 91
- Amendment 92
- Amendment 93
- Amendment 94
- Amendment 95
- Amendment 96
- Amendment 97
- Amendment 98
- Amendment 99
- Amendment 100
- Amendment 101
- Amendment 102
- Amendment 103
- Amendment 104
- Amendment 105
- Amendment 106
- Amendment 107
- Amendment 108
- Amendment 109
- Amendment 110
- Amendment 111
- Amendment 112
- Amendment 113
- Amendment 114
- Amendment 115
- Amendment 116
- Amendment 117
- Amendment 118
- Amendment 119
- Amendment 120
- Amendment 121
- Amendment 122
- Amendment 123
- Amendment 124
- Amendment 125
- Amendment 126
- Amendment 127
- Amendment 128
- Amendment 129
- Amendment 130
- Amendment 131
- Amendment 132
- Amendment 133
- Amendment 134
- Amendment 135
- Amendment 136
- Amendment 137
- Amendment 138
- Amendment 139
- Amendment 140
- Amendment 141
- Amendment 142
- Amendment 143
- Amendment 144
- Amendment 145
- Amendment 146
- Amendment 147
- Amendment 148
- Amendment 149
- Amendment 150
- Amendment 151
- Amendment 152
- Amendment 153
- Amendment 154
- Amendment 155
- Amendment 156
- Amendment 157
- Amendment 158
- Amendment 159
- Amendment 160
- Amendment 161
- Amendment 162
- Amendment 163
- Amendment 164
- Amendment 165
- Amendment 166
- Amendment 167
- Amendment 168
- Amendment 169
- Amendment 170
- Amendment 171
- Amendment 172
- Amendment 173
- Amendment 174
- Amendment 175
- Amendment 176
- Amendment 177
- Amendment 178
- Amendment 179
- Amendment 180
- Amendment 181
- Amendment 182
- Amendment 183
- Amendment 184
- Amendment 185
- Amendment 186
- Amendment 187
- Amendment 188
- Amendment 189
- Amendment 190
- Amendment 191
- Amendment 192
- Amendment 193
- Amendment 194
- Amendment 195
- Amendment 196
- Amendment 197
- Amendment 198
- Amendment 199
- Amendment 200
- Amendment 201
- Amendment 202
- Amendment 203
- Amendment 204
- Amendment 205
- Amendment 206
- Amendment 207
- Amendment 208
- Amendment 209
- Amendment 210
- Amendment 211
- Amendment 212
- Amendment 213
- Amendment 214
- Amendment 215
- Amendment 216
- Amendment 217
- Amendment 218
- Amendment 219
- Amendment 220
- Amendment 221
- Amendment 222
- Amendment 223
- Amendment 224
- Amendment 225
- Amendment 226
- Amendment 227
- Amendment 228
- Amendment 229
- Amendment 230
- Amendment 231
- Amendment 232
- Amendment 233
- Amendment 234
- Amendment 235
- Amendment 236
- Amendment 237
- Amendment 238
- Amendment 239
- Amendment 240
- Amendment 241
- Amendment 242
- Amendment 243
- Amendment 244
- Amendment 245
- Amendment 246
- Amendment 247
- Amendment 248
- Amendment 249
- Amendment 250
- Amendment 251
- Amendment 252
- Amendment 253
- Amendment 254
- Amendment 255
- Amendment 256
- Amendment 257
- Amendment 258
- Amendment 259
- Amendment 260
- Amendment 261
- Amendment 262
- Amendment 263
- Amendment 264
- Amendment 265
- Amendment 266
- Amendment 267
- Amendment 268
- Amendment 269
- Amendment 270
- Amendment 271
- Amendment 272
- Amendment 273
- Amendment 274
- Amendment 275
- Amendment 276
- Amendment 277
- Amendment 278
- Amendment 279
- Amendment 280
- Amendment 281
- Amendment 282
- Amendment 283
- Amendment 284
- Amendment 285
- Amendment 286
- Amendment 287
- Amendment 288
- Amendment 289
- Amendment 290
- Amendment 291
- Amendment 292
- Amendment 293
- Amendment 294
- Amendment 295
- Amendment 296
- Amendment 297
- Amendment 298
- Amendment 299
- Amendment 300
- Amendment 301
- Amendment 302
- Amendment 303
- Amendment 304
- Amendment 305
- Amendment 306
- Amendment 307
- Amendment 308
- Amendment 309
- Amendment 310
- Amendment 311
- Amendment 312
- Amendment 313
- Amendment 314
- Amendment 315
- Amendment 316
- Amendment 317
- Amendment 318
- Amendment 319
- Amendment 320
- Amendment 321
- Amendment 322
- Amendment 323
- Amendment 324
- Amendment 325
- Amendment 326
- Amendment 327
- Amendment 328
- Amendment 329
- Amendment 330
- Amendment 331
- Amendment 332
- Amendment 333
- Amendment 334
- Amendment 335
- Amendment 336
- Amendment 337
- Amendment 338
- Amendment 339
- Amendment 340
- Amendment 341
- Amendment 342
- Amendment 343
- Amendment 344
- Amendment 345
- Amendment 346
- Amendment 347
- Amendment 348
- Amendment 349
- Amendment 350
- Amendment 351
- Amendment 352
- Amendment 353
- Amendment 354
- Amendment 355
- Amendment 356
- Amendment 357
- Amendment 358
- Amendment 359
- Amendment 360
- Amendment 361
- Amendment 362
- Amendment 363
- Amendment 364
- Amendment 365
- Amendment 366
- Amendment 367
- Amendment 368
- Amendment 369
- Amendment 370
- Amendment 371
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to Article 4(2) of the Treaty on European Union, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to Article 17(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the 2024 study by the European Commission on the climate adaptation and cross-border investment needs to realise the TEN-T network 3a, | |
| 3a European Commission: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, Schade, W., Khanna, A., Mader, S., Streif, M. et al., Support study on the climate adaptation and cross-border investment needs to realise the TEN-T network, Publications Office of the European Union, 2024 (ISBN: 978-92-68-20483-2). |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 10 November 2022 entitled ‘Action plan on military mobility 2.0’ (JOIN(2022)0048), | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the joint report from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 13 November 2023 on the implementation of the Action Plan on Military Mobility 2.0 from November 2022 to October 2023 (JOIN(2023)0037), | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the joint report from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 20 March 2025 on the implementation of the Action Plan on Military Mobility 2.0 (JOIN(2025)0011), | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the joint white paper from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 19 March 2025 entitled ‘for European Defence Readiness 2030’ (JOIN(2025)0120), | deleted |
Petras Auštrevičius, Engin Eroglu, Bart Groothuis, Lucia Yar, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Transport Ministerial Statement on Military Mobility issued by the Transport Ministers of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Romania, and the Slovak Republic on 27 May 2025, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the three joint declarations on EU-NATO cooperation signed by the Presidents of the European Council and the Commission as well as the NATO Secretary General on 10 January 2023, 5 December 2018 and 6 December 2016, respectively, | – having regard to the three joint declarations on EU-NATO cooperation signed by the Presidents of the European Council and the Commission as well as the NATO Secretary General on 10 January 2023, 5 December 2018 and 6 December 2016, respectively, with the caveat that military decisions should not be transferred from NATO to supranational EU structures, which could weaken the position of nation states in terms of defence capabilities, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council "The European Union's strategic approach to the Black Sea region1a", | |
| 1a JOIN/2025/135 final |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – having regard to the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of preserving the sovereignty of states, defence independence and neutrality in foreign policy matters, |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; | A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; whereas in this context the increasing acts of sabotage against critical infrastructure and the rise of hybrid threats must be integrated into the planning of capabilities and dual-use infrastructure; whereas the resilience and speed of military movements in Europe have now become an essential condition for the credibility of European defence; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; | A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; ; whereas in this context the increasing acts of sabotage against critical infrastructure and the rise of hybrid threats must be integrated into the planning of capabilities and dual-use infrastructure; whereas the resilience and speed of military movements in Europe is an essential condition for the credibility of European defence; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; | A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along its priority military mobility corridors and all its external borders; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; | A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require Members States, in coordination with NATO, to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; | A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and North Africa and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; | A. whereas Russia’s war against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East, tensions at the EU’s external borders and mass migration require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression and invasion or different types of crises along all its external borders; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require the EU to be ready to respond to potential acts of aggression or different types of crises along all its external borders; | A. whereas the armed conflict in Ukraine, the crisis in the Middle East and tensions at the EU’s external borders require a realistic assessment of security risks and the preservation of defence competences at the Member State level; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Aa. Whereas the Commission proposal for the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2028-2035 sets out a budget of EUR 17.65 billion for military mobility, representing a tenfold increase over the current MFF. Military mobility concerns more than 500 projects involving ports, airports, bridges, motorways, tunnels, etc. that need to be upgraded to allow the passage of heavy vehicles and troops, in close cooperation with NATO, with the provision that 1.5 % of the GDP of its member countries will also be directed towards military infrastructure, as part of dual-use projects; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| A a. whereas instability and recurrent crisis in the Sahel, combined with irregular migration flows and violent extremist movements, highlight the geostrategic importance of ensuring that the Iberian Peninsula is fully connected to the rest of the Union through resilient dual-use corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Ab. Whereas the Commission proposal for the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2028-2035 sets out a budget of EUR 17.65 billion for military mobility, representing a tenfold increase over the current MFF. Military mobility concerns more than 500 projects involving ports, airports, bridges, motorways, tunnels, etc. that need to be upgraded to allow the passage of heavy vehicles and troops, in close cooperation with NATO, with the provision that 1.5 % of the GDP of its member countries will also be directed towards military infrastructure, as part of dual-use projects; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Ac. Whereas in Greece, at least one of the trains carrying US war material derailed in Alexandroupoli on 2 December 2022, causing enormous concern among local residents, who for years have witnessed the transport of military cargo for the needs of NATO, the EU and the US, while nobody is told anything about the really very hazardous war material passing in front of their homes. Whereas an accident could occur at any moment as a result of the criminal policy of transporting ammunition and flammable materials on the railway network; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; | B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas identifying possibilities for short-notice, large-scale movements across the Union is crucial to enhance European readiness for worst-case scenarios; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors and other priority TEN-T sections such as cross-border would be essential to update and adapt transport infrastructure for dual-use in order to swiftly and seamlessly deploying and supplying troops, military equipment and humanitarian aid; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; | B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; whereas the developments of coherent military mobility infrastructure across all EU corridors is essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; | B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment while ensuring its dual-use functionality to keep essential civil supply chains functioning in parallel; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; | B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and other third countries are under a direct security threat, whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; | B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment by land, sea and air; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment; | B. whereas Member States that share external borders with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are under a direct security threat, especially as Western security services warn that Russia could attack the EU in the short term; whereas the military mobility infrastructure in all EU corridors would be essential for deploying and supplying troops and military equipment from West to East; |
Elena Nevado del Campo, Borja Giménez Larraz, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| B a. whereas Spain is the eighth largest defence producer worldwide, with a consolidated industrial base that includes ammunition manufacturing, armament facilities and military vehicle production; whereas the integration of the Ruta de la Plata corridor into the EU’s military mobility framework would connect a dense network of such defence-related companies within not only the Iberian peninsula but also the rest of the EU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C. whereas military mobility is a priority for EU-NATO cooperation and should aim at enabling the movement of allied forces both in times of peace, and of crisis or war; | C. whereas military mobility is a priority for EU-NATO cooperation and should therefore aim at an aligned approach in order to enable the movement of allied forces both in times of peace, and of crisis or war; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C. whereas military mobility is a priority for EU-NATO cooperation and should aim at enabling the movement of allied forces both in times of peace, and of crisis or war; | C. whereas military mobility is a priority for EU-NATO cooperation and must aim at enabling the movement of allied forces both in times of peace, and of crisis or war; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C. whereas military mobility is a priority for EU-NATO cooperation and should aim at enabling the movement of allied forces both in times of peace, and of crisis or war; | C. whereas military mobility is a priority for EU-NATO cooperation and must enable the movement of allied forces both in times of peace, and of crisis or war; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C a. whereas fragmented governance and the absence of full EU-NATO integration — despite Military Mobility including several NATO “High Visibility Projects” — continue to limit the full achievement of strategic objectives; whereas strong institutional leadership and coordinated governance are necessary to transform technical cooperation into a shared strategic vision, thereby strengthening mobility as a tool for deterrence, cohesion and collective security; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C a. whereas enhancing interoperability with NATO and partners such as Ukraine is vital for collective defence; whereas the EU is working to connect its military mobility network with that of NATO and to promote connectivity with regional partners and enlargement countries by extending corridors and harmonising procedures beyond its borders; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C a. whereas military mobility has been identified as a critical enabler in the 2023 EU Capability Development Priorities, highlighting the necessity for enhanced dual-use transport infrastructure and streamlined procedures to ensure the rapid and secure military movement across the Union; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C a. whereas there is an urgent need to intensify coordinated and integrated efforts at EU, NATO and Member State levels to increase resources and address physical, legislative and regulatory barriers; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C a. whereas improving military mobility is a matter of operational credibility and thus contributes to conventional deterrence; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| C b. whereas the timely completion of the TEN-T infrastructures along the TEN-T corridors with dual use and HS/HC, and the implementation of all technological requirements of the TEN-T regulation, represent indispensable objectives to ensure the deployment of effective movements of military mobility throughout the continent; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas the EU’s initiatives on military mobility are part of an unacceptable drive towards integration in the field of defence; insists that military powers, in particular the mobility of the armed forces both inside and outside national territory, are solely a matter of Member State sovereignty, and that no interference or centralisation on the part of the EU should be able to encroach upon the sovereign prerogatives of the Member States; |
