Director of the European Parliament's office in Spain: "Turkey is the neighbour that has a hornet's nest in its hand and we don't want it to stir it up

In Atalayar's programme on Monday 21 in Capital Radio, presented by Víctor Arribas together with the director of the magazine Javier Fernández, the European project and the summit that is currently being held in Brussels to deal with the emergence of the coronavirus and the most tense areas of the Union's foreign policy were discussed.

Atalayar interviewed the director of the European Parliament's office in Spain, María Andrés Marín, who addressed issues with a very interesting perspective on the Parliament, relations with Turkey and Belarus, migrations and the great questions of the fund for economic recovery and European resilience. 

First of all, thank you for attending Atalayar's invitation. Which of the issues mentioned above is the most urgent?

I don't know if I could classify them in order of urgency because there are many things, and all of them are very urgent in their scope. What a day to celebrate the International Day of Peace we have had! For example, with that meeting of the foreign ministers trying to find some solution, or at least one voice on the issue with Turkey or Belarus. It seems that the debate is not over yet.

The European Parliament met last week in a plenary session and, with regard to these two countries, the priorities that should be carried out were established. Firstly, to demand very clear sanctions against Belarus, including Aleksandr Lukashenko (President of Belarus). This sanction on him was not yet clear at the meeting of the foreign ministers today. 

Although they have finally announced that they will cease to recognise Lukashenko when his mandate expires on 5 November this year. This is an attempt to use parliamentary diplomacy to support this very important role being played by several women opponents and the citizens of Belarus. 

Who could have told the citizens of Belarus that in the end the approval of this type of sanctions could depend on something as pilgrim as a situation on the other side of the map that has nothing to do with them. For example, the tensions with Turkey; this was the other resolution passed last week in the European Parliament. The MEPs also condemned the actions of gas prospecting in space or in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Cyprus or Greece and declared it a clearly illegal interference.

What happened this afternoon? So we are following in the media: Josep Borrell, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, had to admit that in the case of Belarus there was not the unanimity needed to impose sanctions as MEPs demanded.

Why? Because Cyprus has dissociated itself by saying that it would only accept it if sanctions were also imposed on Turkey. And that is how things stand.

These two Parliamentary resolutions are an attempt to form a political majority, but it is clear that much remains to be done. Let's see if we can undo this and reach an agreement on sanctions, at least for Belarus, on Thursday and Friday at the European Council.

Well, what a complicated balancing act we have in the European Parliament. Not to mention those two major issues of international concern such as Belarus and Turkey. In addition to this, we have attended in the European Parliament this week, Maria, the State of the Union address by Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission. 
Perhaps the most notable, despite the insistence on the great Green Agreement for the future of the continent and the Union, is the attack on the coronavirus pandemic. The way to "rebuild the confidence of the different countries to face the health and migration emergency", as Von der Leyen said

Yes, the truth is that it was a speech that I particularly liked. Von der Leyen tried to avoid big sentences to really get into the thick of it and to outline what the possibilities should be for getting out of this huge mess that is the coronavirus pandemic and the effects it is having on the economy. 

We have this resilience facility, this resilience package where the priorities are very clear. She insisted very much that it is not a blank cheque, right now we are at a stage where after the Council we managed, after three endless days of summit, to adopt a political agreement for that recovery package.

This package included EUR 750 billion with a great many new features. One of them is that "there would be subsidies, not just loans". The way it is going to be implemented will also be novel. Von der Leyen made it very clear that the three major priorities will not be overlooked. This money will serve to inject liquidity into the States, provided we know how to spend it on green projects, digital transformation and social cohesion. And that is what we are doing. It is now up to the national governments to draw up the projects.

The Spanish government, for example, has until 15 October to present a first draft of this "National Recovery Plan", which consists of explaining which projects or priorities we want to finance with this money.

