Member States are indeed earmarking billions for defence, but, to the detriment of their populations, not as members of a European Defence Union. They are spending it individually, without European coordination, without a common strategy, without a comprehensive vision of how those billions of euros would ultimately realise European security and deterrence. This risks not only irresponsible wasting of tax payer money, it will simply not deliver the security Europeans need. Volt believes we cannot continue like this. And we are not alone – leading with a group of 30 MEPs, we demand a true European Defence Union. It is high-time for the EU to make common European defence a reality, honouring our own treaties, which lay down the legal groundwork, already specifying mutual European defence obligations.

Europe should have no illusions: US military equipment comes with clear limits on sovereign operability. For example, the US-manufactured F-35 fighter jet currently still purchased and operated by a range of member states for around 100M€ per piece, is, reportedly, if not connected to a server in the United States, just expensive scrap metal. In times as uncertain as these, where decisions by a US President are made on whim, Volt asks if Europe can still afford to be dependent on the United States for critical defence assets. Especially in light of the FCAS fiasco where Germany and France got lost in their national defence industries’ bickering over competencies for years, only to scrap the entire development of a European next generation fighter, Volt demands Member States not only to acknowledge that our defence has to be European, but to make that said European defence a reality with the creation of a European Military under the command of a European Minister of Defence. Existing provisions in the EU Treaty should be used now and without further delay.

For Volt, NATO’s Ankara summit is a reminder that Europe can no longer rely solely on the Alliance for its security. While NATO leaders have reaffirmed their commitment to collective defence, recent policy announcements by the US administration, such as the 2025 US National Security Strategy, have severely undermined the credibility of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. At the same time, Russia’s full-out war against Ukraine and the continued hybrid aggression towards Europe underline the urgency for the EU to strengthen her own defences.

Volt strongly believes that now is the time for Europe to take bold action towards the creation of the European Defence Union. Equipped with its own armed forces and command structures it can guarantee the freedom and security on our continent. Such a Union should strive to be on equal footing to the US, both inside and outside of NATO, as partners with equal say.

The European Union Treaty contains a number of provisions that already allow - without treaty change – for significant progress towards the longer term goal of a European Defence Union. Against this background Volt Europa calls on European leaders to:

• Start a process leading to Common Defence in accordance with Art 42.2 TEU (which does not require treaty change)

• Emphasise obligations under the mutual defence clause of Art 42.7 TEU („by all the means in their power“), thereby reinforcing Europe’s sovereignty and adding to deterrence 

• Encourage the use of Permanent Structured Cooperation to accelerate defence integration, while remaining open for all Member States to join when they are ready

• Revisit and strengthen with NATO the „Berlin Plus“ Arrangements that would allow the EU to use NATO assets and capabilities

• Coordinate the EU Member States’ defence spending and procurement to ensure investments align with EU-wide strategic priorities, increase efficiency and avoid costly duplications. 

• Develop a European defence industry to ensure strategic autonomy in armaments and technology

• Reform decision-making also in EU defence policy by ending national vetoes and empowering a European Defence Minister
  

Most of these measures require only courage: The courage of European leaders to back their demands for a stronger Europe with concrete actions and the courage to look beyond their national borders for the common European good. With the geopolitical certainties in tatters and faced with the global rise of authoritarian strong-men, this is the courage that will not only safeguard Europe but that will also ensure that the EU can actively contribute to a world where international law and democracy count more than nationalist interests and the law of the jungle. 

Image source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/07/07/nato-defense-trump-contracts-spending-turkey-summit/

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

This is why at the Ankara summit, NATO will discuss how to turn increased spending into concrete capabilities. Meanwhile the US is withdrawing key capabilities: 5,000 troops will be removed from Germany, and the deployment of a long-range fire battalion was cancelled. A six-month review of the entire US force posture is next, which is expected to include the withdrawal of many strategic enablers like air-to air tankers, bombers and an aircraft carrier.

NATO is and should continue to be the backbone of European deterrence and defence. The European countries in NATO should work together with the EU and ensure the ‘European pillar of NATO' is not just a slogan, but able to defend every centimetre of European territory.

NATO will not survive if Europeans simply buy more (American) weapons. Europe needs to supplement the US capabilities that hold the alliance together. With two self-sufficient pillars, one (North)-American, one European, separable but not separate, NATO will become stronger.

The way to make this happen is a European Defense Union, not as an alternative to, but a condition for NATO 3.0. European leaders should do three concrete things today with the ambition that matches the threat level and the speed of relevance:

Firstly, our decision-making structures must have the speed to give our armed forces the mandates to respond decisively to any threat. A European Security Council made up of EU and non-EU members, with fast and decisive political leadership, could coordinate defence planning and marshal the necessary economic and military resources in wartime.

Secondly, a Europeanised command and control structure can support an independent, theatre-wide European deterrence and defence. Preferably using NATO structures and systems, if necessary separate. This includes operationalising the EU’s mutual defence clause (article 42.7), regular exercises, a rapid reaction force, and upgrading the EU’s MPCC.

Thirdly, European strategic enablers can fill the most critical capability gaps in our defence that are too expensive for a single member state. By pooling national defence spending, we can procure, maintain and operate them together. AWACS, IRIS2 and the MRTT give precedents.

All three are compatible, empowering NATO structures and their continuing Europeanisation, for example with EU strategic enablers providing HQ AIRCOM with permanently available assets.

At the last NATO summit in the Hague, Europeans agreed how much we have to spend to keep us safe. This should be the NATO summit where we finally agree what to spend it on. Let’s not wait for war to unite us, let’s unite to prevent war!

This is a joint statement by the following Members of the European Parliament, who are also part of the European Defence Union Network (EDUMEP).

Names added after final confirmation.

- Marie Agnes Strack Zimmerman (Renew)

- Rasa Jukneviciene (EPP)

- Matej Tonin (EPP)

- Wouter Beke (EPP)

- Pekka Toveri (EPP)

- Lukas Mandl (EPP)

- Michael Gahler (EPP)

- Ingeborg Ter Laak (EPP)

- Thijs Reuten (S&D)

- Idoia Mendia (S&D)

- José Cepeda (S&D)

- Hilde Vautmans (Renew)

- Dainius Žalimas  (Renew)

- Bernard Guetta (Renew)

- Lukas Sieper (Renew)

- Sandro Gozi (Renew)

- Raquel García Hermida-van der Walle (Renew)

- Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (Renew)

- Lucia Yar (Renew)

- Anna-Maja Henriksson (Renew)

- Bart Groothuis (Renew)

- Sergey Lagondinski (Greens)

- Martins Stakis (Greens)

- Reinier van Lanschot (Greens)

- Damian Boeselager (Greens)

- Anna Strolenberg (Greens)

- Nela Riehl (Greens)

- Kai Tegethoff (Greens)

- Ville Niinistö (Greens)

- Hannah Neumann (Greens)

- Daniel Freund (Greens)

- Merja Kyllönen (The Left)

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜

It is 2026, the year of the 250th anniversary of the US Declaration of Independence, one of the most consequential manifestations of a people’s will to freedom and self-determination against foreign oppression and European colonialism. It is also 2026, a year where the fraying of the post second world war transatlantic alliance between the US and Europe has moved beyond bewilderment and alienation to stages of open strategic competition. Indeed, it is the year 2026 as well, a year where freedom and democracy seems to be on the retreat globally. A year where Reporters without Borders reported a global 25-year low in press-freedom with more than 50% of the world’s population enduring conditions where free access to information and independent media are distant ideas and not a lived reality. 

Journalist bullying in front of the European Commission?

Regardless of the multiverse of realities of the year 2026, the 250th anniversary of the birth of a nation is a reason to celebrate, in particular given the importance of the American Independence Declaration for the evolution of liberal democracy that in return built the foundation of the EU today. And as such, when the country in question is an ally, there should be no objection in principle to holding celebrations in the capital of Europe, hosted by the official representatives of the US to the EU, NATO, and Belgium.

However, regardless of which country is being celebrated, national celebrations should not take place in locations that symbolize another country’s sovereignty and independence, such as Cinquantenaire Park.

Moreover, this is the year 2026, and the Trump administration turned the festivities in Brussels into an invite-only parade of nationalist cliches and corporate banalities instead of honouring a 250-years old nation, whose strength and innovativeness comes from its inherent diversity. But not enough, faced with questions from invited journalists, the ambassador of the US to Belgium reportedly instrumentalised local police to remove those journalists under the absurd pre-text of them being an “active threat”.

This incident is as revealing as it is worrisome. It is revealing the ultimately political ambitions of the Trump administration, where free access to information and a free independent media are seen as threats to the authoritarian agenda pursued. It is worrisome in the brazenness and aggressiveness with which members of the US administration are exporting their agenda, as explicated in the 2025 US Security Strategy, to Europe, not only giving adversarial speeches and endorsing extremist parties, but even co-opting law enforcement for their goals a mere stone's throw away from the headquarters of the European Commission. 

Our institutions cannot be silent accomplices

According to Reporters without Borders, only 1% of the world’s population lives in countries with good conditions for the press. It is little consolation that this 1% lives in Europe, since press freedom is under pressure in most of Europe, too, already without inappropriate interventions by US ambassadors. 