Elena Nevado del Campo, Borja Giménez Larraz, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain such as the difference between the “Iberian gauge” of 1668 mm and the European standard gauge of 1435 mm used in the rest of Europe; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain, such as administrative and infrastructural barriers; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain, including natural barriers, bottlenecks and infrastructural vulnerabilities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain which needs to be solved in order to secure EU´s future; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain including administrative and infrastructural barriers; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain, such as administrative and infrastructural barriers; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable obstacles remain; | D. whereas despite significant progress in recent years to enhance military mobility through the implementation of the actions set out in the Action plan on military mobility 2.0, considerable administrative, financial and infrastructural obstacles remain; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas the Union’s southern flank contains critical sea lines, including the Strait of Gibraltar and the Suez Canal and the Bosporus; whereas disruption of these maritime routes would undermine not only the reinforcement of allied forces but also Europe’s energy security, global trade flows and food supplies; whereas the Mediterranean hosts critical subsea infrastructure, including data cables and energy pipelines, which are increasingly vulnerable to sabotage, as demonstrated by recent incidents in both the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean; whereas maritime transport remains the backbone of large-scale force projection, since heavy equipment cannot be moved with the required speed and scale by air or land alone; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. Notes with alarm the repeated breaches of EU and Polish sovereignty through Russian drone attacks, incursions, and hybrid warfare tactics; condemns these actions as violations of international law and EU treaties; calls on the EU and Member States to treat them as acts requiring the same seriousness in terms of response, deterrence and legal / diplomatic countermeasures as more conventional military aggression. |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas the efforts and investments to complete the TEN-T infrastructure, and to scale up the EU governance necessary to increase military mobility capabilities of the EU should contribute to the enhancement of movement capacities consistently throughout and wherever in Europe, including in the south-north axis corridors, in the Mediterranean area, to ensure territorial continuity; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas investments in dual-use infrastructure and equipment for military mobility purposes will at the same time generate significant benefits for both passenger and freight transport systems, for the decarbonization of transport, for the completion of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), for civil protection capabilities, and for the strengthening of the single market; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas the Three Seas Initiative strengthens North–South connectivity in the Baltic–Adriatic–Black Sea region; whereas it plays a pivotal role in enhancing military mobility, regional infrastructure resilience, and the ability of Central and Eastern European states to respond jointly to security crises, in full complementarity with NATO planning and Member States’ sovereignty; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas transport and military mobility in the EU can significantly strengthen the security and resilience of the 27 Member States, provided that it is fully enabled to deliver its potential — ensuring full connectivity, rapid movement of equipment and troops, and efficient logistical support to military operations, including in times of crisis and unforeseen emergencies; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas Turkey threatens an EU Member State, Greece, with war (casus belli) in violation of the UN Charter, disregarding the potential strain this may cause within NATO; whereas Austria opposed Turkey's application to join the PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation), as Turkey does not meet the admission criteria for third countries; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas private operators play an important role in military mobility, notwithstanding the different regulatory nature of the procedures for such abnormal transport operations, also encounter non-harmonised procedures often causing severe delays in the issuance of cross-border permits and transport operations; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas internal audits and recent experience show serious shortcomings in the EU’s military mobility, with delays from bureaucratic red tape and inadequate infrastructure potentially taking up to 45 days to move military equipment across borders in response to a potential attack; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas the deployment of Russian troops and the growing influence of primarily military contractors with ties to the Putin regime in the Sahel region poses a significant challenge to the security and defence of Europe; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Da. whereas the expansion of military mobility must not lead to the restriction of Member States' sovereignty in the areas of defence and foreign policy, and any new measures in this area must be approved at national level; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas private operators play an important role in military mobility, but the lack of harmonisation of procedures often causes serious delays in the issuance of cross-border permits and in transport operations; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas private operators play an important role in military mobility, however non-harmonised procedures often cause severe delays in the issuance of cross-border permits and transport operations; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas investments into improving the existing dual-use air, rail, road and waterways infrastructure bring sizable benefits to communities and businesses in times of peace; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas the reality of military mobility is that the regulatory barriers remain the main obstacle to smooth military transportation in Europe, whereas too little is being done; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D a. whereas military transport carried out by private operators faces delays due to non-harmonised issuance procedures of cross-border permits; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D b. whereas the European Court of Auditors report of February 2025 on Military mobility concluded that the EU's second action plan (the “Action Plan 2.0”) of November 2022 was drawn up urgently in the context of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, and was not based on sufficiently solid foundations; whereas the report concluded that progress has been insufficient in achieving the overall objective of ensuring the rapid and unimpeded movement of military personnel, equipment and assets at short notice and on a large scale; whereas according to the report, improvements in governance, regulatory simplification, funding predictability and the selection of dual-use infrastructure projects under the post-2027 multiannual financial framework are necessary; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D b. whereas the Near East and North Africa are immediate neighbours to the Union; whereas instability in the Sahel, Libya, Syria and the broader Middle East generates spill-overs such as terrorism, irregular migration, arms trafficking and hybrid threats; whereas rival powers, including Russia, China and Turkey, are actively expanding their presence in the Mediterranean basin and Africa, thereby increasing pressure on the Union’s southern borders; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D b. whereas the eastern Mediterranean is of strategic geopolitical importance, with energy projects of common interest for Europe such as the Great Sea Interconnector (GSI) and EastMed, in which major American, French and Italian energy companies are involved; whereas there is an urgent need to protect these projects from any action contrary to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D b. whereas many European transport routes are not yet fit for heavy military vehicles, as tanks have been barred from entering certain countries because they exceed national weight limits and convoys have been halted at bridges not designed for such loads, highlighting the urgent need to upgrade key rail lines, roads and bridges to meet military standards; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D b. whereas in order to support long-term security of supply of energy for military mobility (including but not limited to liquid fuels), it is crucial to maintain resilient and competitive EU-based liquid fuel manufacturing industry and support it in its effort in low-carbon transformation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D b. whereas the military's heavy reliance on fossil fuels creates significant dependence and vulnerabilities and in the long term, efforts to decarbonise the military sector could lead to enhanced strategic autonomy; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D b. whereas EU MS have been exposed to aggravating and destructive natural disasters which pose the need for swift and coordinated reaction, including on the level of armed forces; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D c. whereas in the event of a crisis on the Union’s eastern border, reinforcement of allied forces may have to move laterally from the South and West; whereas ports and transport hubs in Spain, Italy, Greece and France provide essential alternative entry points if eastern land corridors are blocked or saturated; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D c. whereas sparsely populated regions such as border regions, rural areas, mountainous regions, islands, outermost regions and other geographically disadvantaged areas impacted by negative demographic tendencies are often of crucial importance for defence and security concerns; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D c. whereas the war against Ukraine shows that military mobility is crucial not just for troop movement but also civilian evacuation and humanitarian aid; whereas rail has played a particularly important role in this regard; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D c. whereas Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) plays a key role in enhancing and aligning the European Union's defence capabilities reducing our dependencies regarding strategic enablers, such as military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D d. whereas, in accordance with the Treaties, defence remains a sovereign competence of the Member States, exercised collectively within the Council in the framework of the CSDP; whereas the EDA acts as the intergovernmental platform to develop defence capabilities, harmonise military requirements and facilitate cooperative projects; whereas the Commission may contribute only within the strict limits of Union competences, such as transport, customs or funding instruments and therefore has no prerogative over the definition, planning or execution of defence policy; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D d. whereas the EU Defence Industrial Programme (EDIP) can play an important role in supporting the development of innovative technologies and capabilities relevant to military mobility; stresses that synergies between EDIP, the Connecting Europe Facility, and other EU funding instruments should be fully exploited in order to strengthen the resilience of transport infrastructure and enhance the Union’s overall capacity for swift and secure military movement; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D d. whereas some MS have a prominent geostrategic crossroads location and lay at the intersection of airways, waterways and roads of pivotal regional and global importance (such as the Danube river, the TEN-T corridors); |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D d. whereas rail has an important role to play in enhancing EU defence capabilities due to its unique ability to carry large and specialised loads over land; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| D e. whereas military mobility is not limited to land corridors but also encompasses the maritime domain, including SLOC, ports, and critical subsea energy and data infrastructure; whereas the ability to move forces and equipment rapidly across the Mediterranean is essential for the resilience of the overall military mobility network; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic deficiencies and that the need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; welcomes the commitment of NATO Member States to invest 1,5% GDP in defence relevant infrastructure that should also become a guiding principle for non-NATO EU Member States; welcomes the cooperation of EU and NATO on the issue of enhancing military mobility as well the participation of the United States, Canada and Norway in the EU PESCO project on military mobility; calls for a swift approval of the request by the United Kingdom and Switzerland to join the PESCO project on military mobility; deplores that an efficient EU-NATO cooperation is still being hampered by the lack of an agreement for the exchange of classified information between both organisations; calls, therefore, for expanding and deepening the structured dialogue established in 2018; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Underlines the importance of military mobility for European security and defence; stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence readiness, reduce their strategic dependencies, address their capability gaps and strengthen the European defence, technological and industrial base across the EU in the framework of the common security and defence policy, missions and operations and in the context of national and multinational activities, including NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategy to enhance military mobility will inevitably lead to the subordination of large parts of EU transport and infrastructure projects to this militarised approach; rejects, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO as it will not create more security or re-establish peace but on the contrary; insists that the military mobility budget as well as the entire "Defence" budget line violate Article 41.2 TEU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; stresses that the Union’s southern flank, including the Mediterranean and Black Sea maritime domains, is equally critical to military mobility, given the rising instability in North Africa and the broader Middle East; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; points out that these logistical measures do not involve any pooling of military resources, which remain a national responsibility; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; considers nevertheless that the time has come to urgently turn stated EU-NATO common objectives into real progress; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of the ongoing Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the Turkish threats in the Eastern Mediterranean; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the escalating threat in neighbouring European countries; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of the rising number of security threats and an international crisis; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their own defence capabilities, as well within the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of the armed conflict in Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; | 1. Stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence capabilities in the framework of the common security and defence policy and in the context of NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) Underlines that military mobility is as essential enabler for the effective, timely and safe deployment, movement and transportation of military personnel and assets in the frame of missions, operations, exercises, or day-to-day activities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2) Emphasizes the need to enhancing, preserving and protecting the infrastructure essential for enabling the swift and effective movement of military units and supplies, including rapid reaction forces, heavy equipment, goods and humanitarian aid within and beyond the EU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Rejects the Commission’s proposals of 19 March 2025 (COM(2025)0122), for a Council Regulation establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), and of 22 