Brussels: Europe and the Arabs
Charles Michel, President of the Council of the European Union, presented a report on the state of the union during a plenary session of members of the European Parliament on Wednesday in Strasbourg."

Our recent European Council was marked by the participation of President Volodymyr Zelensky. He participated in a brief plenary session, where we took the opportunity to reaffirm our full support for Ukraine for as long as it takes, because defeating Ukraine is not an option. President Zelensky then met in small formats with the commanders about stepping up direct operational assistance, especially for more weapons. To win the peace, we must strengthen our defense and capabilities. And three days after the Russian attack, we made a decision to deliver weapons and ammunition to Ukraine, and this was a quantum leap. I think this was the birth of our European defense. Strengthening our European defense means developing our industrial capabilities and this is urgently needed to support Ukraine. Russian forces have fired between 20,000 and 50,000 artillery shells per day in recent months. Ukraine needs ammunition to defend itself, which is why we have worked on the proposal of the Estonian Prime Minister, Kadja Kallas, to organize bulk orders to support the pace of deliveries to our Ukrainian friends, and High Representative Borrell has put together a concrete plan to implement this aid to Ukraine.
We'd like to see an escalation. We would like to see an escalation towards peace. But Russia did not stop escalating the war. It would take only one decision, only one decision of the aggressor to engage in peace, silence the guns and withdraw his forces beyond Ukraine's internationally recognized borders. Unfortunately, we do not see any signals from the Kremlin in this direction. And despite that, we continue to fight the peace battle, the diplomatic battle. We support the just peace formula proposed by President Zelensky. It is built on the UN Charter, it is based on respect for international law, and we are working hard to rally the international community to support peace efforts, as we did in the run-up to the vote in the UN General Assembly calling for the withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukrainian soil. We also discussed this, for example, with several contacts at the recent African Union summit in Addis Ababa, and the High Representative went to the United Nations in New York to vote. The resolution was supported by an overwhelming majority of 141 countries. This vote is encouraging, but the work of convincing others remains very difficult.

The economic consequences of the war in Ukraine have forced us to ask ourselves the right questions about the competitiveness of our economy, in the short and long term. Just one example to illustrate the challenge: the EU's energy trade deficit. In 2022, we delivered about 4% of our GDP, compared to 1.7% in 2021, while the US has seen its surplus triple over the same period. US energy exports will increase by 60% in 2022. Last December, the European Council asked the Commission to present ways to help our industry advance our green and digital transformation, particularly in the context of more targeted state interventions, including through the United States . We have decided on our short-term courses of action. First, easing the government assistance system in a targeted and time-bound manner, coupled with greater flexibility in the use of all existing financial means. Point two, making life easier for our business by streamlining procedures and licensing. And third, ramping up training and retraining to provide our future sectors with the professionals they desperately need. But ladies and gentlemen, we must also take action in the long term, because we cannot allow short-term actions to undermine our long-term strategy. And that is precisely the debate we will have next week at our next European Council on the competitiveness of the European economy. We expect the required proposals from the Commission tomorrow.
In the long term, I believe we need to work in three areas: investment, innovation and trade. First, investment: European companies, especially SMEs, are having a hard time finding the capital they need to invest in innovation. The gap between the EU and the US in terms of productive investment is 2% of GDP. Another example, stock market capitalization in the European Union is less than half that of the United States, as a proportion of GDP. However, Europeans save much more than Americans. We must bridge this gap and find out the solution. There is a solution called the Capital Markets Union, a project that was laid almost 10 years ago. It is now critical to accelerate effective action to realize this essential project, to finance our economy, to create jobs, and to ensure the well-being of all Europeans for decades to come.
It is also for this reason that we have launched this call publicly with the President of the Commission, the President of the European Central Bank as well as with the President of the European Investment Bank and the President of the Eurogroup, to accelerate action. Regarding the capital markets union.

Ladies and gentlemen, the second point that we must work on is related to innovation. We all remember that already a few years ago, the Lisbon Strategy set an ambitious goal - 3% of GDP was to be allocated to mobilize capacities for innovation. However, we can clearly see that the result is not up to the goal that was set at that time. We have to do more, we have to do better, and that will certainly be part of the discussion in the Council this week. We see, for example, that if you take the digital platforms, 90% of their capitalization of the 70 most important companies in the world comes from the United States and China: this shows a low percentage of the European Union's ability to spread itself in sectors that are nevertheless essential to our common future.

Finally, the third point I would like to make from this rostrum is the issue of trade. Some thoughts on this topic with you. The trade has been for many years 

, so to speak, a sacred asset of the European Union. It was a powerful engine for prosperity and the ability to achieve development and improve the living conditions of our citizens. artistic work. Thus, since 2006, of the fourteen trade agreements that have been concluded, for the vast majority either entry into force has taken place temporarily rather than permanently, or entry into force has remained stalled. We will have in the coming months, for example Mercosur or Chile or the question of Mexico, a certain number of choices to make. We'll have to look the truth in the face. To tell you the core of my thoughts on this subject, I think we have two issues in terms of our trade policy for the future.

The first relates to our way of making decisions: not only our negotiating style, but also the ability to ensure that our companies, and all the players directly involved, can feel involved in the process, that is, work for more transparency, for more trust. A good example of this is Brexit, which was an opportunity to mobilize without a hidden agenda, with full transparency, all information for the European Parliament, national parliaments, civil societies, and economic players, in which it was possible to work quickly, and I think it works well. Undoubtedly, this example should inspire us for the future in terms of style.

The second topic is the thematic topic. I am well aware that there is a generous and sincere desire to solve many problems in the world through the instrument of trade agreements. But perhaps it should be considered that choices must be made. I believe, as far as I am concerned, that a trade agreement should first contribute to improving and strengthening trade relations - we sometimes tend to forget that this is one of the aims of a trade agreement. It should also lead to encouraging more support in the world for the high standards that we want, for example for working conditions, or for example for environmental conditions. Sometimes, if we want to kiss a lot, we hug really tight; Maybe we should have this democratic debate. The European Parliament certainly has, in this regard, a major role to play.

Finally, consider our economic future. Being competitive for the EU also means looking at the relationship we have with other major players in the world. The United States, of course, China too. In this context, it goes without saying that, in accordance with the treaties, the Council has every intention of fully assuming its responsibilities with regard to the foreign policy of the European Union. This is the meaning of the strategic discussions that have taken place on several occasions in recent months within the European Council. Some thoughts on this as well. On the other hand, there is certainly no equal distance between the United States and China. We are a strong, loyal, and loyal ally of the United States. We are developing historical relations with this country, ties that relate to values, ties that also affect economic cooperation and that affect very directly,