There is not only the economic strain many independent media experience and the irresponsible defunding of public broadcasters. Across Europe, journalists are also targeted in a wave of lawsuits, not meant to bring justice but to intimidate and silence. We observe the systematic undermining of a sustainable diverse media landscape by governments in Italy, Slovenia and Slovakia. And there is the slow and steady erosion of trust fuelled by social media worlds that have turned from spaces of contact and connection into swamps of misinformation and mazes of fake propaganda. 

Rarely has the situation of the media been so dire, and never was it more urgent for the EU and its Member States to step up their support for a vibrant, free, independent, and diversified media landscape. When free speech and media freedom are threatened, our institutions cannot be silent accomplices. Whether it’s journalists being detained, our personal rights being hollowed out by the Commission’s Digital Omnibus or ChatControl being reintroduced yet again by the European Parliament president - let’s not forget that our European institutions must serve the people first and foremost. They must protect our rights to free speech and access to verified and unbiased information from threats emanating from beyond European borders and from within.

Sovereignty emerges from well-informed citizens taking collective action to guarantee their interests are respected, heard, and integrated in the decision-making processes that shape the societal contracts that govern our lives. Because in the end, the enemies of the free press are the enemies of free people. We are certain the 18th century founders of the USA would agree with us. 

The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has exposed a critical structural vulnerability in the European Union's agricultural supply chain. More than one quarter of globally traded fertiliser transits this single maritime chokepoint, with Gulf producers collectively accounting for roughly 16 million tonnes per year of nitrogenous, phosphates and sulfur  of annual export capacity.

The current crisis demonstrates why reducing dependency on synthetic fertiliser imports is not only an environmental objective, but a matter of strategic autonomy.

Russia and Belarus together accounted for 30% of EU nitrogen fertiliser imports and 35% of EU compound fertiliser imports in 2025( fertilizers combining nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in a single product). In order to contribute to the economic security and strategic autonomy of the European Union, this dependence on imports must be reduced.

EU dependency

Agriculture in the EU is heavily dependent on the import of fertilisers. The main components of industrial fertiliser are nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus.

For nitrogen, the EU relies primarily on imports from Russia, Egypt, Algeria, the US, and China. 

For phosphate, the EU relies primarily on imports from Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Russia, Lebanon, and Israel. Potassium fertilisers are primarily imported from Canada, the UK, Israel, and again, Russia.

While direct imports from the Gulf region to the EU are limited, the Hormuz blockade has driven up world market prices significantly,  exposing the EU to geopolitical instability it has no direct leverage over.

Existing policy

The urgency of fertiliser supply security is not new. Following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the European Fertiliser Strategy had already identified import dependency and price volatility as structural risks to European agriculture. At the same time, the European Green Deal proposed an Integrated Nutrient Management Action Plan (INMAP), which aimed at a 20% reduction in fertiliser use through improved nutrient efficiency and circular approaches, a measure that would have directly reduced import dependency while supporting sustainability goals.

However, the European Commission seems to have deprioritised INMAP without a clear alternative, leaving a policy gap at precisely the moment when nutrient efficiency and supply resilience are most needed. 

The European Commission presented the Fertiliser Action Plan on 19 May 2026. Although various short-term measures are presented and several long-term options are proposed that require further elaboration, there is a lack of a clear vision in which strategic choices are being made.

Call for action

This is the moment to reduce European dependence on artificial fertilisers while simultaneously strengthening the competitiveness of the agricultural sector and promoting more sustainable production.

Volt calls on the Commission to use the Fertiliser Action Plan to:

• Support competitiveness through innovation, not deregulation. Strong regulation with clear goals drives innovation and reduces dependencies. Reducing input costs for European farmers must be achieved through ambitious, goal-oriented regulation that incentivises investment in technologies reducing dependency on synthetic fertilisers. Clear regulatory targets are not a burden on competitiveness, they are the primary driver of the innovation needed to overcome structural dependencies and protect the long-term viability of European agriculture.

• Phase out dependency on Russian fertiliser imports. The EU's tariff measures since July 2025 are a first step, but an insufficient one. The Commission should set a clear timeline for eliminating Russian and Belarusian fertiliser imports, paired with concrete support for alternative supply chains.

• Choose circularity and revive and strengthen the Integrated Nutrient Management Action Plan. Improved nutrient efficiency and circular nutrient flows are simultaneously an environmental and a strategic objective. INMAP should be integrated into the Fertiliser Action Plan as a binding framework.

• Facilitate the scale-up of biofertilisers. The regulatory framework should be tailored to enhance the market uptake of biofertilisers, and public investment in research, demonstration projects and knowledge sharing should be increased.

• Monitor fertiliser reserves. Improve transparency and monitoring of fertiliser stocks and address structural market failures. While existing stocks in Europe may currently be sufficient to cover short-term needs, the current crisis has highlighted the lack of accurate, real-time visibility over fertiliser supplies across Member States. The Commission should therefore establish a robust monitoring framework for key fertiliser inputs, particularly urea and ammonia, to ensure early warning capacity ahead of critical planting windows. Beyond monitoring, the Commission should develop targeted instruments to tackle market failures that leave farmers exposed to price volatility and supply disruptions during geopolitical shocks.

Opinion article by members of the Agriculture & Food Security Community (AgriCom).

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

More than ever, geopolitical threats are reinforcing the observation that Europe must invest in its own defence solutions. In the past, Europe has leaned heavily on the United States for protection. . This means that innovation, jobs and decisions around capabilities have been made outside of Europe. With the US becoming less of an ally, having more diverging core values and goals, it is apparent that Europe needs to reduce its transatlantic dependency. 

One very important field in this context is the development of a 6th-generation fighter, more advanced than current fighters, such as the F-35. The US, China and Russia are currently developing their own platforms.

And so had Europe been - until the recent collapse of the Franco-German-Spanish Future Combat Air System (FCAS) project, also known as Système de Combat Aérien du Futur (SCAF) and the Futuro Sistema Aéreo de Combate (FSAC). Following years of disagreement between the main contractors in the programme, Airbus and Dassault, the project has now been scrapped. The fact that there wasn’t even agreement on the naming of the programme was surely writing on the wall.

A further programme to develop a 6th-gen fighter partly in Europe, the UK-Italy-Japan-led Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP, also known as TEMPEST), remains active. However, the demise of FCAS/SCAF/FSAC is a bitter disappointment and throws into question Europe’s ability to detach itself from the US at exactly the moment it needs to build its own defence capabilities.

A Look Into the Past
Defence cooperation in Europe has a long history, as reflected by the development of the Panavia Tornado, Eurofighter, Tiger, A400M, NH90, and others.  Often these joint defence procurements are plagued by cost overruns and delays which prolong the process before finally producing a compromise product. The main stumbling blocks to efficiency include national interests, capability requirements, a lack of information sharing, lengthy and complex processes and the absence of a single authority with decision-making power. Different needs and ideas lead to distrust, creating the situation where a once-shared goal for cooperation is abandoned. An inability to adequately align the interests of different countries is a significant challenge. 

A better way forward for European defence cooperation

In the US, a process is used whereby the government specifies requirements, and companies bid for the contract, uniting the design bureau and the constructor in one organisation. In some cases, companies will also provide technical demonstrators. In this way, political decisions cover the selection of the design, not the final manufacturing process. Nevertheless, as we can see with the F-35, the winning consortium may seek to gain political support by distributing production throughout the country through direct subsidiaries as well as subcontractors.

The EU could set up a similar system, in which EU countries come together and decide on the requirements of a 6th gen fighter. The outcome could be that two or even three kinds of jets need to be developed. Countries would then ‘sign up’ for jet A, B, and/or C. The EU would then send out these sets of requirements. Requirement decisions should be made early on and must be fixed, in order to prevent deviations and continuous discussion. Furthermore, the agreement should be specifically on the requirements and not on the design choices. This would limit interference by countries during the design phase as a result of industrial interests. Different variations of a 6th gen fighter could provide a basis for specialisations, realising efficiency while meeting the interests of countries. 

Other relevant aspects would be standardisation, interoperability and interchangeability. Standardisation should be made a significant factor in procurement and should also apply to information sharing and supply chain resilience. In this system, companies would get points for using parts that are standardised, sharing data and having a distributed supply base.

Strengthening cooperation should be supported with European initiatives (EDIP, SAFE, EDIRPA) and based on NATO standards. Such EU initiatives would speed up the process and help with the development (not production) of a 6th gen fighter.

However, trusting in the will of countries and the power of European initiatives will likely not be enough to achieve the goals envisioned. A single authority responsible for joint procurement is therefore needed to assess bids and developments independently.

Currently, Europe lags in production capacity, technology, development and affordability - the result of defence industry neglect. The short-term solution is to buy American. The long-term solution is not to buy American, but instead to accept these short-term deficiencies and face them by investing more and making a deliberate choice to accept these extra costs.

Future recommendations for Europe

Learning from what works and what doesn't, we can aim to formulate a vision for the future of European defence procurement that works for us.

1. Move procurement responsibility to an EU institution that is not subordinate to national interests, like OCCAR

2. Harmonise rules to use EU security clearances across EU borders with no national secrets concerning the joint project.