April 2025 (COM(2025)0188), for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on defence-related investments in the EU budget to implement the ReArm Europe Plan, as unacceptable and dangerous for the people. The EUR 800 billion under ReArm EU and the EUR 150 billion of loans under SAFE, which will line the pockets of the monopolistic groups developing the EU's war economy, along with the surging war spending of NATO countries, rising to 5 % of GDP by 2032, signal a war frenzy that the people will pay for with dramatic cuts to social services and with their blood. The plundering of workers' insurance funds is already being promoted through the Savings and Investments Union, wage stagnation and soaring exploitation, as provided for in the Greek Government's bill for 13-hour workdays, based on Directive 88/2023 on working time, unaffordable housing, expensive 'green energy' and drastic cuts in healthcare, education and civil protection in the name of cost. |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1 a. Underlines that military mobility is as essential enabler for the effective, timely and safe deployment, movement, transportation and sustainment of military personnel and assets in the frame of missions, operations, exercises, or day-to-day activities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1 a. Welcomes the inclusion of military mobility in the priorities of the Transeuropean Transport Network guidelines; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Rejects the Commission’s proposals of 19 March 2025 (COM(2025)0122), for a Council Regulation establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), and of 22 April 2025 (COM(2025)0188), for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on defence-related investments in the EU budget to implement the ReArm Europe Plan, as unacceptable and dangerous for the people. The EUR 800 billion under ReArm EU and the EUR 150 billion of loans under SAFE, which will line the pockets of the monopolistic groups developing the EU's war economy, along with the surging war spending of NATO countries, rising to 5 % of GDP by 2032, signal a war frenzy that the people will pay for with dramatic cuts to social services and with their blood. The plundering of workers' insurance funds is already being promoted through the Savings and Investments Union, wage stagnation and soaring exploitation, as provided for in the Greek Government's bill for 13-hour workdays, based on Directive 88/2023 on working time, unaffordable housing, expensive 'green energy' and drastic cuts in healthcare, education and civil protection in the name of cost. |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1c. Stresses that there are no ways or means to ensure the safety of workers and residents in the face of military transport, in the context of military mobility, least of all by abolishing all control within the framework of a 'military Schengen'. Military mobility itself, which is part of the EU's war plans and fierce imperialist rivalries, signals the automatic transformation of transport networks into battlefields and possible targets of retaliation, given that attacking enemy supply lines has long played a critical role in determining the outcome of a war. |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1d. Highlights that it has been demonstrated that the arms race, military mobility needs and the priorities of the EU's 'war economy' have nothing to do with the 'defence' and security of the people or their present-day needs. The participation of the EU and the Member States in the fierce rivalries of NATO and the US with China and Russia serves the interests of monopolistic groups and their plans for domination over energy and trade routes. This leads to bloodshed among the people. Typical examples are the massacres in Ukraine and the Middle East, where the occupying state of Israel is perpetrating the crime of genocide against the Palestinian people through starvation and displacement with the support of the EU and the US; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; stresses that Russia poses a considerable threat to EU’s security and that in case of the most extreme military contingency effective and fast deployment of troops to EU’s Eastern flank, especially for protection of the Baltic States is of the essence; deems it absolutely necessary to connect the EU’s military mobility infrastructure to Ukraine in order to be able to effectively respond in case of Russian aggression beyond Ukraine; points out, at the same time, that also the corridors from north to south require reinforcement in order to be able to effectively react to crisis in EU’s Southern Neighbourhood; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility and stresses the importance of early and effective coordination with strategic partners such as the United States, whose rapid support and logistical capabilities were crucial in the first weeks of the full scale war; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; stressing the urgent need to eliminate bottlenecks and obstacles by investing in dual-use infrastructure, particularly in regions with limited land connections such as the Iberian Peninsula; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Recalls the need of systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility and also from national and multinational exercises - including NATO - and experiences in implementing the relevant Action Plan on Military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; underlines, in this regard, the strategic need for military mobility investments in EU's Member States along NATO’s Eastern Flank and the Black Sea region; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility and establish the necessary procedures as fast as needed; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility, in particular based on the experience of the Ukrainian armed forces; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility, ensuring logistical contingencies and back-up planning; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war against Ukraine and other variety of war scenarios including on military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine including on military mobility; | 2. Insists on systematically drawing lessons from the armed conflict in Ukraine, including on military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) Stresses that military mobility is not limited to the movement of troops, weapons and equipment, but also concerns humanitarian aid and solidarity; recalls that the solidarity lanes to Ukraine, established in May 2022, are the best example, having enabled the export of around 189 million tonnes of goods and the import of 81 million tonnes, ranging from military aid to humanitarian assistance, fuel and other products; underlines that support for military mobility requirements can also bring significant benefits to citizens, since the ability to rapidly deploy military forces may facilitate faster delivery of aid and medical support, as well as the repair of infrastructure in the event of natural disasters, pandemics or other crises; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. Underlines the importance of military mobility for European security and defence; stresses that the EU’s strategic need for enhanced military mobility has become more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes, the ambition of Member States to substantially increase their defence readiness, reduce their strategic dependencies, address their capability gaps and strengthen the European defence technological and industrial base across the EU in the framework of the common security and defence policy, missions and operations and and in the context of national and multinational activities, including NATO; urges Member States and the Commission to take further action to simplify and harmonise diplomatic and administrative procedures for military mobility and to reduce the time required for granting permissions, enabling quicker action and more efficient responses in accordance with their defence needs and responsibilities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. Highlights that in order to enable the European Parliament to effectively exercise its parliamentary scrutiny, notably with regard to EU funding, and to contribute to the enhancement of military mobility as part of the EU's ambition to achieve defence readiness by 2030, any military advice as well as progress reports, including related EU NATO cooperation, on military mobility should be provided to the European Parliament without any undue delay in addition to regular briefings to be provided by the EU Military Committee or the EU Military Staff; calls for the development of the required infrastructure and related procedures to enable information exchanges on the level EU during Committee sessions in the European Parliament; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. Considers that time has come to ensure genuine and concrete preparedness on military mobility by moving from a narrow focus on ‘mobility’ towards a comprehensive approach to ‘military logistics’, encompassing all logistical aspects, including transport hubs, maintenance, storage, refuelling, repair and ammunition, with a view to reducing regulatory burden that slows down the development of Europe’s defence capabilities; building a safe, secure and resilient Europe and to deterring any form of aggression; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. Commends the collective efforts and support provided to Ukraine, emphasizing in particular the pivotal role of Poland as the principal hub for delivering assistance and ensuring its effectiveness; in this context, reiterates its call for strong and sustained investment in Poland’s logistics infrastructure — including air transport, such as the Central Communication Port (CPK), and railway networks — to maintain and strengthen these vital support operations; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. Regrets that attributions of funding for dual-transportation projects under the Action Plan 2.0 was not always based on geo-strategic considerations; suggests that in the future, the Commission and the EEAS should ensure that the most relevant dual-use infrastructure projects are selected by prioritising investments that answer strategic needs of the Member States; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 a. Underlines that military mobility is an essential enabler for common European security and defence; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2 b. Asks Member States and the EU to adopt a common vision, by clearly defining a high level of ambition for military mobility, to provide concrete building blocks to move the EU and Member States’ actions on Military Mobility forward and to formulate specific deliverables which should be all integrated in the EU Strategic Compass; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; welcomes the Commission’s MFF proposal that intends to increase funding for military mobility by the factor ten to 17,6 billion Euro under the Connecting Europe Facility with a total amount of 51,5 billion; recalls the Commission’s 2024 study estimates an investment need of 866 billion Euro to complete TEN-T core networks of which around 201 billion Euro would be required for cross-border projects; strongly underlines that the guiding principle for EU funding for military mobility has to be the ambition to achieve defence readiness by 2030 as defined in the White Paper on the Future of European defence on the basis of the military assessment by the EU Military Committee taking duly into consideration national military assessments and plans; recommends to include an adequate margin in the budget to allow additional funding for military mobility if urgent needs arise in order to ensure defence readiness by 2030 at the latest; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; notes, in this regard, the Commission’s proposal of July 2025 to dedicate €17.6 billion to military mobility under the Connecting Europe Facility for the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a ten-fold increase on the current envelope; underlines, however, that this level of funding should be considered a baseline rather than an upper ceiling given the scale of evolving threats and the growing critical defence infrastructure requirements along the four priority corridors; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented and deplorable cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation undermines the development of a safe and secure Europe, and cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; considers that the channelling of these additional funds towards military mobility in the next MFF will need to be closely monitored, with the creation of specific and time- bound indicators and targets to be achieved, as theseare lacking in the current MFF; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Welcomes the plans for increased budget for military mobility in the forthcoming multiannual financial framework (MFF); notes the Commission’s proposal indicating over 50 billion for a Connecting Europe Facility 3, including over 17 billion euro for military mobility, which is a tenfold increase compared to the previous MFF; stresses that the practice of decreasing the budget as noted in 2020, regarding the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding, shall not repeat itself; reiterates that the budgetary allocations for military mobility must be increased to ensure swift and efficient large-scale mobilisation and movement of military troops, equipment, and assets across the EU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; recalls that, in response to Russia’s aggression, the EU, by late 2023, allocated the entire EUR 1,7 billion military mobility dual-use TEN-T infrastructure budget within the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) as a political signal, creating a potential funding gap of over four years before the next budgetary period; insists, consequently, that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; underlines that due to this lack of budgetary ambition, the CEF Transport military mobility budget had to be frontloaded after Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and entirely consumed in the beginning of 2024, leaving no resources for the four remaining years of the current MFF; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased in a dedicated budget line, while ensuring complementarity with the EU’s social, environmental and industrial priorities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; regrets that this decision follows earlier expenditure cuts by the former Commission, which were rightly criticised by Parliament; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be urgently and drastically increased; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased in line with the 'hot-spot analysis' that was conducted under the authority of the Commissioners for Defence and Sustainable Transport; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased, without this impacting on the funding allocated to cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy; |
Ondřej Krutílek, Alexandr Vondra, Veronika Vrecionová, Rihards Kols, Reinis Pozņaks, Aurelijus Veryga, Adam Bielan, Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Cristian Terheş
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; welcomes the proposed allocation of EUR 18 billion for military mobility under the next MFF and insists on preserving this amount in the subsequent negotiations on the overall MFF ceiling; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased, taking into account needs identified for enhancing military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Take notes of the Council’s cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission and recall that the spending should be made more efficient along the military mobility corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased without undermining existing policies; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut of 75 % to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the position of Parliament and the Commission, and stresses that such a situation cannot be repeated; insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; | 3. Recalls the Council’s unprecedented cut to military mobility funding under the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), as compared to the overall financial requirements of the infrastructures and operating assets of military mobility, and insists that the resources allocated to military mobility within the next MFF be drastically increased; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3 a. Welcomes that the proposal for the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) aims to multiply the military mobility strand of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) tenfold; urges the Council not to reduce this military mobility envelope and that this is not at the detriment of the purely civil part of CEF; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; highlights that there is a 94% overlap between the military transport map and the TEN-T network, underlining the strong synergies between civilian and military infrastructure; stresses in this respect that it is crucial to understand where the financial and capability gaps are for the adaptation of military requirements of the infrastructure of the TEN-T; reiterates, however, that funding for military mobility should not come at the expense of funding other CEF transport priorities such as, in particular, actions relating to the projects of common interest with cross-border dimension implementing the TEN-T, as well as actions relating to the completion of a smart, resilient, decarbonised and sustainable TEN-T; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; underlines that counter-mobility is a critical component of European military deterence and resilience; stresses that it is crucial to mainstream counter-mobility in the design and implementation of the four corridors of military mobility of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T); encourages the Commission and Member States to cooperate closely to achieve a swift upgrading of the 500 “hot spots” identified within the four corridors, with particular focus on the cross-border sections, including rail, ports and airports, of these corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets and technologies enabling interoperability across all transport modes; calls for a clear definition of dual-use investment to be co-financed by the new CEF to avoid misuse of funding, including projects related to cybersecurity, maritime traffic management, underwater drone detection, radar and air defence systems to defend the critical infrastructure and assets along the main corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the next MFF, which reinforces the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets across all transport modes, in particular maritime ports; calls for a broad definition of dual-use investment to be co-financed by the new CEF, including projects related to cybersecurity, maritime traffic management, underwater drone detection, radar and air defence systems, as well as investments that contribute to both military mobility and the energy transition, such as port quays with higher bearing capacity serving both purposes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets and including technologies enabling interoperability; underlines that military mobility considerations should play a stronger role in the allocation of CEF funding, with a particular emphasis on rail, so that such dual-use projects critical for both civilian and defence purposes are duly prioritised; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, mainly for infrastructure, along with use of all other available instruments of financial assistance like European Competitiveness Fund for transport assets and the SAFE programme, to successfully foster Member State cooperation and alignment on large scale, cross-border transport projects and deployment of dual-use infrastructure; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued and its overall budget for transport must be significantly increased in the next MFF as it is the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets, for completing the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) and the four priority military mobility corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; stresses that the EU needs to emphasize on a military mobility belt from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea through the completion of the TEN-T network; |
Petras Auštrevičius, Engin Eroglu, Bart Groothuis, Lucia Yar, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets, including technologies enabling strategic autonomy, interoperability, automation and cyber resilience; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets across all transport modes including maritime ports and airports; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued and reinforced in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding for infrastructure, transformative technologies (such as ERTMS) and transport assets; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets and including technologies enabling interoperability; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, for infrastructure, transformative technologies (such as ERTMS) and transport assets; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, for transport assets, including dual-use infrastructure and mobile assets; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; | 4. Stresses that a centrally managed and dedicated EU transport funding instrument such as the Connecting Europe Facility must be continued in the next MFF as the main source for robust military and dual-use mobility funding, both for infrastructure and transport assets; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) Stresses the need to establish a dedicated EU funding instrument for the security training of on-site civilian staff responsible for managing and operating critical transport infrastructure, in order to complement and incentivise corresponding investments by Member States as well as by regional and local authorities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2) Calls for specific investments in transport equipment compliant with NATO standards, such as wagons adapted for heavy armoured vehicles, cargo aircraft, high-capacity tugboats, as well as autonomous multimodal logistics capabilities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Urges the Commission to address the challenges associated with the fragmentation of Connecting Europe Facility funding availability, particularly regarding the constrained nature of the different periodic calls for proposals, and the gaps in-between successive funding periods; calls, in this regard, for the scope of eligible activities to be expanded so that trans-European transport network projects deemed critical for military mobility can consistently access CEF support, thereby avoiding interruptions that undermine long-term planning and investment; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Recalls that the completion of cross-border and large-scale transport infrastructure projects within the TEN-T network is an indispensable objective for achieving effective dual-use and military mobility capabilities within a reasonable timeframe; recommends ensuring that adequate CEF funding is allocated under the upcoming MFF and is sufficient to complete all large-scale and cross-border infrastructure projects on the TEN-T network, as well as to cover the investments needed to strengthen the resilience of the relevant road network; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Underlines the strategic importance of road transport infrastructures (roads, bridges/viaducts, tunnels, junctions and cross-border sections) for guaranteeing the resilience and continuity of mobility within the EU; recalls that the upgrading of such critical assets is essential both for civilian and military mobility; recommends that adequate funding under CEF and the MFF is secured to address such needs; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Highlights the need to streamline and simplify procedures and conditions for obtaining funding for dual-use infrastructure projects within the Military Mobility funding in Connecting Europe Facility which will be continued in the next MFF; in this regard project promotors, including infrastructure managers, should be consulted in order to take their experiences into consideration; |
Petras Auštrevičius, Engin Eroglu, Bart Groothuis, Lucia Yar, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Urges to create, within the upcoming military mobility package, an investment plan for each of the four priority military mobility corridors to streamline military mobility investments and make the corridors functional in the next MFF; insists that the goal of investment plan is to abolish the need of burdensome permitting procedures along those corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Insists that funding allocations take into account the considerable burden carried by eastern flank Member States, ensuring priority financing for cross-border and dual-use infrastructure projects in Poland, the Baltic States, Finland, Slovakia and Romania; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Considers that an increase in the budget for military mobility should not lead to a budget reduction for other Connecting Europe Facility actions, which are also significantly underfunded and oversubscribed; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 a. Notes that, in the current MFF, 95 military mobility projects were supported in 21 Member States through the Connecting Europe Facility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 b. Underlines the crucial role played by dual-use intermodal logistical hubs and terminals, including loading platforms suitable for military assets and rolling stock for exceptional transport, in ensuring efficient military movements and managing strategic military assets; in this regards recommends that a proper financial strategy, combining funding under the new MFF and private capital, including support from EIB, is established to strengthen funding and scale up investments in development, management and maintenance of dual use logistical hubs, including port terminals, as well as in road and rail infrastructure — including missing links and high speed connections — along the TEN-T core network; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 b. Calls on the Commission to provide additional incentives for the use of a broader set of financing instruments that can speed up and reduce the costs of construction of dual-use projects, including loans and public–private partnership (PPP) mechanisms; stresses that, to encourage uptake, payments made under such instruments should be considered eligible expenditure within the CEF framework, thereby multiplying the leverage of EU resources and attracting additional private capital to military mobility infrastructure; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 b. Welcomes the Commission's proposal to finance dual-use transport infrastructure projects under the national and regional partnership plans and the European Competitiveness Fund; Underlines that investments undertaken under this framework should complement projects funded under the upcoming Connecting Europe Facility III; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 b. Warmly welcomes both the continuation of the Connecting Europe Facility and the level of ambition for the military mobility budget within the Commission budgetary proposal; |
Petras Auštrevičius, Engin Eroglu, Lucia Yar, Urmas Paet, Nathalie Loiseau, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Bart Groothuis
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 b. Calls for the appointment of a dedicated European coordinator for each of the priority military mobility corridors to facilitate their implementation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4 c. Highlights that implementation of large transport infrastructure projects crucial to international military mobility may take longer than a single MFF and is not adapted to allocation of funding through annual calls; therefore, invites to speed up their construction by providing more guarantees for their continuation between different MFFs and between different annual calls of funding; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Rejects the use and re-allocation of funding available under the current MFF, including resources in the European Regional Development Fund, in the Cohesion Fund and in the Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility or rearmamnet; insists that the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund should be used to reduce economic, social, and territorial disparities between EU regions and therefore must not be used to finance any military measures or projects; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Recalls that Member States may use funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure and mobile assets to foster military mobility; urges, in this context, that maximum flexibility in funding reallocation be granted to those Member States that share a border with aggressor states and face an increased risk of conventional military threats; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including, insofar as the recently proposed measures by the Commission would allow for the reallocation of resources from the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility, and calls for a significant increase of EU funding in the next MFF to support critical cross-border projects, including those connecting the Iberian Peninsula with the rest of Europe; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility, whilst also taking into account local economic vitality and regional civilian uses, which will enhance the effectiveness and the societal benefits of these investments; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure, transport and mobile assets to foster military mobility, without compromising the existing allocation to other strategic sectors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or transport assets, including dual-use infrastructure and mobile assets to foster military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility, including military counter-mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure and mobile assets to foster military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; | 5. Urges Member States to use the maximum funding available under the current MFF, including the recently introduced measures to re-allocate resources in the European Regional Development Fund and in the Cohesion Fund, as well as quickly redirect unused Recovery and Resilience Facility funds towards transparent investments in defence or dual-use infrastructure to foster military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5 a. Underlines that the implementation of the key actions set out in the EU Black Sea Strategy, including those concerning military mobility in the Black Sea, should be supported by an increase in the Conecting Europe Facility budget and, where appropriate, by the use of other financing instruments mentioned in the Conclusions of the EU Black Sea Strategy; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; | 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative and predictable acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; such investments should contribute to strengthening a genuine European defence Union; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; | 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the National and Regional Partnership Plans, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support expansion and upgrade of both physical and digital dual-use infrastructure and collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; |