3. Limit political interference in the project after the initial procurement decision.

4. Stimulate consolidation of the European defence industry in order to limit the influence of national industrial interests.

Compromise and trust will be key in achieving international cooperation in programmes such as FCAS.  A near-term, collaborative European solution that drives technological growth is far better than a distant "perfect" design or a fragmented mix of somewhat decent fighters. Swift action is needed. Only continuous improvement that can be achieved through European cooperation will strengthen strategic autonomy. If we fail to achieve this, we risk remaining dependent on countries outside of Europe and will simply never keep up.

Opinion article by members of Volt Europa’s Defence & Security Community (DefCom), Working Group for Cooperation & Integration. To join DefCom, send an email to defcom@volteuropa.org.

Note: The image used in this article is not of an FCAS, but of a Eurofighter.

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

Following the chaotic release of Anthropic’s Fable 5, the US administration blocked access to the AI model for all non-US citizens through a comprehensive export control directive, effectively shutting down its service. Washington’s unilateral intervention, under its "America First" doctrine is a stark wake-up call, exposing the severe strategic risk of Europe’s digital complacency. With the EU relying on foreign providers for roughly 70% of its cloud infrastructure, we have effectively outsourced our digital sovereignty to foreign executive orders. 

Volt Europa calls on European leaders to radically overhaul the Union’s digital infrastructure strategy.

The Fable 5 incident is not an anomaly; it is the most acute manifestation of Europe's structural reliance on non-EU digital infrastructure. The US CLOUD Act of 2018 and FISA Section 702 already grant American authorities extraterritorial access to any data held by US companies, regardless of whether that data is stored on European soil. As EU Commissioner Virkkunen herself acknowledged in the context of the Cloud and AI development Act (CADA) proposal, it remains structurally difficult for American companies to reach the highest European sovereignty levels due to the extraterritorial nature of the US CLOUD Act. 

When a single executive order can sever European access to a frontier AI model overnight, and permanently expose European data to foreign government access without European judicial oversight, our systemic dependency becomes undeniable. 

The lessons of history: turning Washington’s protectionism into European opportunity

History demonstrates that Washington is repeating a classic strategic blunder. In the 1990s, the US placed encryption software on its military export control list. The results were entirely counterproductive; the tech sector simply moved its key cryptographers and operations to Europe and the UK to bypass the restrictions. 

This dynamic illustrates two critical realities. First, the Mobility of Ideas. Innovation moves across borders with total ease, and the internet fundamentally interprets short-sighted laws as damage to be routed around. Second, the sovereignty opportunity. Washington's protectionism is a self-inflicted wound that Europe should leverage as an opening to attract global talent.

Washington's unilateral block on Fable 5 is the modern equivalent of its 1990s blunder. This protectionist overreach creates an immediate commercial and geopolitical opening for the European Union. As the US clamps down on open research, Europe must position itself as the global safe haven for AI researchers, developers, and cryptographers. By offering a stable, predictable, and open regulatory environment, the EU can capture the sovereignty dividend by actively attracting top-tier tech talent and businesses fleeing arbitrary foreign executive mandates.

In contrast, relying on centralised, foreign proprietary tech giants is a systemic security risk for the European Union and its member states. The antidote is therefore structural; when capabilities are baked into open-source software, they cannot be retracted by a foreign executive order overnight.

We should not copy Silicon Valley's past. Instead, we should inherit its future by welcoming the innovators it is currently pushing away.

Demystifying the frontier AI race

True European autonomy cannot be achieved by blindly copying Silicon Valley or racing to accelerate AI development in a vacuum. Frontier AI models like Fable 5 have moved beyond the realm of commercial software into the domain of cyberdefence and critical security infrastructure. When an AI model's underlying capabilities include offensive cybersecurity tools, such as complex vulnerability identification and exploitation capabilities previously confined to nation-state actors, and when these capabilities are protected only by easily circumvented software safeguards, independent technological control becomes a security imperative.

However, the race for the most capable frontier model is largely symbolic. Aside from highly specific security use cases, Mythos-class LLMs like Fable 5 are often only marginally better than their immediate predecessors. Conversely, steep operational costs and resource considerations, such as excessive water usage and severe noise pollution, suggest that the deployment of smaller, specialised models offers a distinct competitive advantage in industrial applications. In some cases desired response times and the strict necessity to keep data local dictate the use of locally deployed models, executed on local hardware, rather than the high-end server farms required by foreign frontier giants.

In this spirit, Volt advocates for companies to design AI architectures focused on sustainability, open standards, and ethical training as best practice over the use of the latest frontier model at all costs.

Actionable policy levers: reforming EU funding and infrastructure

A Europe that runs its frontier models on foreign chips, inside foreign data centres, and under foreign legal jurisdiction has not gained sovereignty. Volt Europa urges the immediate acceleration of the Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA) alongside strict, uniform enforcement of the EU AI Act. We call for extending the spirit of the NIS2 Directive and the Cyber Resilience Act to mandate that essential European infrastructure, from hospitals to energy grids, is built upon open-source, open-standards, and decentralised tech ecosystems that run independently of foreign geopolitical shifts.

To ensure these regulations translate into tangible infrastructure, we endorse EuroStack, the pan-European initiative developed by lawyers, academics, politicians, and tech companies that provides a ready-made blueprint for sovereign, open-source cloud infrastructure. Volt intends to make the principles of EuroStack the operational backbone for implementing the Cloud and AI Development Act. 

To back this regulatory blueprint with real infrastructure, Europe must execute concrete fiscal and funding adjustments, specifically by:

• increasing funding to reduce foreign tech dependency. The EU must systematically prioritise funding within Horizon Europe and other flagship digital programmes for European participants who build on open, sovereign technology stacks, in line with the CADA's own principle of 'rewarding contributions to EU-based innovation and supply chain resilience’. 

• funding ideas, not stagnant conglomerates. In line with the recommendations of the IFO Institute and Bocconi University framework, the EU must fundamentally reverse its approach to innovation capital. Currently, the vast majority of EU funding is captured by massive corporations that deliver little actual innovation. Funding must be aggressively redirected toward small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and open-source ecosystems, which serve as the true engines of technological breakthrough.

As Sven Franck, Co-President-elect of Volt Europa, notes, “Europe possesses the talent and technologies to make strides towards technological independence. We also offer the legislative frameworks that foster research and innovation. What is missing is the political will to orient public funding towards European solutions with the clear goal of technological leadership and securing our digital future.”

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

On the 29th March 2017, the UK triggered Article 50, starting a process that would cost the UK greatly in economic and diplomatic power. On that same day, Volt was founded to bring Europeans closer together. From that day forward, they would move in opposite directions: Britain pursuing splendid isolation, Volt building unity.

Ten years of consequences

Brexit was sold to the British people with the promise of greater prosperity and greater sovereignty, and to “take back control” from Brussels. Yet, 10 years on, Britain is less influential in the world, the British economy is running below expectations, and public finances are suffering. Their leadership is shattered; Britain has now had 7 prime ministers in the last 10 years, all of whom failed to effectively face up to the consequences of Brexit. Additionally, Brexit opened the doors to the normalisation of racist and far-right rhetoric, which is still tainting political discourse to this day. 

Ten years of building

While Britain has spent the last decade struggling, Volt spent it on building a progressive, pan-European political movement. What began as a small group with an idea has now grown into a movement with tens of thousands of members and hundreds of elected officials. Today, Volt is active across 31 countries and has established 22 national parties, turning a vision into a pan-European political force.

The geopolitical landscape has changed

However, the geopolitical landscape of 2026 is very different from the one that Britain imagined in 2016.

Europe is building strategic autonomy, increasing its defensive capabilities, and growing its economy. The challenges connected to AI, the energy insecurity that comes from a fragmented world, in spirit and trade, demand European unity.

The UK could - and should - be a strong participant at the heart of Europe, not an observer on the sidelines.

Why the UK needs Volt now

It is precisely this participation in Europe on which Volt was founded. While Brexit was set in the belief that Britain would be stronger on its own, Volt emerged from its belief that Europeans would be stronger together. Ten years after both began, the contrast between them is striking. Britain spent the past decade moving away from Europe and is suffering from the consequences, while Volt spent a decade building a European future. 

The anniversary of Brexit is not a moment to mourn what was lost, but to reconsider what remains possible. Volt exists in every European country and also within the UK. Volt believes Britain's future is at the heart of Europe, and Volt UK is there to provide a bridge to Europe. 

Become a member of Volt UK! | Volt Europa or contact us at info@volt.org.uk 

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

With its declaration, Volt Europa works towards providing a blueprint for decision making in a more integrated European Union.

The Bratislava declaration (available in Volt’s website) calls on heads of government to initiate treaty reforms - long overdue since the 2007 Lisbon treaty ratifications - and indispensable considering the geopolitical context and enlargement ambitions from Moldavia to Ukraine.

Inês Bravo Figueiredo, Co-President of Volt Europa "Volt is here to unlock Europe's full potential and change people's lives for the better. With treaty changes, we can ensure that qualified majority voting replaces the paralysis of unanimity. If we abolish the veto, Europe can finally act swiftly and decisively on the issues that matter most to citizens, from securing our shared energy supply and defense to tackling the cost of living and the climate crisis. Europe’s future is no longer held hostage to the least ambitious government in the room.”