Petras Auštrevičius, Engin Eroglu, Bart Groothuis, Lucia Yar, Urmas Paet, Nathalie Loiseau, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; | 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative and predictable acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; | 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European Defence Industry Programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE regulation, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Encourages Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; | 6. Asks Member States to ensure that the dedicated budgets under the European defence industrial programme, the European Defence Fund, the SAFE, the measures under the Defence Readiness Omnibus proposal and other EU defence initiatives can be used to support collaborative acquisition of enabling capabilities for defence, including on military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6 a. Stresses the importance of clear award criteria to avoid misuse of funding; urges therefore for a better monitoring of the projects as they should be in line with the priorities as were set out in the revised Annex II of the military requirements; highlights the competences of the European Parliament regarding the monitoring of funding within the European budget; encourages the Commission - in cooperation with the Member States - to translate those priorities into a clear roadmap of the most urgent projects; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6 a. Reminds that attracting private capital is essential to bridge the growing funding gap in strategic sectors such as defence and to ensure greater financial autonomy for the Union; in this regard, underlines that the creation of a stable and predictable European regulatory framework constitutes a necessary condition for attracting private capital for investments in military assets; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6 a. Stresses the importance and strategic value of existing military mobility infrastructures, such as roads, ports and airports; underlines the need to protect them from drone attacks in light of the recent Spiderweb Operation that has shown the vulnerability of key strategic assests; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6 a. Encourages Member States to temporarily activate in a targeted and coordinated manner the National Escape Clause foreseen in the recently adopted ReArm EU plan to boost their defence capabilities and increase their investments in dual-use transport infrastructure; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6 a. Encourages to explore possibilities of developing additional financing mechanisms, such as a Defence, Security and Resilience Bank, to address the funding needs of security, defence and resilience; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6 b. Emphasizes that investments made to facilitate military mobility will also generate civilian benefits in terms of decarbonization, modal shift towards sustainable modes of transport, performance and resilience of freight and passenger transport systems, strengthening of the European single market, and civil protection capabilities to respond to pandemics, natural disasters, and provide humanitarian aid in response to crises; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6 a. Reiterates its profound concern about the current lack of agility, responsiveness and efficiency in military mobility, which is hampered by an excessive and ineffective governance and regulatory complexity resulting in absence of harmonization, slow coordination and time loss; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it, stressing that such a framework must not conflict with Member States’ competences in the field of security and defence, or limit their sovereignty, but should instead be built on simplifications and recommendations developed by NATO, drawing on current operational experience; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | 7. Reiterates calls for the swift decision and implementation of a ‘military Schengen area’, by harmonising rules, regulations, and procedures and by removing all legal, logistical, and infrastructure barriers to military mobility; encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards this objective; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; strongly underlines the necessity of including the military expertise on the EU level provided by the EUMC and the national level as well as by the European Defence Agency in that process; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and invites the Member States, acting in the Council and within the EDA, to deliver a jointly agreed roadmap towards it; stresses that the Commission’s role is limited to providing support strictly within its transport and customs competences; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; stresses however that Member States should keep the possibility to suspend at any time such a mechanism to defend their own national security interests; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it, while ensuring full respect for Member States’ sovereignty in decision-making on the movement of armed forces across their territory; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it; | 7. Reiterates calls for a ‘military Schengen area’ and encourages the Commission to provide a roadmap towards it, without creating duplicates with NATO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7 a. Calls for a sustained implication on the European Investment Bank to contribute to the financing of infrastructure projects with a high European and defence-related added value; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7 b. Calls for the systematic application of the European preference principle in military mobility projects, particularly in the procurement of infrastructure components, in order to strengthen the Union’s strategic autonomy and ensure that investments contribute to European industrial and security interests; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; urgently calls, in that regard, on the Commission to review the administrative and compensation requirements of the Habitats Directive as well as the Council Directive on the conservation of wild birds (1979); calls on the Commission to introduce simpler and more effective exemptions in both the Waste Framework Directive (2008) and the Waste Shipment Regulation (2024) by explicitly referring to Class 1 Explosives, as defined under the UN Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals, in order to harmonise definitions and prevent divergent interpretations by Member States; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; urgently calls, in that regard, on the Commission to review the administrative and compensation requirements of the Habitats Directive as well as the Council Directive on the conservation of wild birds (1979); calls on the Commission to introduce simpler and more effective exemptions in both the Waste Framework Directive (2008) and the Waste Shipment Regulation (2024) by explicitly referring to Class 1 Explosives, as defined under the UN Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals, in order to harmonise definitions and prevent divergent interpretations by Member States; |
Elena Nevado del Campo, Borja Giménez Larraz, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles including the difference between the size of the ‘Iberian gauge’ and the European standard one, which forces the unloading and reloading of cargo in order to move it from Spain to the rest of Europe; stresses that this obstacle should be urgently addressed, taking into account that Spain is the eighth largest defence producer worldwide and that seamless military mobility is therefore of strategic importance for the Union; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Member States, coordinated through the EDA and the Council, to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; stresses that the Commission’s role is strictly limited to facilitating the adaptation of EU transport and customs legislation where legally necessary; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose, within the framework of the common transport policy, further actions necessary to remove all obstacles to military mobility; urges the Commission to strive for a deep harmonization of the regulatory framework in light of the necessary coherence and the swift implementation of the proposed measures; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles, including physical bottlenecks such as the Pyrenees, where the Iberian Peninsula currently relies on only two crossings; stresses the need to diversify connections, notably by developing new rail connections across the Pyrenees as strategic dual-use corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles, including by proposing a military mobility omnibus of regulatory amendments in view of simplifying and accelerating EU programme and budget implementation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; such obstacles range from physical barriers to burdensome vehicle authorisation and lack of administrative harmonisation within the Union; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles, including burdensome railway vehicle authorisation processes, different national infrastructure operational rules and lack of automation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles, with a particular focus on administrative and infrastructural barriers; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles, focussing on administrative and infrastructural barriers; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles including administrative and infrastructural barriers; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles, without creating duplicates with NATO operations; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8. Calls on the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; | 8. Urges the Commission to propose further actions with the urgent aim of integrating and coordinating the EU’s approach to removing all existing military mobility obstacles; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8 a. Stresses that support for military mobility requirements can bring significant benefits to citizens; notes that the ability to rapidly deploy military forces can also mean faster delivery of aid and medical support, medical evacuation, as well as the repair of infrastructure in the event of natural disasters, pandemics or other crises; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8 a. Expects the upcoming Rail Capacity Regulation to become an important tool in enabling effective, seamless and smooth cross-border rail military mobility, besides freight and passengers; calls for its prompt implementation, particularly where military mobility corridors are concerned; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8a. Stresses that any measures in the area of military mobility, including cross-border movements of armed forces, must be subject to the consent of the Member State concerned and to national legislation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8 a. Stresses that standardisation efforts should also focus on training and relevant security clearance; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 8 b. Stresses that with regards to large-scale transformation processes, preparedness is not only a question of military capabilities, but that in all efforts for military responsiveness EU citizens have to be taken on board by communicating and explaining measures taken; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; | deleted |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; | 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; especially in the territories bordering Russia and in those representing the Union's external borders with other continents, such as the Iberian Peninsula; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; | 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; welcomes the recent measures proposed by the Commission with regard to permit granting; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; | 9. Rejects the military mobility pledge 2024 as it is prioritising investments in transport infrastructure benefitting military movements; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; | 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure across all domains: land, air and sea, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; |
Ondřej Krutílek, Alexandr Vondra, Veronika Vrecionová, Rihards Kols, Reinis Pozņaks, Aurelijus Veryga, Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Cristian Terheş
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; | 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure and transport assets, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9. Calls on the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; | 9. Demands the Member States to implement, as a matter of urgency, the 13 commitments taken under the military mobility pledge 2024, focusing on investments in transport infrastructure, accelerating cross-border movement permissions and enhancing EU-NATO cooperation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) Urges the Commission and the Member States to fully implement the Military Mobility Pledge 2024 by delivering on each of its 13 commitments - especially the enhancement of transport infrastructure, regulatory harmonisation, and EU-NATO coordination - as part of a comprehensive and adequately funded Military Mobility Package; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9 a. Stresses the need to meet the infrastructure and interoperability requirements set out in the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) Regulation; calls on the EU, on Member States and transport companies to remove infrastructure bottlenecks and upgrade tunnel dimensions and maximum bridge loads to military requirements, to address low water levels on inland waterways, to roll-out ERTMS and DAC on railways, to streamline lengthy procedures for the approval of rolling stock, to improve locks capacity and digitalisation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 9 b. Alerts on the necessity to increase connectivity between transport modes, in particular last-mile connections to rail in seaports, inland ports and freight terminals to strengthen the capacity, responsiveness, and resilience of logistic chains in times of crisis and conflict; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures across all transport modes; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; also reiterates the necessity to harmonise rules with regards to abnormal transport as private operators play an important role in transporting military equipment, both as part of the ongoing revision of the Weights and Dimensions Directive and within the upcoming Military Mobility Package; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; notes the results already achieved and the continuous effort of cooperation between European Defence Agency (EDA) and European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in this perspective for the aviation domain; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; urges the facilitation of rail vehicle authorization and the harmonization of operational rules in the railway sector via deployment of standardized rail traffic solutions (ERTMS); |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, throughout an EU digital platform for military movement, planning and coordination, and related host- and transit nation activities in close cooperation with NATO including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous, heavy or oversized goods, priority movement of military convoys, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation, which should be recognised and used by all Member States ; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures including across all transport modes; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous and oversized/overweight goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Stresses the importance of maintaining national rules as a priority, while ensuring their streamlining and adaptation in alignment with EU frameworks; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous and oversized or overweight goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous and oversized/overweight goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; | 10. Highlights the need to streamline complex, lengthy and divergent national rules and procedures; insists that the upcoming military mobility package proposes simplified, harmonised, uniform and digitalised procedures, including on customs, transport of dangerous and abnormal goods, diplomatic clearances and the use of identical permits, such as for cross-border movement bids/credits and EU/NATO form 302 documentation; further calls for the development of a military customs system to digitalise customs formalities and reduce administrative burden and cost, with respect to the existing EU projects such as the Secure Digital Military Mobility System; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10 a. Underlines that, as shown in the Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council: The European Union's strategic approach to the Black Sea region, a key component of the EU’s action in the Black Sea region is the need to enhance mobility in and around the Black Sea and to facilitate dual-use infrastructure projects in EU Member States, while also strengthening connections with neighbouring countries across land, maritime and air domains; stresses that, while increased military mobility in the region adds clear value to the security of the Union, it will also provide additional benefits for the security of the EU and contribute to the reconstruction of Ukraine; highlights the urgent need to modernise dual-use transport infrastructure along the existing mobility network – encompassing multimodal transport routes connected through logistics hubs – so that it can accommodate potentially heavy and large-scale military transport; emphasises that EU loading and unloading ports on the Black Sea and the Danube, together with the connecting rail and road infrastructure, are essential to enabling military mobility, and that the capacity to move military equipment and troops rapidly into Ukraine will serve as an additional security guarantee to deter future aggression; |