Sven Franck, Co-President of Volt Europa: "We will never have 27 pro-European governments at the same time. Treaty changes provide the timeframe and opportunity to engage and involve citizens in the process of deepening cooperation from defence and security to economic integration."

Only European leaders will move Europe forward. This is why Volt Europa will act on two fronts: building the next generation of European political leaders while also offering a platform for progressive, forward thinking minds keen on building the future Europe Union. Volt is the only European political party in its purest sense and its new leadership will focus on building momentum towards the 2029 European elections.

About Volt Europa

Founded in 2017 in response to rising nationalism and Brexit, Volt Europa operates in over 30 countries across Europe. With more than 40,000 members/supporters, over 360 elected representatives at municipal, national, and European level, Volt actively advocates for reforming the European Union into a united, democratic, and sovereign federal state, unlocking Europe's full potential.

Fact Sheet

• Group in the European Parliament: Greens EFA

• Years in Existence: 9 years (Founded on 29 March 2017)

• Geographic Presence: Active in over 30 European countries

• Total Membership: Over 40,000 members+supporters continent-wide

• Votes in the European Elections: 1.4 million votes across Europe

• MEPs elected: Damian Boeselager (Germany), Nela Riehl (Germany), Kai Tegethoff (Germany), Anna Strolenberg (Netherlands), Reinier van Lanschot (Netherlands)

• Volt in the press: All news about Volt 

• Elected Officials: 360 Officials elected in 11 Countries

Media Contact

Contact us via eurpress@volteuropa.org (Jacob Lippold)

Volt will build the leadership platform to unite Europe and demands reforming EU treaties

The last months have shown us that in a world changing for the worse, we, as European citizens, can only prevail if we change Europe for the better.

Whether a European army or a United Europe, citizens across the continent understand the urgency and what is at stake. So does Volt: We are running out of time.

Volt Europa was born with the goal to “Fix Europe”. We believe in a federal Europe and we are calling on national governments to also make a leap of faith: changing treaties was never easy, but it was possible until the 2007 Lisbon treaty. We see today that 20 years without reform is a recipe for disaster.

Only 1 government is needed to propose treaty changes in the European Council. 14 can initiate the process. We don’t have 27 Orbáns. We don’t have 14 Orbáns. We actually have no more Orbán. Yet, unanimity remains and threatens the European project at its core.

If national leadership continues to only talk about a more united and more integrated Europe without taking the next logical steps, the only solution is to build and vote for real European political leadership. This is what Volt will do.

The next European elections are in 2029. Volt demands to open EU treaties until then. We cannot wait. And Volt will not wait:

• We will seek dialogue with heads of government to argue for initiating treaty changes to give the Parliament legal initiative and move to qualified majority voting.

• We will build momentum in the population to use the next European elections to change course towards a federal Europe.

• We will build the platform for future European leaders - on European and national level to provide an alternative and European perspective to electors.

Volt Europa is on its way to taking responsibility for Europe.
We demand national governments to take responsibility now.

On 14 June 2026, Volt Europa, Europe’s only pan-European political party active in more than 30 countries, elected its new European Board and executive leadership at our 2026 General Assembly in Bratislava. More than 900 members, supporters, and volunteers joined us in person, with hundreds more taking part remotely through our interactive digital platform.

This is a defining moment for our party. The newly elected board takes the helm as we begin executing Volt's roadmap toward the 2029 European Parliament Elections. The primary strategic objective for the new team will be securing 25 parliamentary seats in at least 7 countries, the minimum needed to establish Europe's first independent, pan-European political faction within the European Parliament.

The New Volt Europa Board:

• Co-Presidents: Inês Bravo Figueiredo & Sven Franck

• Treasurer: Alberto Spatola

• Non-Executive Board Members: Marieke Koekkoek, Chan Uk Jun, Mihaela Sirițanu, Slavomir Manasek, Marina Rrika

Our new Co-Presidents shared their vision for the mandate ahead:

Inês Bravo Figueiredo: This election means that there is change coming to Volt Europa. Both Sven and I came here with a very clear perspective - make Volt more political. We want Volt to be out there, we want to change people’s lives - starting NOW.

Sven Franck: Volt needs to start to have political influence. We need visibility in different member states, and make our message heard across Europe. We have only three years till 2029 to get elected, and the campaign is a reminder to vote for us. We have to convince them that we are the right solution for Europe much before the campaign.

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

Our generation is confronting geopolitical challenges unlike any we have seen in recent decades. The contradictions of the old system are pushing us to build a new one. Europe stands at a historic cross-roads: The time is now for transforming the multilateral crisis into positive change. We reject the false choices that have paralysed political debate for too long: values or interests, idealism or realism, openness or sovereignty. Europe’s greatest strength in the emerging world order lies in its ability to unite democratic values with strategic power.

As Volt Europa we see nine interconnected challenges define the crisis for the EU: the break with the United States; the weaponisation of trade and economic interdependences; Russia’s return to expansionism; China’s rise and the competition of models; the erosion of multilateralism and international law; the digital and tech sovereignty deficit and platform monopolies; the shifting alignments and economic power of the Global South; planetary crises without borders; the collapse of US soft power leaving a power vacuum.

The EU faces a choice: adapt with ambition or become an object of others’ strategies rather than a subject of its own.

This paper rests on two foundational claims. First, the EU must prioritise strategic autonomy and independence in key fields as a precondition for meaningful internal and external action and any strategic intervention on the international stage. Second, strengthening global stability and sustainable development is not only a moral imperative but directly in Europe’s interest. These two claims are not in tension. A more sovereign EU is also a more credible and generous partner. Throughout, we take the UN 2030 Agenda’s three pillars – economic sustainability (equitable growth), environmental sustainability (resource preservation), and social sustainability (justice and inclusivity) – as the minimum consensus framework for what constitutes progress.

Our Vision for a stronger EU position in the New World Order

1. From dependency to diversification

Trade relations of the EU need to be diversified actively. The EU must map its strategic dependencies systematically and introduce maximum dependency ceilings in critical sectors: energy, digital, defence, and raw materials. We call for a standing dependency warning system and an annual EU dependency summit. Trade agreements must be redesigned around concrete strategic interests rather than abstract liberalisation: more specialised, more sectoral, more targeted. This is not protectionism, it is precision. Accelerating the build-out of renewable energy is an essential part of this strategy: dependence on fossil fuels from unstable or hostile suppliers is a strategic vulnerability as much as an environmental one.

2. Non-Eurocentric partnerships

China outperforms the EU in partner countries not because its values are better but because its offer is better targeted. The EU must deliver what Global Gateway still too often fails to achieve: locally guided, sustainable investment informed by civil society and local actors. But the EU’s unique asset is what China cannot offer: human capital, mobility, and genuine two-way conditionality. We call for a decisive break with the conditionality-as-coercion model that has characterised EU partnerships for decades, and its replacement with genuine interest-based partnerships in which conditionality flows in both directions. This means flipping the migration conditionality logic entirely: offering visa facilitation, Erasmus, Talentpool partnerships, and technology transfer as proactive instruments of engagement, in exchange for the EU’s strategic needs.

Trade Partnerships

3. A three-gears approach to multilateralism

Abandoning multilateralism hands the field to great-power unilateralism. But one-size-fits-all multilateralism no longer works. The EU’s answer is a three-gears approach: plurilateralism for speed when the UN is blocked; regionalism for depth with ASEAN, the African Union, and MERCOSUR; and a middle powers coalition for bargaining weight where China or the US is setting the terms. The EU’s distinctive role is that of the world’s most credible convener and broker: carrying legitimacy without dominance. The red thread across all three gears is international law. Without accountability, norms are worthless: we call for an International Centre for the Prosecution of Core International Crimes and a complete EU legislative framework to pursue violations effectively.

4. One voice, one seat

The three-gears approach only works if the EU speaks with a single voice. We call for the transfer of France’s permanent UNSC seat to an EU seat, a standing EU representation across all UN agencies, and in the long term a European Union Ministry of Foreign Affairs leading a genuinely Common European Foreign Policy. On UN reform, we call for broader regional representation, an end to permanent seats in favour of elected regional groupings, majority voting in the UNSC for cases of genocide and crimes against humanity, and the creation of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly.

5. A European Defence Union in three steps

We cannot spend our way into security. The debate must shift from hitting a spending percentage to building a single market for defence: integration, interoperability, joint procurement, European preference over foreign suppliers, and European debt at low interest rates – saving up to 100 billion euros per year. We propose three mutually reinforcing pathways: first, a Europeanised NATO with European command structures and digital backbone; second, deeper integration among core groups of willing member states; third, a full European Defence Union with a European Army at its centre. Defence must also be reimagined as an innovation engine: green defence is not a contradiction. In the long term, a future United States of Europe should place a permanent peacekeeping force at the disposal of a reformed United Nations.