Petras Auštrevičius, Engin Eroglu, Bart Groothuis, Lucia Yar, Urmas Paet, Nathalie Loiseau, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10 a. Urges the harmonisation of operational rules in the railway sector by deploying standardised rail solutions, particularly the European Railway Traffic Management System (ERTMS), which harmonises signalling and train control, thereby enhancing the safety, interoperability, efficiency, speed and tracking of military transport networks; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10 a. Calls for the establishment of a one-stop digital window for oversized and abnormal road transport for military purposes (authorisations, escorting, temporary exemptions), interoperable with Form 302 and with military customs systems; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 10a. Stresses that Member States must be able to veto any military movement through their territory if they consider it a security risk; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures will strengthen mutual trust among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; | 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures and effective interoperability will strengthen mutual trust among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; highlights that particular attention should be given to administrative and regulatory procedures as well as to addressing missing or inappropriate infrastructure; notes that setting up large-scale cross-border testbeds related to military movements, notably permissions, related arrangements, procedures and provisions could be crucial to enhance cooperation of defence personnel and transport workers and companies; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures will strengthen mutual trust among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; | 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures will strengthen mutual trust among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; calls on the Member States to define contingency plans with clear responsibilities and decision-making pathways for approving cross-border transport of military assets; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures will strengthen mutual trust among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; | 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures will strengthen mutual trust, facilitate and increase cooperation among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures will strengthen mutual trust among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; | 11. Stresses that the harmonisation of procedures is a prerequisite and will strengthen mutual trust among Member States and boost cross-border connectivity; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11 a. Notes that in order to advance towards the European harmonisation and effective interoperability for cross-border connectivity, it is important to accelerate the ongoing work on legislative files with direct repercussions for military mobility, such as the revision of the Directive on Weights and Dimensions, or the future revision of the Directive on the transport of dangerous goods; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11 a. Underlines the crucial role played by rail interoperability in ensuring seamless operations across borders within the EU, and recommends that adequate funding under CEF and the MFF is secured to address such needs; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 11 a. Underlines that the provision of war risk insurance coverage for high-risk logistics providers can serve as an incentive for companies, as it contributes to mitigating operational risks; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Welcomes the objective of simplifying the legal and administrative frameworks as proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus and the upcoming joint communication on military mobility 2025; | 12. Welcomes the objective of simplifying the legal and administrative frameworks as proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus and the upcoming joint communication on military mobility 2025; regrets, however, that key obstacles linked to existing EU-legislation, such as the Habitats Directive, as well as the Council Directive on the conservation of wild birds (1979), Waste Framework Directive (2008) and the Waste Shipment Regulation (2024) have not yet been addressed, and reiterates its call for their timely revision to remove barriers to military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Welcomes the objective of simplifying the legal and administrative frameworks as proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus and the upcoming joint communication on military mobility 2025; | 12. Welcomes the objective of simplifying the legal and administrative frameworks as proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus and the upcoming joint communication on military mobility 2025; regrets, however, that key obstacles linked to existing EU-legislation, such as the Habitats Directive, as well as the Council Directive on the conservation of wild birds (1979), Waste Framework Directive (2008) and the Waste Shipment Regulation (2024) have not yet been addressed, and reiterates its call for their timely revision to remove barriers to military mobility; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12. Welcomes the objective of simplifying the legal and administrative frameworks as proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus and the upcoming joint communication on military mobility 2025; | 12. Welcomes the objective of simplifying the legal and administrative frameworks as proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus and the upcoming joint communication on military mobility 2025 and calls for its swift entry into force; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) Calls for the next joint communication to include a cooperation framework to carry out an in-depth analysis of the EU-wide infrastructure network from a multimodal perspective; calls to assess the connectivity needs with major entry and exit points (terminals, ports, airports...); calls to identify weaknesses in the transport and logistics system and to propose concrete actions on digitalisation, interoperability, information-sharing and security; calls to establish large-scale cross-border testbeds for military movements, notably on authorisations, modalities, procedures and arrangements, where effective cooperation between defence personnel, transport workers and companies will be essential; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12 a. Underlines the importance of strengthening dual-use connections between the EU and Türkiye, a NATO member, which are strategically vital both for military mobility and for ensuring economic resilience across the Black Sea region; emphasises that Romania, as a frontline state on the Eastern flank plays, along with Bulgaria, a pivotal role in this strategic connectivity, notably through its Black Sea and Danube ports as well as its rail and road networks, which are indispensable for secure civilian supply chains and for enabling large-scale military transport; calls on the EU to prioritise investment in dual-use infrastructure projects under the Connecting Europe Facility and other relevant financial instruments, so that the EU–Türkiye corridor evolves into a resilient and strategic axis contributing simultaneously to European security, regional economic growth, and Ukraine’s integration and recovery; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12 a. Calls on the Commission to streamline certification procedures for key military mobility capabilities and technologies, while allowing temporary exemptions from environmental, alternative fuels, and green transition requirements when necessary to ensure the rapid development of robust military mobility capacities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 12 b. Highlights the strategic value of better connecting Bucharest with Edirne as part of the wider Black Sea and Eastern flank corridor; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Urges on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; while guiding Member States in mandating different security providers with the surveillance and protection of ‘critical infrastructure’; further stresses the need to incorporate in this framework specific provisions regarding the rights and protections of civilian workers undertaking military transport operations; finally reaffirms that a strike can never be considered a crisis situation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; stresses that any clarification of the rules applicable in times of peace, crisis or war must uphold the principle of national sovereignty in decisions relating to the deployment of forces; points out that European military mobility is tool for facilitation and not for pooling; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Calls on the Council, supported by the EDA and the EU Military Staff, to define the operational requirements for ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; stresses that the Commission’s role is strictly limited to facilitating the adaptation of EU transport and customs legislation where legally necessary to give effect to those requirements; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors, while also providing clear definitions for "fall-back situations" to guarantee continuity of military transport in case of disruption; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; stresses that funding for projects outside the territory of the EU should be voluntary and must not draw on resources needed for the development of national networks; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘increased vigilance’, ‘crisis’, ‘security emergency’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel and equipment throughout and across military corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Calls on the Commission to reflect on developing a legal and operational framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; | 13. Calls on the Commission to present a legal and operational framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, clearly distinguishing ‘peacetime’, ‘in-between’ and ‘wartime’ phases, and including rules for each phase in order to ensure interoperability and priority access for armed forces to transport facilities, networks and assets, with streamlined movement for military personnel throughout and across military corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, including NATO, as well as private transport companies serving as provider of logistic services to Member States' armed forces on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; recommends the setup of a permanent coordination and information exchange platform on the European level by the Commission working in liaison with the European Defence Agency consisting of representatives of relevant EU bodies such as the EUMC and the DG MOVE national administration and armed forces, NATO as well as civilian transport companies providing logistic services to Member States’ armed forces; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; calls for the organisation of regular joint EU-NATO exercises and stress tests involving the armed forces, civil protection, infrastructure managers, and transport operators to improve communication, coordination, streamline procedures, and identify and remove obstacles to military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication and coordination system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers, transport operators qualified to provide military transport services, and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication and coordination system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers, transport operators qualified to provide military transport services, and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication and coordination system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers, transport operators qualified to provide military transport services and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication and coordination system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers, transport operators qualified to provide military services, and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, including regional and local authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14. Expects that the forthcoming framework will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; | 14. Expects that the forthcoming legal framework concerning crisis situations will establish an efficient and clear communication system between military and public authorities, on a need-to-know basis, to exchange necessary information with infrastructure managers and foster resilience across entire networks for each phase; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14 a. Welcomes the extraordinary meeting of the TEN-T Committee on 1 July 2025, attended by the Commissioners for Transport and Sustainable Tourism, and for Defence and Space, as a step towards deepening the dialogue on the EU’s military mobility policy; calls for the establishment of a dedicated working group on maritime ports to ensure sustained dialogue between the relevant military and port administrations; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14 a. Notes the lack of cooperation and limited communication between port authorities and military or relevant defence building actors; understands the sensitivity of information sharing practices, especially foreign-owned European port authorities; however stresses that a reliable and secure channel for specific information exchange is necessary, which requires best practice implementations in ports; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14 a. Calls on the Commission to use the legal framework addressing ‘crisis situations’, including the rules applicable to each phase, when revising its regulatory framework on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles over and in the perimeter of ‘critical infrastructure’; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14 b. Urges the Commission to review the scope of the notion of ‘critical infrastructure’ within the legal framework, with a view to including production, storage, maintenance and repair facilities related to military mobility infrastructure, rolling stock and other assets; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 14 c. Urges the Commission to simplify the regulatory regime applicable to such ‘critical infrastructure’ in order to provide the operational flexibility necessary in different ‘crisis situations’; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Calls for the establishment of a decision-making mechanism to allow heads of state and government to take immediate action in ‘crisis’ and ‘wartime’ phases; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Calls for the establishment of a decision-making mechanism to allow heads of state and government to take immediate action in ‘crisis’ and ‘wartime’ phases; | 15. Calls for the establishment of a permanent decision-making mechanism enabling heads of state and government to take immediate action in ‘crisis’ and ‘wartime’ phases, while ensuring democratic accountability through effective oversight by the European Parliament; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Calls for the establishment of a decision-making mechanism to allow heads of state and government to take immediate action in ‘crisis’ and ‘wartime’ phases; | 15. Calls for the establishment of a decision-making mechanism to allow heads of state and government to take immediate action in ‘crisis’ and ‘wartime’ phases; underlines the importance of parliamentary oversight, also at European level; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15. Calls for the establishment of a decision-making mechanism to allow heads of state and government to take immediate action in ‘crisis’ and ‘wartime’ phases; | 15. Calls to respect the decision-making mechanism inside the Union as set by the treaties; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15 a. Calls on the Member States to work on identifying crucial transport nodes with a military relevance and their (cyber/hybrid) vulnerability to possible opponents, with a focus on (civilian and military) embarkation and debarkation ports, especially air and sea ports of entry, as well as container terminals (warehouse management systems), transit routes and rail traffic control; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 15a. Stresses that local authorities in the eastern flank Member States are key actors in the planning and implementation of military mobility projects; calls for their systematic involvement in the consultation, design and monitoring process for EU-funded infrastructure, thereby ensuring synergies between local development and defence requirements; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters; | 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters; calls on the Commission to establish a ‘Military Mobility Taskforce’ with representatives of all competent EU bodies to streamline the preparation, implementation and monitoring of all initiatives concerning military mobility in a horizontal manner; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters; | 16. Calls for improvement of coordination between the EU, the Member States and other stakeholders by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters; in parallel, calls for the designation of national contact points to improve overall governance and coordination of military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters; | 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters, as a way to limit bureaucracy, not to expand it; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level by appointing, for instance, a single point of contact for military mobility matters; | 16. Calls for improvement of coordination at the EU institutional level, including through the appointment of a single point of contact for military mobility matters and by ensuring the effective integration of all relevant stakeholders; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16 a. Recognises the strategic position of the Southern European border, which links the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, two key scenarios for Europe's seaborne military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16 a. Reinforces oversight by the European and national parliaments over the implementation of military mobility measures, ensuring transparency and citizen benefits; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 16 b. Observes the fragmented regulatory framework applying to military mobility activities in the EU and the inherent lack of parliamentary oversight for mobility projects financed within PESCO. Notes, however, that Parliament should oversee the allocation of military mobility projects under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and through other MFF sources, such as cohesion funds, even though not directly earmarked for military mobility projects, therefore ensuring accountability and transparency; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Improving infrastructure | Improving and constructing new dual-use infrastructure |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, which has been created on the basis of military expertise provided within the CSDP structures and in close cooperation with the Commission and coordinated in cooperation with NATO, resulting also in the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots of military relevance; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); emphasises the high importance of maritime ports in these corridors, in particular with regard to deployment of NATO troops arriving in Europe from overseas as well as their relevance for the continuity of supply chains; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); stresses the importance of the maritime ports on these corridors; acknowledges in that respect that military mobility needs have to be seen together with civil readiness needs: ports play an equally crucial role in view of ensuring the uninterrupted flow of goods, in particular via maritime TEN-T ports and thus guaranteeing business continuity and civil readiness in times of crisis or conflict; |
Elena Nevado del Campo, Borja Giménez Larraz, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); stresses in this regard the importance of advancing the completion of the Ruta de la Plata corridor, currently under the Comprehensive Network of the TEN-T - before its stipulated deadline in 2050 - in order to strengthen internal EU connectivity, enhance resilience, and provide a strategic dual-use corridor for both civilian transport and military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); considers that all identified sensitive points should be eligible for CEF co-financing of up to 100%; stresses that a geographical balance between Member States must be ensured while avoiding a fragmentation of projects that could hamper the preparation of the most important corridors for heavy military transport; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) whose governance structures may provide valuable support to EU-NATO coordination, both by enhancing the development of strategic projects and by identifying persisting bottlenecks and barriers to military mobility; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); regrets, however, the exclusion of the Iberian Peninsula from the list of priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, despite its strategic role as Europe's south-western gateway; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); considers that all identified sensitive points should be eligible for CEF co-financing of up to 100%; stresses that a geographical balance between Member States must be ensured; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); underlines that the weakest links and bottlenecks have knock-on effects on the functioning and effective continuity of entire corridors and the network as a whole; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); | 17. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the four priority military mobility corridors for short-notice and large-scale movements, created in cooperation with NATO, and the ongoing identification of 500 hotspots; highlights that more than 94 % of these corridors are a part of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); stresses that this approach also allows to increase economic integration within the Union; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) Calls on the Commission and the Member States to embed a 'whole-of-society' approach in the Military Mobility package, involving civil authorities, infrastructure managers, industry, local communities, and EU–NATO partners, while ensuring the timely and meaningful consultation of the relevant social partners; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Highlights the essential role of the TEN-T and its infrastructure for the civilian but also military supply chains; stresses the need for strategic redundancies in the TEN-T and military mobility infrastructure to facilitate large troop deployments in case of the most extreme military contingency while maintaining civilian and military supply chains; calls, therefore, upon the Commission working in liaison with the European Defence Agency, the EUMC and relevant national bodies to conduct stress tests of the military mobility infrastructure as well as for regular exercises for scenarios requiring large troop movements; highlights that such stress tests and exercises need to be conducted in line with NATO planning and should include all relevant stakeholders on the European and national level, including also civilian actors such as provider of logistic services to the Member States’ armed forces; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Reminds the importance of complying as soon as possible with the provisions and deadlines set within the revised TEN-T regulation, starting with the core network by 2030, including ERTMS and ensuring full rail interoperability, as well as the necessary maintenance; notes the importance of an adequate loading gauge as an enabler for military mobility; recalls the relevance of implementing the provisions of the Smart TEN-T directive in this regard, particularly in the framework of dual-use infrastructure projects; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Underlines that the definitions of military mobility and dual-use infrastructure must cover civilian uses sufficiently, so that the full potential of these investments can be maximised for security, crisis preparedness and regional vitality; stresses that infrastructure projects, especially in logistically critical nodes and areas, can simultaneously enhance military readiness, civil connections and regional development; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Stresses the priority of financing ‘last-mile’ road interventions to ports, airports, logistics bases, strategic infrastructures and border crossing points on the TEN-T network, with particular attention to cross-border and sections where road bottlenecks persist and infrastructure that ensures territorial continuity and interconnectivity with the islands; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Urges that all revisions of the TEN-T network and the military mobility gap analysis systematically include southern maritime corridors, as gateways for reinforcements from NATO Allies and strategic logistical hubs for the EU; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Highlights that only those infrastructure projects which genuinely address military mobility needs should count towards military expenditure, especially towards meeting the NATO target of 5% of GDP spent on defence; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Notes the importance of both modernising existing and constructing new dual-use transport infrastructure for enhancing European military mobility capabilities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 a. Calls for a precise evaluation of the financial needs to achieve these military mobility corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 b. Stresses that the timely removal of infrastructure bottlenecks is essential for ensuring rapid reinforcement capabilities; highlights that projects such as Rail Baltica are strategic for both civilian and military mobility, as they provide interoperable, sustainable, and high-capacity rail connections across the EU’s eastern flank; calls on the Commission and the Member States to prioritise the swift completion and full funding of such cross-border rail links under the Connecting Europe Facility and other EU instruments; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 b. Welcomes the identification of the routes relevant for military mobility within EU, according to the geographic data tables in the Chapter 2 of the Annex II to the Military Requirements for Military Mobility within and beyond the EU, as the tables encompass existing transport infrastructure as well as planned, under development and future projects, emphasizing the importance of both modernising existing and constructing new dual-use transport infrastructure for enhancing European military mobility capabilities; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 b. Stresses the urgent need to intensify efforts for timely upgrading of the military mobility infrastructure’s capacity enabling transit of overweight and oversized vehicles, especially with regard to border crossings and choke points for troop movements; strongly underlines that such an upgrade needs to be complemented by a harmonisation of permission procedure for overweight and oversized vehicles; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 b. Stresses the importance of avoiding over-reliance on a few northern gateways; insists on developing strategic redundancy by investing in alternative maritime entry points in southern Europe, thereby enhancing resilience in crisis scenarios; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 c. Highlights the importance of the railway infrastructure for larger troop movements and calls for improved management and operational capacities facilitating troop movements in particular cross-border movement; calls, therefore, for an inclusion of that aspect in the Rail Infrastructure Capacity Regulation and for its swift adoption; expresses strong concern about the persisting lack of interoperability due to different track gauges throughout the Union that affects cross-border movements of troops; highlights that according to the Commission’s estimate in its study of 2024 achieving interoperability through implementation of technical standards would require investments of 39 billion Euro; welcomes the Rail Baltica project to connect the Baltic states to the EU’s railway network by adapting the track gauges; considers this project of high importance given the strategic vulnerabilities of the Baltic states to a potential Russian aggression; stresses that this project must not experience delays as its scheduled completion in 2030 coincides with the ambition to achieve defence readiness and therefore should receive reinforced EU funding; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 d. Points out that with regard to achieving a faster response time for troop deployments a sole focus on dual-use infrastructure will not be sufficient; stresses that fast deployments require the most direct connection of military bases and installation to the military mobility corridors with such connections, where necessary and effective with regard to improving response time, being solely for military purposes; calls to that end upon the Commission and the Member States to include funding for such a direct connection within European and national plans; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 e. Welcomes the European Investment Bank’s loan of 115 million EU to expand the Danish Port of Esbjerg as an important project to enhance military mobility by adapting it to military needs; considers this an exemplary project illustrating the added value for achieving European defence readiness as an essential EU policy objective the EIB support can provide; welcomes the broadening of the dual-use definition of EIB investments and reinforced funding for defence investment; calls for further increase of EIB investments in military mobility as well as defence in general given its character as a European policy priority; regrets, nonetheless that the EIB’s mandate still prohibits investments in defence; recalls that the EIB’s objective is to foster European integration, promote the development of the EU and support EU policies in line with article 309 TFEU; calls, therefore, upon the Member States in their role as governing body of the EIB to adapt the EIB’s mandate allowing genuine defence investments; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 17 f. Welcomes the multilateral initiatives of the Netherlands, Germany and Poland as well as of Greece, Bulgaria and Romania with the aim to establish transport corridors and facilitate troop movements; underlines that such initiatives should be supported in the EU’s framework on military mobility while ensuring coherence with the EU’s military mobility framework and NATO’s defence planning; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors, providing the necessary space, capacity and infrastructure, in particular regarding shelter, food and fuel supply for troops in transit as well as secure and protected stocking capacities for ammunitions and sensitive military equipment; stresses the need to adapt the capacities of these hubs as well as other choke points and hotspots of the military mobility infrastructure in order to enable major and secure troop movements in case of the most extreme military contingency, including infrastructure reinforcement, traffic management and surveillance, as well as defence capabilities such as radar, air defence, cybersecurity; advises to adapt the definition of dual-use in that regard; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs, including the development of necessary dual-use energy infrastructure, such as refuelling and repowering stations, necessary to support mobility needs and security of supply, along the military mobility corridors; stresses in that respect the key role of maritime ports as integrated node in the identified corridors recognising their particular role in military logistics; also highlights the importance of the connectivity of those ports to the TEN-T; reiterates the progress that has been made to that regard within the NetLogHubs-project in PESCO; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating additional logistics hubs and transhipment terminals along the military mobility corridors; calls for the already existing logistics hubs and commercial transhipment terminals relevant for military transports along the military mobility corridors to be adequately designated as dual-use infrastructure; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors, including the need for effective connections between these hubs and the corridors themselves, as well as integration with other infrastructures such as airports, ports, and military installations; emphasizes that well-connected hubs can significantly enhance logistics management along the military mobility corridors by streamlining coordination, improving response times, and increasing operational flexibility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Stresses the importance of establishing logistics hubs not only along military mobility corridors, but also in key strategic European zones, including the Eastern flank and Central Europe, and underlines that these hubs must be equipped with adequate protection measures in line with current military and security requirements; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; stresses in that respect the key role of maritime ports recognising their particular role in military logistics: stresses however the need to ensure at the same time the continuity of supply chains, both for the supply of goods and energy to Europe’s economy and society as well as to guaranteeing the continuity of the role of ports as gateways for trade; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of setting modal priorities for rail and waterways, creating and expanding hinterland multimodal logistics hubs, such as inland ports, along the military mobility corridors to ensure swift transfers between the transport modes road, rail and waterways; |
Nathalie Loiseau, Petras Auštrevičius, Bart Groothuis, Marjan Šarec, Lucia Yar, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of establishing a network of strategically located logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors, capable of providing the necessary infrastructure for maintenance, storage, refuelling and repair; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs, including inland ports, along the military mobility corridors, enabling swift inter-modal transfers between rail, road and waterways, as well as adequate contingency planning; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors on transport roads, rail, port, inland waterway, pipeline and (regional) airport infrastructures; |
Bart Groothuis, Hilde Vautmans, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Lucia Yar, Petras Auštrevičius