Multilateralism UN Reform Defence

6. European digital sovereignty

The EU is dangerously dependent on a handful of Silicon Valley corporations whose political alignments are increasingly incompatible with European values. Digital independence is now a matter of the highest geopolitical stakes. We call for a Tech Sovereignty Eurogroup, composed of digital experts and elected officeholders, to coordinate EU strategy on technology, AI, and cybersecurity. European alternatives must be built on four principles: open-source transparency, environmental sustainability, democratic governance, and a distinctly European vision of AI – targeted, efficient, and purposeful rather than energy-intensive and extractive. Concrete measures include data localisation rules, a Digital Services Tax, a sovereign cloud definition, and a European Democracy Act to protect electoral processes from foreign interference.

7. Global commons guarantor

Some threats – climate breakdown, pandemic risk, food insecurity – cannot be addressed by any bilateral deal or regional bloc. With the US having retreated from the WHO, the Paris Agreement, and the SDGs, the EU must become their active guarantor. We call for a Climate Loss and Damage register, modelled on the Ukraine register, to make climate harm legible, countable, and legally actionable. On global health, the EU is already the largest contributor to the Pandemic Preparedness Fund. With the upcoming ratification of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the EU must now go further: we call for the establishment of a strengthened global health warning and data sharing system built on European tech infrastructure, reducing the dangerous dependency on US or Chinese platforms whose data governance standards are incompatible with European values, and ensuring that the next pandemic is met with coordinated European capacity rather than fragmented national responses.

On food security, reciprocal food security benchmarks must be embedded in agricultural trade agreements, alongside Strategic Mutual Reserves and knowledge-sharing on sustainable agriculture.

Digital Climate, Food and Health

8. Fixing the global financial system

The EU must use the euro more deliberately to reduce coercion in the global financial system – not to recreate US hegemony but to build a genuinely multipolar financial architecture. This means promoting euro-denominated contracts in strategic sectors, developing a digital euro with strong privacy protections, and completing the Capital Markets Union. On taxation, the EU should champion a global common corporate tax base among UN member states, with revenues channelled to fund multilateral institutions independently of the political will of any single contributor. On debt, the current system is structurally biased against developing countries: we call for IMF and World Bank voting reform. Beyond governance, we call for a comprehensive multilateral debt restructuring framework built on two concrete pillars: first, the structured renegotiation of the debt of the countries currently in debt distress; and second, the institutionalisation of the Debt Pause Clause Alliance – the thus far informal commitment by international banks and countries since 2025 to automatically suspend loan repayments in the event of natural disasters or severe economic shocks – through ratification by the EU and its member states with a single unified voice.

9. Europe as a great attractor

Society’s culture, its values, and its conduct on the international scene, enables the informal consensus-building and diplomatic goodwill that make collective action possible before crises harden into conflicts. The United States understood this for decades; that strategic commitment has now collapsed, leaving a cultural power vacuum the EU should fill – not by dominating, but as a convener. We call for a Common European International Cultural Relations Policy, strategic cultural investment modelled on South Korea’s Korean Wave, and active deployment of cultural relations as a distinct strand of enlargement, neighbourhood, and rapprochement strategies. Values and culture are not separate categories but mutually constitutive: European culture, in all its diversity, is the living expression of pluralism, creative freedom, and the coexistence of difference. Enlargement must be understood through this lens: not as a technocratic accession process but as the expansion of a sphere of shared values, cultural convergence, and people-to-people exchange. It is the EU’s most powerful soft power instrument, and the clearest proof that the European project works: the only political project in the world with more than a dozen countries voluntarily lining up to become part of it.

This new leadership will steer Volt into its next major political chapter: the European Election campaign in 2029 with the goal to achieve its own faction in the European Parliament.

The GA will be open to civil society activists, journalists, citizens, and supporters, with options to attend in person at Peugeout Arena, NTC Bratislava or join via a global livestream. 

Why Bratislava?

The biggest challenges of today require solutions that go beyond borders. Which is why Volt exists. 

Bratislava was chosen as the host city for its symbolic significance in this regard. As the only European capital bordering two nations - Austria and Hungary - it reflects Volt’s commitment to cross-border collaboration and interconnected solutions. With democracy under pressure and Slovakia’s local and regional elections approaching in October 2026, the GA underscores Volt’s role in addressing Europe’s modern political challenges. The event aims to energise Volt Slovakia and demonstrate how a united, borderless approach to politics can counter authoritarianism and foster shared prosperity.

Event Details

When:
Saturday, June 13, 2026 (9:00 AM CEST) – Sunday, June 14, 2026 (6:00 PM CEST)

Where:
NTC Bratislava
Príkopova 6, 831 03 Bratislava, Slovakia

Format:
Hybrid (in-person and interactive livestream)

Agenda: Plan for the weekend

How to Participate

In person: Register for physical attendance and access to social and networking events (June 11–14) via the official event portal.

Remotely: Join the livestream to watch keynote speeches, panel debates, and real-time election results.

About Volt Europa

Founded in 2017 in response to rising nationalism and Brexit, Volt Europa operates in over 30 European countries. With more than 34,000 members and over 300 elected representatives at municipal, national, and European levels, Volt advocates for reforming the European Union into a united, democratic, and sovereign federal state.

Fact Sheet:

• Group in the European Parliament: Greens EFA

• Years in Existence: 9 years (Founded on 29 March 2017)

• Geographic Presence: Active in over 30 European countries

• Total Membership: Over 40,000 members+supporters continent-wide

• Votes in the European Elections Across Europe 2024: 1.4 million votes all over Europe

• Volt in the press: All news about Volt 

• Total Elected Officials: 360+ Officials elected in 11 Countries! 

Media Contact

Contact us via eurpress@volteuropa.org (Jacob Lippold)

Spain has now joined Slovenia in urging the European Commission to take European protective measures against these extraterritorial sanctions. This call has also been reinforced by a former ICC prosecutor, who urged the EU to adopt a statute specifically blocking US sanctions against ICC members.

Volt Europa expressly supports this initiative, which is both necessary and appropriate.

The International Criminal Court is a central instrument for the enforcement of international law, the prosecution of war crimes, and the protection of universal human rights. When judges and staff members of international courts are intimidated through economic or political pressure, it is not merely an institution that is being attacked, but the fundamental principle that international law must apply independently of geopolitical interests.

It is troubling that sanctions against representatives of the ICC can, in practice, disrupt access to bank accounts, payment services, and international cooperation, including within the European Union itself. This creates a dangerous precedent for the political instrumentalization of economic power against international justice.

The political willingness to deploy punitive sanctions reaches beyond the ICC: the United States also imposed sanctions on a UN Special Rapporteur, but those measures were later suspended by a federal court and then lifted.

Volt Europa therefore calls for a coordinated and determined European response. The European Commission should immediately examine extending the EU Blocking Statute to cover sanctions against representatives of the ICC and, once extended, ensure its consistent enforcement. European banks, payment service providers, and companies require clear legal protection and certainty so they can continue cooperating with the ICC without fear of US secondary sanctions. EU member states should strengthen their political and financial support for the International Criminal Court and actively defend its institutional independence. In the long term, Europe needs greater strategic sovereignty in its financial and payment systems so that European foreign and justice policy cannot be constrained by unilateral measures imposed by other states. The European Union should present a united front internationally and make clear that attacks on international courts are attacks on the multilateral order as a whole. 

Volt Europa stands for a Europe that does not merely defend the rule of law, human rights, and international law rhetorically, but safeguards them institutionally. The credibility of the European Union depends on whether it is prepared to protect independent international institutions even when this entails political pressure from abroad.

Anyone who wishes to preserve a rules-based international order must not allow judges of international courts to be intimidated or isolated through sanctions. Europe must act now, collectively, decisively, and in accordance with its own values.

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

Luckily, Europe does not need a plan B to a US-dominated NATO. We can return to plan A: the European Defence Union, with joint decision-making, integrated command structures,  strategic capabilities, and a rapid reaction force. Such a Defence Union would not duplicate NATO but strengthen it with a robust European pillar at its centre capable of acting independently if necessary; separable, not separate. 

Two-thirds of Europeans want Europe to be able to defend itself independently.* We are Members of the European Parliament who share that goal. If we act, the European Union can safeguard the freedom of its 450 million citizens and uphold its founding promise of creating peace. Yet progress remains slow. The words of national governments are not backed up by actions. 

Buying time but wasting it
In recent years, EU-US ‘’diplomacy’’ meant buying time through appeasement. But after a year of US pressure on Ukraine, unilateral tariffs, interference in our elections, and threats to annex Greenland, it is clear that this strategy failed. 

The trade-off was that at the same time, Europe would scale up its defence industry, strengthen military capabilities and become more resilient against hybrid attacks and foreign interference.

Even though national leaders have repeatedly voiced the political wish to do this, real political will is lacking. The rapid increase in European artillery shell production shows what is possible when there is political will. Unfortunately, similar acceleration has not taken place in other areas. That puts Europeans at risk.

Stumbling over the first steps
The upcoming laws in the so-called ‘’defence omnibus’’ contain the first steps: cutting time and paperwork for defence production, integrate our defence market and enable joint procurement. 