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors on transport roads, rail, port, inland waterway, pipeline and (regional) airport infrastructures; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of modernising and enhancing the capacity of logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors, and to build new hubs where necessary; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors, including core TEN-T maritime ports and intermodal terminals; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors by land, sea and air; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating intermodal logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18. Highlights the importance of creating logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; | 18. Highlights the importance of creating intermodal logistics hubs along the military mobility corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) Highlights the need to integrate fuel and energy resilience into military mobility planning by embedding strategic fuel depots, pipeline connections, and refuelling infrastructure along key transport corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Welcomes and strongly supports the development project “Secure Digital Military Mobility Systems” (SDMMS) within the European Defence Fund (EDF); considers SDMMS crucial for the ambition of achieving defence readiness; considers the EU’s funding of 9,2 million Euro insufficient for achieving timely results and calls for an immediate financial reinforcement in order to achieve a timely completion and implementation in light of the new security situation since the start of the project under the EDF 2021; highlights the importance of capabilities in order to enhance military mobility and, therefore, welcomes the two EDF research project “Future Air System for European Tactical Transportation” addressing a relevant capability gap and strongly calls for accelerating progress by increasing funding under the EDF; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Highlights the strategic role of maritime infrastructure and seaports in supporting the EU’s military mobility objectives, including the projection of force by sea, the rapid deployment of equipment and troops, and the reception of forces in times of crisis; recalls that many EU seaports have the potential to exploit dual-use capabilities but require targeted public investment to upgrade critical infrastructure, including terminals, hinterland connections, and draft capacity; calls for increased EU funding to enhance the military resilience and connectivity of strategically located ports; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Highlights the strategic role of maritime infrastructure and seaports in delivering the Union’s military-mobility objectives — notably sea-based force projection, the rapid deployment of equipment and personnel, and the reception of forces in times of crisis; recalls that many Union seaports possess significant dual-use potential but require targeted public investment to upgrade critical assets, including terminals, hinterland connections and draught capacity; calls for an increase in Union funding to strengthen the military resilience and connectivity of strategically located ports; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Stresses that updating and adapting military requirements of TEN-T infrastructure for dual-use can significantly benefit citizens; notes that the possibility for rapid deployment of military forces can mean faster deliver of aid, medical support and infrastructure repair when emergency services are necessary in case of natural disasters, pandemics or other crisis; believes that dedicated information campaigns about military mobility should be encouraged to outreach to citizens and civil society; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18a. Stresses the strategic importance of the Black Sea and of the Danube Corridor for the military mobility of both the EU and NATO; calls on the Commission and the Member States to prioritise the upgrading of infrastructure in the Romanian ports of Constanța and Galați, and on the Danube inland waterway system, so as to facilitate the mobility of allied forces and equipment from Central Europe to the Black Sea; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Reminds that counter-mobility infrastructure, including dual-use obstacles, fortifications, and rapid deployment systems to reinforce border and territorial defence, also forms an important part of military mobility; calls on the Commission and the Member States to carry out thorough, coordinated planning and preparation for counter-mobility infrastructure, prioritising the East-South Flank; |
Dariusz Joński, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Magdalena Adamowicz, Flavio Tosi, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Andrey Novakov
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Underlines the importance of maintaining and strengthening infrastructure supplying liquid fuels (both conventional and renewable/low-carbon) for military and civilian use - extensive distribution and storage network delivering liquid fuels as well as secure supply chain for imports, in order to cover possible temporary peak in demand in extraordinary situation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Highlights the important role of port infrastructure and inland waterways for military mobility; calls for addressing bottlenecks in the waterways network, improving port access and swift implementation of the River Information Services Directive to fully integrate waterways in the multi-modal transport network for military mobility; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen the maritime dimension of military mobility, by recognising seaports as strategic dual-use nodes essential for projecting and sustaining forces across the Atlantic and Mediterranean; |
Bart Groothuis, Hilde Vautmans, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Lucia Yar, Petras Auštrevičius
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 a. Highlights the need to integrate fuel and energy resilience into military mobility planning by embedding strategic fuel depots, pipeline connections, and refuelling infrastructure along key transport corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18b. Calls for logistics centres to be set up in EU Member States, particularly in regions neighbouring the Black Sea and the eastern borders, in order to facilitate the rapid provisioning of EU and NATO troops in the event of a crisis; stresses that these centres should be developed as dual-use facilities, servicing both civilian and military needs; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18 b. Reminds that all strategic points of road transport, such as parking facilities, refuelling stations, and car-wash stations, should be urgently upgraded to accommodate large number of military transport and service population in time of emergency; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 18c. Reiterates that investments in military mobility infrastructure must also strengthen local civil protection capacities, hence enabling roads, airports and logistics centres to serve as critical assets in disaster response, humanitarian aid and emergency evacuation operations; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | deleted |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; commends the Member States, in particular Poland, for their efforts and investments made thus far to enable the best possible logistical support for Ukraine in its defence, and calls on the EU to provide greater support for these efforts; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Stresses the importance of strengthening interoperability with partner countries through dialogue, technical assistance and coordination on dual-use infrastructure, while keeping military mobility corridors limited to EU Member States; underlines that any possible extension beyond EU territory must be based on clear legal frameworks, reciprocal agreements and a careful assessment of security implications; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine, Moldova and the Western Balkans, in order to enhance interoperability, increase operational responsiveness, support partners where appropriate in their resistance against Russian aggression and other hybrid threats in the region, and to deter against future aggression; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; prioritising dual-use projects that also contribute to post-war reconstruction, civilian connectivity, and economic recovery; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Considers it of the utmost importance to extend military mobility corridors and related infrastructure into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability, response time and to deter against potential future Russian aggression beyond Ukraine; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors within the EU Members States in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression on the European Union's territory; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; | 19. Considers it important to extend military mobility corridors into Ukraine and Republic of Moldova in order to enhance interoperability and to deter against future aggression; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 a. Considers it important to strengthen the Solidarity Lanes between EU and Ukraine in order to enhance Ukraine’s security and resilience; notes the implication the Solidarity Lanes has for military mobility; underlines the importance that the Commission concludes an ambitious Road Transport Agreement between EU and Ukraine as well as between EU and Moldova; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19a. Stresses the need to coordinate the planning of military mobility corridors with critical infrastructure, including electricity grids and gas pipelines, in order to ensure rapid access to energy resources during crises and to facilitate the protection of key energy facilities; |
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Borja Giménez Larraz, Hélder Sousa Silva, Elena Nevado del Campo, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 a. Considers it important to prioritize the protection of corridors linking military bases of strategic value for the interests of the EU and NATO, including in EU's outermost regions, to civil mobility networks; where applicable, stresses the need to develope new corridors; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 a. Highlights the need to develop and modernise strategic corridors crossing Romania such as the Rhine-Danube and Orient-East Med TEN-T corridors, which are vital for the Single Market and indispensable for rapid military reinforcement of the Eastern flank; |
Borja Giménez Larraz, Elena Nevado del Campo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 a. Underlines that extending military mobility to the Iberian Peninsula is equally fundamental in order to secure a reliable flow of military equipment towards Central and Eastern Europe, including Ukraine; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to adapt critical rail segments for military loads (axle load, loading gauge) and trans-shipment capacity on the Romania–Republic of Moldova and Romania–Ukraine axes, including the Iași–Ungheni and Galați–Giurgiulești nodes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 c. Urges the need to prioritise Constanța and Danube river ports (Galați, Brăila, Tulcea) as dual-use hubs for strategic sealift and inland waterway projection, including Sulina Channel upgrades and rapid customs/maritime clearances for allied movements; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 19 d. Calls for air mobility enablers in North-East and South-East Romania and the Republic of Moldova (runway, fuel hydrants, night/all-weather approaches) to support strategic/tactical airlift and medical evacuation; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Highlights that given Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the eastern flank of the EU is particularly vulnerable to cyberattacks and hybrid threats, which requires prioritisation of critical infrastructure protection and the resolution of ongoing network issues; notes that, in the event of a Russian attack, eastern EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine would be under direct threat and would depend on the functionality of the military mobility corridors in other regions, particularly in the south and west; | 20. Highlights that given Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the eastern flank of the EU has been repeatedly targeted by cyberattacks, hybrid threats and acts of sabotage, including cyber incidents against transport operators, which requires prioritisation of critical infrastructure protection and the resolution of ongoing network issues; underlines that these events demonstrate the urgent need for better monitoring and rapid-response mechanism for cyber and hybrid threats targeting rail, road, port and energy infrastructure, to be developed in close cooperation with NATO; notes that, in the event of a Russian attack, eastern EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine would be under direct threat and would depend on the functionality of the military mobility corridors in other regions, particularly in the south and west; calls therefore on the EU to step up efforts supporting Member States to ensure that critical transport infrastructure on the eastern flank is fully protected and resilient, including through rapid mechanisms for reinforcement and enhanced cyberdefence for rail, road, ports and energy supply nodes; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Highlights that given Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the eastern flank of the EU is particularly vulnerable to cyberattacks and hybrid threats, which requires prioritisation of critical infrastructure protection and the resolution of ongoing network issues; notes that, in the event of a Russian attack, eastern EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine would be under direct threat and would depend on the functionality of the military mobility corridors in other regions, particularly in the south and west; | 20. Highlights that given Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the eastern flank of the EU is particularly vulnerable to cyberattacks and hybrid threats, which requires prioritisation of critical infrastructure protection and the resolution of ongoing network issues; calls on the Commission and the Member States to allocate adequate resources and investment to ensure a well-connected military mobility network, including improvements in the maintenance of existing infrastructure, with a strong overall resilience in all domains related to the transport sector, including cybersecurity ; notes that, in the event of a Russian attack, eastern EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine would be under direct threat and would depend on the functionality of the military mobility corridors in other regions, particularly in the south and west; calls on the Commission to strengthen support for Member States with strategic dual-use logistics infrastructures, notably seaports and multimodal platforms, and to ensure their resilience against cyber threats and hybrid attacks; |
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 20. Highlights that given Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the eastern flank of the EU is particularly vulnerable to cyberattacks and hybrid threats, which requires prioritisation of critical infrastructure protection and the resolution of ongoing network issues; notes that, in the event of a Russian attack, eastern EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine would be under direct threat and would depend on the functionality of the military mobility corridors in other regions, particularly in the south and west; | 20. Highlights that given Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the eastern flank of the EU is particularly vulnerable to cyberattacks and hybrid threats, which requires prioritisation of critical infrastructure protection and the resolution of ongoing network issues; notes that, in the event of a Russian attack, eastern EU regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine would be under direct threat and would depend on the functionality of the military mobility corridors in other regions, particularly in the south and west; calls, therefore, for EU-level funding to be allocated for the cyber-resilience and digital protection of critical infrastructure corridors along the eastern flank, and in particular to transport and energy corridors; |
Connections
The dossier, the decisions on this text and its other versions.
No connections found for this item.
Sources & citation
Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.
- Data source
- Licensed CC BY 4.0.
- Retrieved
- 25 September 2026
Cite as
European Parliament (2025). “AMENDMENTS 1 - 371 - Draft report Military mobility”. Text, 17 September 2025. docId CJ57-AM-777035. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/CJ57-AM-777035 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Data: EP Open Data API: document record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/documents/CJ57-AM-777035 (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-cj57-am-777035,
author = {{European Parliament}},
title = {{AMENDMENTS 1 - 371 - Draft report Military mobility}},
year = {2025},
date = {2025-09-17},
howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/CJ57-AM-777035}},
url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/CJ57-AM-777035},
urldate = {2026-09-25},
publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
note = {Text. docId CJ57-AM-777035. Data: EP Open Data API: document record (CC BY 4.0)}
}