However, short-sighted self-interest and old habits benefiting big legacy industries continue to block real progress. On defence procurement, these attitudes hinder prioritising equipment produced within the EU. Attempts to weaken automatic approval for permits after deadlines risk delaying critical defence manufacturing sites for years. Intra-EU transfer licences and the treatment of components remain blocked, preventing the dismantling of national barriers to defence trade. 

Buying equipment together could save up to 100 billion euro per year. Member States remain stuck in their national trenches. These laws should have been finalised last year. In the period since then, Putin has equipped six new divisions. We need to run a record-breaking race, but Member States are stumbling over the first steps.

Winning the race

This must change. Europe needs to act as one united power. It is only together that we can build our strategic autonomy in defence, energy, and industry. The timelines are tight. The US set a deadline for Europeans to take on greater responsibility within NATO by 2027. After Iran, this shift may accelerate. This can only be done by working closely with key partners such as the United Kingdom, Norway, Canada, and in particular Ukraine.

Three steps are critical: 

• Urgently adopt the defence omnibus;

• Create a true  single market for defence, reducing dependencies through a principle of European preference, increasing interoperability and achieving economies of scale; 

• Build a European Defence Union that strengthens NATO but can operate independently of the United States.

The European Commission and the European Parliament are ready. Now we need a push from national governments. So our call to all Member States on this day, Europe day, is simple: build a European Defence Union, and do it now.

As Paul-Henri Spaak warned in another era: “Il n'est pas encore trop tard, mais il est temps.” 

* https://bebartlet.com/european-pulse-forum-2026/#defense

Signatories:

• Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Chair of the Security and Defence Committee (Renew), Germany

• Rasa Juknevičienė (EPP), Lithuania

• Wouter Beke (EPP), Belgium

• Matej Tonin (EPP), Slovenia

• Michael Gahler (EPP), Germany

• Sven Simon (EPP), Chair of the Constitutional Affairs Committee (EPP), Germany

• Sven Mikser (S&D), Estonia, SEDE coordinator

• Thijs Reuten (S&D), Netherlands

• Tobias Cremer (S&D), Germany

• Thomas Pellerin Carlin (S&D), France

• Nathalie Loiseau (Renew), France, SEDE coordinator

• Helmut Brandstätter (Renew), Austria

• Lucia Yar (Renew), Slovakia

• Hilde Vautmans (Renew), Belgium

• Lukas Sieper (Renew), Germany  

• Bart Groothuis (Renew), Netherlands

• Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (Renew), Netherlands

• Sandro Gozi (Renew), France

• Bernard Guetta (Renew), France

• Martins Stakis (Greens/EFA), Latvia, SEDE coordinator

• Nicolae Ștefănuță (Greens/EFA), Romania, Vice President of the European Parliament

• Hannah Neumann (Greens/EFA), Germany

• Daniel Freund (Greens/EFA), Germany

• Sergey Lagodinsky (Greens/EFA), Germany

• Ville Niisto (Greens/EFA), Germany

• Reinier van Lanschot (Volt), Netherlands

• Kai Tegethoff (Volt), Germany

• Anna Strolenberg (Volt), Netherlands

• Damian Boeselager (Volt), Germany

• Nela Riehl (Volt), Germany

Read in your language:

• Netherlands: https://fd.nl/opinie/1595733/defensie-unie-is-hard-nodig-maar-eu-lidstaten-trappen-op-de-rem?utm_medium=social&utm_source=app&utm_campaign=earned&utm_content=20260509&utm_term=app-ios&gift=qmgIS 

• Netherlands: https://www.ad.nl/buitenland/terwijl-trump-zich-terugtrekt-vergadert-de-eu-in-de-tussentijd-heeft-p…

• Netherlands: https://www.trouw.nl/politiek/europarlement-tegen-eu-landen-schiet-eens-op-met-europese-defensie~b5…

• Netherlands: https://www.parool.nl/nederland/nu-amerikanen-raketten-weghalen-luiden-europarlementariers-de-noodk…

• Netherlands: https://www.rd.nl/a/1148279-europarlement-aan-lidstaten-maak-haast-met-europese-defensieunie

• Netherlands: https://www.leidschdagblad.nl/buitenland/europarlement-aan-lidstaten-maak-haast-met-europese-defens…

• Netherlands: https://www.pzc.nl/buitenland/terwijl-trump-zich-terugtrekt-vergadert-de-eu-in-de-tussentijd-heeft-…

• Netherlands: https://www.dagelijksestandaard.nl/nieuws/europarlement-aan-lidstaten-maak-haast-met-europese-defen…

• European:: https://www.euractiv.com/news/a-cross-party-group-of-30-meps-reports-for-duty-to-push-eu-defence-un…

• European::https://table.media/en/security/news-en/european-defense-union-50-members-of-parliament-are-putting… 

• European: https://davekeating.substack.com/p/meps-set-up-military-group-to-challenge 

• Germany: https://www.n-tv.de/politik/EU-Abgeordnete-fordern-Unabhaengigkeit-von-Nato-id30803720.html 

• Austria: https://www.derstandard.at/consent/tcf/story/3000000320021/vereint-um-krieg-zu-verhindern-europa-muss-eine-verteidigungsunion-anstreben 

• Germany: https://www.t-online.de/nachrichten/ausland/id_101247834/eu-abgeordnete-fordern-unabhaengigkeit-von-nato.html 

• Germany: https://rp-online.de/politik/deutschland/strack-zimmermann-fordert-europaeische-verteidigungsunion_aid-147907543 

• Germany: https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/verteidigung-in-europa-abgeordnete-werben-fuer-umbau-der-eu-zur-verteidigungsunion-a-c9814ff7-223b-4e00-877b-76f55c8524d2?sara_ref=re-so-app-sh

• Germany: https://www.faz.net/agenturmeldungen/dpa/eu-abgeordnete-fordern-unabhaengigkeit-von-nato-200815297.html 

• Belgium: https://www.tvl.be/nieuws/limburgse-europarlementsleden-pleiten-voor-europees-leger-nu-steun-van-vs-afbrokkelt-180678 

• Belgium: https://www.hbvl.be/politiek/beke-en-vautmans-trekken-aan-de-kar-voor-meer-europese-defensie-druk-opvoeren-op-lidstaten/151205996.html 

• Slovakia: https://dennikn.sk/5319277/preteky-s-casom-prehravame-europa-musi-utekat-k-obrannej-unii-nasi-lidri-vsak-zakopli-uz-na-starte/ 

• France: https://www.lexpress.fr/monde/europe/au-lieu-dattendre-que-la-guerre-nous-rassemble-unissons-nous-pour-la-prevenir-lappel-de-25-2RWQP5FBGRCPHKLUQF23MVVD5Y/?cmp_redirect=true 

• Lithuania: https://www.delfi.lt/news/ringas/politics/rasa-jukneviciene-ir-reinieris-van-lanschotas-vienykimes-kad-isvengtume-karo-120247486 

• Lithuania: https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/2922090/europe-must-run-for-a-defence-union-national-leaders-are-stumbling-at-the-start-opinion 

• Latvia: https://www.delfi.lv/bizness/56234200/eiropas-zinas/120117381/ep-deputati-vel-nav-par-velu-bet-ir-pedejais-laiks 

• Italy: https://www.ilfoglio.it/esteri/2026/05/09/news/leuropa-deve-correre-verso-una-difesa-comune--398571 

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 .

Growing antisemitism in society sparked discussions within Volt. Besides discussing how to combat antisemitism, there was also discussion about the definition and the difference between antisemitism and criticism of the Israeli government. 

Last week, an  article was published in the German news outlet Die Zeit about cases of antisemitism within Volt, and we would like to provide some clarity.

Sadly we have had a few incidents of antisemitism within our party. In response, we consistently investigated these incidents and took action where necessary: individual sanctions were imposed, the moderation on our internal platform was strengthened, our code of conduct was updated, and external experts were consulted for advice on how to prevent such incidents. We also launched dialogue sessions on the meaning of anti-Semitism, its forms, and how we can combat it.

A new definition of antisemitism was adopted at the Volt Europa Congress in Frankfurt in November 2025, following motions filed by the members in accordance with our democratic practices.

For some, however, it felt uncomfortable to hold a discussion on what constitutes antisemitism. The concern is understandable. At the same time, we recognize that questions about the space to criticize the Israeli government are also a significant concern in society. We believe these are important conversations to have, even if they are difficult.

For this reason, we supported our members to bring this topic forward as an agenda point at the congress. The discussion also featured David Feldman, a prominent scholar in this field, who serves as co-director of BISA, Professor of History at Birkbeck, University of London, and Professor of the History of Antisemitism at the University of Melbourne. 

After the Jerusalem Definition of Antiseitism (JDA) was approved to be adopted by Volt, a group of people left the party. After many efforts to involve them, it is unfortunate to conclude that we were unable to make them feel at home. 

Volt aims to create a society where there is no discrimination. We remain committed to combating antisemitism and all other forms of racism. 

Francesca Romana D'Antuono and Mels Klabbers, Co-Presidents of Volt Europa

In this car, 27 national leaders are behind the steering wheel. If 26 of them press down the gas pedal to accelerate, but one pushes the brake, the car doesn't move. Every single country has a veto which blocks our progress. This is increasingly problematic, because there are areas where we urgently need progress: defence, enlargement, and competitiveness.

Volt wants to create the United States of Europe (USE), a democratic federation, which will enable a society where people have dignified lives with the highest standards of living on the planet. Recently, due to geopolitical pressures from Russia, the US and China, big generational societal challenges like the climate crisis and decreasing economic performance, many Europeans have started to recognise the need for real change.

The EU is currently not able to change due to vetoes from unambitious national politicians who are chained to national interests and prevent desperately needed change. As a result of this deadlock, calls for ''multi speed Europe'' or ''pragmatic federalism'' have become louder. In this vision, coalitions of the willing made up of countries wanting to move faster and integrate deeper go ahead before the others (who then catch up later). 

This practice is not new. The Euro and Schengen are examples of massively successful projects that were kickstarted by a few ambitious countries and became the norm for almost everyone only later. The European Public Prosecutor Office is an ongoing example.

These forms of multi speed Europe can take place through different legal pathways such as enhanced cooperation under EU law or intergovernmental treaties outside the EU. Some of them allow non-EU countries to participate, such as Ukraine, the UK or Norway.

This would also help address the other challenge: enlargement. If we want to make sure that well-performing countries join the EU faster, but also prevent a new Viktor Orbán from entering the Union, we have to embrace  a 'more for more, less for less' approach.

In ideal circumstances, the EU would move as one to become the USE, a place where everyone joins the next steps in our cooperation right away. But in today's world, we don't have time to wait for the least ambitious national politician in the room. 

We can get to the United States of Europe at different speeds. What emerges is a kind of European 'onion': an inner core should be able to move towards the USE at greater speed, the current EU should apply its fundamental values much stricter, candidate countries should get a fairer 'more for more, less for less' approach and an outer layer of friends like the UK, Norway and Canada should be kept close.  

Volt supports forms of voluntary multi-speed Europe, as long as they are:

• Last resorts to move ahead with common and ambitious EU reform, which is blocked by lack of unanimity;

• Explicitly designed to be open to other EU (and non-EU) countries and over time can become an EU-wide reform;

• Binding once countries sign up, no easy 'opt-in, opt-out' mechanism; 

• Utilising EU frameworks within EU law, not ad-hoc intergovernmental solution;

• Combined with strong rule of law and democracy safeguards and automatic reversals that prevent backsliding countries from abusing the system

• Never politically abused to create ‘first and second class’ member-states, or a perception thereof, only to accelerate deeper integration

In other words: a clear 'step-by-step' system that is equally open to all countries, merit-based, and guided by the same legal framework, contributing to a faster, 'ever closer Union’. Countries can move up and down the ladder based on independent and objective criteria, not arbitrary political distinctions. For candidate countries, such stages help accelerate membership; they will never be an alternative to full membership.*

• Layer 1: The Federal Core: towards a ''United States of Europe''

  • Criteria: enhanced cooperation enacted within EU law (e.g. article 20 or 46) as long as they fulfil the four conditions outlined above

  • Effect: more federal competences for the EU on critical policy areas (e.g. a capital markets, savings and investment, fiscal, foreign and defence Union)

• Layer 2: The European Union (status quo)

  • Criteria: formal EU membership with full voting rights has been acquired

  • Effect: current EU: full coverage of EU law, policies, budget, voting rights

• Layer 3: Advanced candidate countries

  • Criteria: full alignment with the EU's common foreign and security policy (CSFP), positive Interim Benchmark Assessment Report (IBAR) received for the opened fundamentals cluster (meaning: a high level of rule of law and democracy)

  • Effect: early access to select parts of the EU budget, application of the mutual defence clause article 42.7, and full participation (with voting rights but without a veto) in EU institutions for closed chapters (meaning: for policy areas where reforms are finished)

• Layer 4: Regular candidate countries (status quo)

  • Criteria: Any European** State which respects the EU's fundamental values and is committed to promoting them (article 49), candidate status received

  • Effect: gradual access to EU single market and policies based on reform and growth plans, as well as simple observer status in all EU institutions (w.o. voting rights)

• Layer 5: Value-based partners (EFTA +)

  • Criteria: Any democratic country that has signed a partnership with the EU

  • Effect: privileged but conditional participation in specific EU single market or policy areas, like defence, technology, energy. Economic ''anti-coercion'' pact. ''Super Brussels effect'' on global regulatory standard setting.

Written by Reinier van Lanschot, Volt MEP

*For our detailed position on EU enlargement/reform, the various stages of 'more for more, less for less' and its criteria and effects, please check out our vision paper.

**Volt considers any country in which a majority of the population has democratically expressed an aspiration for EU membership to be a European state.

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

Political context

Growing geopolitical tensions between Europe and the USA reflect our different visions of democracy. The Volt Europa Tech team aims to use technologies that align with our principles of data sovereignty, protection of privacy and inclusion. This is not in line with the global market dominance of the Big Tech companies based in the USA.

It is clear to us that reliance on American hyperscalers within Volt and Europe is not sustainable in the long term. That is why we are committed to transitioning completely to European and open-source solutions. We want to enable European digital sovereignty and innovation, making Europe economically and technologically strong.

Where we are now

The main reason to step away from American Big Tech is that we want full control of our data. US law, most notably the CLOUD Act (Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act of 2018), allows American authorities to compel US-based companies to disclose data, even if stored outside the United States. The EU-US Data Privacy Framework, intended to address these concerns, rests on an Executive Order and can be revoked by any sitting US president without congressional approval. For a value-driven political organisation like Volt, that level of legal uncertainty is not acceptable. We at Volt take data protection of our members seriously. Therefore, we have started taking concrete steps to use European-hosted and open-source tools:

• Our Community platform and intranets have been migrated to a German-built tool.

• CiviCRM is soon to be our European-hosted open-source member management system.

• LogTo, an open-source identity service provider, is our alternative to Google authentication (SSO).

• All our official websites are hosted by a European partner, using Statamic Laravel, supported by Mave (a European Alternative to YouTube embeds), and Plausible for anonymous analytics. They all ensure cookie-free videos and webpages.

• Even though we still rely on American technology to send out newsletter campaigns, transactional emails are now sent through Lettermint - a European email broadcasting provider.

• Streaming and online events are all shared through a French webinar tool.

• Amendments and motions ahead of assemblies are managed through Motion Tools, which is an open-source solution born in Germany.

• Our new learning management system is an open-source e-learning tool.

Challenges

This is only the beginning. We have a long way ahead of us. Due to limited human and financial resources, we encounter several challenges:

1. Europe already has great alternatives to the majority of US-based tools and systems, but they often come at a higher price and a less streamlined user experience.

2. Self-hosted open-source tools require constant maintenance. We are always seeking volunteers to help us with that.

3. We want to ensure that Volt tools enable productive work and collaboration between our members, supporters, and volunteers. We aim to implement systems that suit everyone, from tech experts to digital novices.

What we need to work on

Despite these challenges, we aim to eliminate our reliance on American Big Tech in the coming years by taking small but decisive steps. We also need to make sure that changes do not cause downtime and that our organisation continues to run smoothly. In the future, we want to focus on the following:

• Step-by-step replacement of Google services with European providers. Making a change starts with being honest. So we need to be transparent about our big reliance on Google Suite. We are changing this, as shown by the integration of a new authentication system. Now it’s time to take the next small step of reducing our reliance on Google. 

• Running all our infrastructure on the European cloud.

• Using European payment processors, such as ClubCollect and Wero, both on the European level and across all our national chapters, for accepting payments, donations, and member fees, whilst also supporting national solutions, which are common, e.g. in the North European countries.

• Sending all of our mailing campaigns using European mail delivery services.

• Going up the supplier chain. We can help our suppliers move their tech stack to European alternatives, if they are reliant on foreign big tech solutions.

While making these changes, we want to avoid vendor lock-in. Interoperability standards will be an important factor when choosing our service providers.

Great news: you can be a part of it!

This is not just another IT project.  It is a political necessity and a reflection of our values, an ongoing commitment that everyone in Volt can be a part of.

You can start bringing the change by transforming your own habits, like switching to a European browser and using a European alternative to ChatGPT & co (and recommend that your friends do the same!). Find European alternatives on this website. You can also help Volt by joining our Tech team efforts as a volunteer to help us move in the right direction more quickly, or support us financially to make the transition happen.

How will you be a part of this change?

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

But if we stop at celebration, we miss the deeper story.

Hungary’s recent history has exposed the structural contradictions of today’s European Union.

For over a decade, Orbán was not an outsider. His party, Fidesz, sat comfortably within the European People’s Party, the main centre-right political family in Europe and the same grouping Ursula von der Leyen sits in. During those years, the erosion of democratic norms in Hungary was visible and yet largely tolerated.

This is not a Hungarian anomaly. It is a European failure.

The rise of illiberal leaders across the continent did not happen in a vacuum. It followed a decade marked by overlapping crises: the financial crash of 2008, the Eurozone crisis of 2012, the migration crisis of 2015, the pandemic, and now the chaos that geopolitical and energy crises have brought to us.

Too often, the EU’s response to these crises has been perceived as technocratic, punitive, and detached. Austerity policies, imposed without sufficient democratic ownership, have fed a sense of alienation. When decisions that deeply affect people’s lives appear to be taken by distant, unelected actors, political backlash is not a surprise, it is a consequence.

Orbán’s system was built on that backlash. But it went further.

Over the years, Hungary developed a political model that combined electoral competition with structural imbalance: media capture, institutional pressure, and electoral reforms designed to favour the ruling party. This is why yesterday’s result is widely seen as remarkable. Winning against such a system is not just a political victory. It is a structural disruption.

And yet, this is not the end of the story.

Hungary’s new Prime Minister, Péter Magyar, represents a break with Orbán’s leadership. This is good: Hungarians deserve honesty and rebuilding institutions that were systematically dismantled over sixteen years takes time. So does restoring judicial independence, rebuilding a free media landscape, reforming public education, unwinding the networks of political patronage that run deep through the economy. None of this happens in one parliamentary term, and none of it happens without resistance. That is the reality of rebuilding a state that was deliberately hollowed out. At the same time Magyar does not represent necessarily a break with the broader ideological landscape of European centre-right politics. It is clear, for example, that on issues such as migration, continuity rather than rupture is defined in the coming years.

This matters because the real question is not just who governs Hungary, but what kind of Europe emerges from this moment.

Orbán’s defeat weakens a key obstacle to a more coherent European foreign policy, particularly on Ukraine and relations with Russia. But the deeper challenge remains: Europe still lacks the political capacity to act as a unified power.

Without a common foreign policy, a shared defence framework, and genuine democratic legitimacy across borders, the European Union will continue to react rather than lead.

Hungary’s election is therefore both a success and a warning.

A success, because democratic change is still possible; a warning, because the conditions that enabled Orbán’s rise have not disappeared.

If Europe wants to prevent the next Orbán, it must go beyond managing crises. It must address their root causes: inequality, democratic distance, and the absence of a truly European political space.

Otherwise, this victory will remain an exception rather than the beginning of a new European trajectory.

By Francesca Romana D'Antuono and Mels Klabbers, Co-Presidents of Volt

Image source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Peter_Magyar.Viktor_Orban.jpg

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

In the illegally occupied West Bank, a systematic policy of displacement, expropriation and violence against the Palestinian population is being advanced. What is happening is not accidental – rather, it is a deliberate, clearly communicated process affecting large parts of Area C, the Jordan Valley and increasingly Area B. With the support or acquiescence of Israeli security forces, a policy is being implemented that aims to permanently prevent Palestinian self-determination and to cement the de facto annexation of the West Bank.

This current wave of violence follows a disturbingly consistent pattern. First, illegal outposts are established, then Palestinian shepherd and Bedouin communities are denied access to water and grazing land, until, finally, brutal attacks on property and people by Israeli settler terrorists force residents to flee. Since 7 October 2023 alone, 4,037 Palestinians have been displaced in this manner. Entire communities simply no longer exist.

The role of the Israeli government in this practice is particularly alarming. Security forces often act hand in hand with settlers. Meanwhile, families defending their land are imprisoned and mistreated. The International Court of Justice made it clear in July 2024 that the displacement in the West Bank driven by settler violence and land seizure is a prohibited “forcible transfer.” Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, this practice qualifies as a war crime and must be consistently sanctioned under international law.

Furthermore, the Israeli security cabinet announced in early February that it would allow Israelis to acquire land in the unlawfully occupied Palestinian territories. The announcement therefore represents a further step towards the de facto annexation of the West Bank, and contradicts international law as well as existing international agreements.

Israeli settlers set fire to homes and vehicles in several locations in the illegally occupied West Bank on March 22, 2026, injuring at least one person, including in al-Fandaqumiya and Seilat al-Dahr near Jenin. Further attacks were reported in Masafer Yatta, Qaryut, and Jalud, in some cases under the protection of Israeli security forces. There were also incidents of stone-throwing at vehicles. Such incidents are part of a growing wave of violence since October 2023, in which more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank.

Volt calls on the EU and its Member States to take decisive and immediate action to halt these measures and ensure accountability for violations of international law:

1. Suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement for as long as the Israeli government violates international law.
   
   

2. Immediately halt imports and exports of all goods originating from the illegally occupied territories that Israel declares as Israeli goods.
   
   

3. Impose EU sanctions on settler organisations and on individual politicians and ministers who support settler terrorism.

This is a matter of nothing less than the right to life, security and dignity for an entire people. The EU must finally send clear signals, end its double standards and actively defend compliance with international law. Volt will not be silent until the systematic violence in the West Bank ends.

Image source: https://mondoweiss.net/2024/11/photo-essay-the-silent-displacement-in-the-west-bank/#:~:text=As%20the%20world%20has%20focused,Bank%20following%20October%207%2C%202023.

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 

What is the current escalating situation in Iran?

In Iran, repression has significantly intensified. Independent human rights observers and activists report that thousands of civilians have been killed, with some estimates suggesting tens of thousands of deaths during the brutal crackdown by Iranian security forces. Throughout January 2026 waves of arrests continued, accompanied by accusations of torture and coercion, but the exact number of people arrested since the start of the protests has remained not fully disclosed. 

Unarmed protesters, bystanders, and even children have been shot with live ammunition. Doctors who dare to treat the wounded have been arrested and are awaiting execution. An increasing number of protesters, activists and organisers have been sentenced to death, with mass executions surging in recent weeks. The internet has been shut down to keep the truth of these violent acts hidden. For this reason, the European Union has taken action, adding Iran's Revolutionary Guards to the terrorist list, while still maintaining open diplomatic channels.

At the same time, the United States has issued an ultimatum to Iran, threatening military intervention. Trump is demanding Iran make a “deal” regarding its nuclear programme while also using rhetoric about stopping the killings of protesters, instrumentalising their suffering as a geopolitical leverage. In response, the Islamic Republic's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the country's armed forces were ready, "with their fingers on the trigger [to] immediately and powerfully respond" to any aggression by land or sea.

Diplomatic talks between the US and Iran are taking place in Oman. These are the first since the US attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities in June 2025. The discussion is aimed at addressing Iran’s nuclear programme and broader regional security issues. There is heightened tension, as the wide-ranging demands advanced by Trump – pushing for more than just nuclear agreements – risk putting the entire diplomatic effort at stake, at a moment when the window for meaningful progress is already narrow.

What kind of action are we calling for now?

The situation of the Iranian people is devastating and urgent. Decisive action by the international community is needed sooner rather than later to intervene in the face of a mounting number of civilian deaths and unlawful executions on a daily basis. 

The US is threatening military intervention with the main goal of destroying Iranian nuclear and defensive capability, which would require weeks of sustained overhead bombardment. While claiming that liberation of the Iranian people and regime change are key goals of the intervention, the US has not proposed any credible strategy for long-term democratic change or stability in connection to these threats.

A US-led military intervention that bypasses international law would not ensure a peaceful transition of power or the urgently needed relief for the Iranian people. Simultaneously this would significantly weaken the international rules-based order and further embed a dangerous precedent of unilateral military aggression and infringement of self-determination on the international stage. Europe must firmly insist on compliance with international law, in particular the unlawful use of military force.

Instead, we demand decisive action by the United Nations Security Council in compliance with the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle, which ensures that the international community protects populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Where a state manifestly fails to protect its population from mass atrocities, the international community has a responsibility to act collectively, through lawful and proportionate measures mandated by the Security Council. 

The UNSC must assess the situation accordingly and should mandate a multilateral, NATO led operation meant to put significant pressure on the regime under the legal argument of R2P to stop arbitrary violence and mass killings inflicted by the Iranian government. Such an operation must prioritise civilian protection, prevent further atrocities, and lay the groundwork for democratic reconstruction.

However, we realise that the UNSC is currently deadlocked and needs to be urgently reformed. In the absence of a UN mandate, the next best thing would be a multilateral operation with broad participation, in compliance with R2P. Europe should unite so that in the long run, it can speak with one voice in the world and help build a rules based order that can act faster and decisively to protect human rights everywhere.

In addition, Europe must play an active role in de-escalating tensions, strengthening Iranian civil society, enabling humanitarian support and guaranteeing asylum for the politically persecuted and those fleeing human rights violations, while using all diplomatic tools available to ensure that any use of force is grounded in international legality and multilateral legitimacy.

Inaction in the face of mass repression and large scale human rights violations is not an option. Accountability for the killings of protesters and the violent suppression of dissent must be pursued through legal mechanisms, including independent investigations through the Human Rights Council. At the EU level, Member States can rely on universal jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute individuals responsible for grave international crimes. The European Union should actively facilitate and coordinate these processes.

We stand with the Iranian people, who have been protesting against the illegitimate regime for decades, calling for an end to repression, respect for basic freedoms, accountability for abuses, and the right to shape their country’s future. 

Our Iranian friends need solidarity, not silence. 

They need principled international action grounded in law and legitimacy, not unlawful unilateral intervention. And above all, they deserve to be heard.  

Image: By Vahid Online, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=182747312

______________

You and us share the same dream of a united, thriving Europe. It really means a lot to us when you make a donation, and if you would like to help us plan ahead with confidence, we thank you for your monthly contribution 💜 .