Then, moreover, it has to be articulated through the Autonomous Communities together with the central government. It is going to be a complicated task, we are now collecting the proposals and it will be on 30 April when the council has to approve this National Recovery Plan. In other words, even the frugal countries are going to have to examine this plan presented by Pedro Sánchez and say whether they agree or not.

I would like to convey to María the concern of Spanish citizens regarding the delay that affairs in Europe always have. We are talking about the fact that the first aid in connection with the economic damage caused by the measures against COVID-19 will arrive in the middle of 2021. By then many companies will no longer exist, and it will be difficult to help or support them.

Well, that is not entirely true. It is true that there is a feeling that Europe is taking a long time to agree. I myself have just explained the monumental political mess that exists in foreign relations or this economic issue. 

But as Ursula von der Leyen rightly said in her State of the Union address last week, "those who criticise Europe for not being quick enough or effective, let them have the guts to move to majority decision-making".

The European Parliament always manages to agree and pass resolutions or legislative acts, more or less ambitious, depending on the difficulty, but it always manages to agree. It is always in the Council that things end up getting blocked because of this requirement for unanimity and opposition among national governments.

But many laws, directives, regulations were reformed... At first, as early as March, barely three weeks into the pandemic, laws were reformed to unblock all EU funds that had not been spent on cohesion or regional funds. 
Remember that Spain sometimes complains that it would like to receive more funds, but then it has to be able to absorb and execute them. In the regional funds of the last legislature, less than 30% of the funds were adopted because they had not been allocated. So that is the difficulty, not the slowness of the European Union.

I believe that an enormous effort is being made in terms of liquidity, I believe that this is not going to be the problem. But then the difficulty is that the Spanish Government, the Autonomous Communities and the companies also manage to agree on what type of projects they want to prioritise and do so coherently without wasting the funds. They have to be used for something that serves a real recovery of society.

You are undoubtedly right. There are managers closer to home who should do a better job and not always blame Brussels, which is a rather hackneyed thing to do. I would also highlight the role of the European Central Bank (ECB). One fact: it has bought up 46 billion of Spain's debt since the pandemic broke out. The ECB's investment and the action it is taking, particularly in terms of debt and with the banks, is very significant. 
With respect to the tension in the eastern Mediterranean. We are concerned, Atalayar always looks at the Mediterranean from Europe and Spain. To what extent can the tensions that France is leading in order to defend Greece against Turkey cause a certain amount of instability in the European Union.

The problem we always have with Turkey is that it is a very complicated neighbour. It has the key to many things we need to cooperate with. This very week, the European Commission is going to make a new proposal on how to reform the issue of immigration and asylum. We are going to refocus the Dublin regulation, that package that says how we are going to deal with people who come to Europe and put their lives at risk.

Turkey has always had a say in this and has exerted its pressure in a very intelligent way. Let's just say it's like the neighbour who has the hornet's nest in his hand and we don't want him to shake it up at all. If you have noticed, this afternoon the foreign ministers did speak very clearly about the sanctions on Belarus. But as far as Turkey is concerned, the subject has been brought to the discussion, but the subject of sanctions has not been mentioned. 

Hence, the monumental anger that Cyprus had, because they are determined to impose more sanctions on Turkey because of what is happening. It is very complex because they (Turkey) are pulling the strings with these gas prospections, with these incursions they are making in the EEZ knowing that, on the other hand, they have in their hands the issue of immigration (with which we need to get along with Turkey).

I do not see a short-term solution, what I do see is that there is little appetite on the part of Turkey to calm things down. MEPs have been quite clear in their resolution: they do want to impose more sanctions on Turkey, they do consider this an illegal intrusion and they give full support to Greece and Cyprus. 

We now feel better than three or four weeks ago, when that ship (Oruç Reis) entered Greek and Cypriot waters. It seems that they want to calm the waters. It is very difficult to get 27 Member States to agree on their foreign policy priorities with one voice. Unanimity is more complicated.

There is also the issue of asylum and refugees. We witnessed the fire in Moria two weeks ago and the difficulty of integrating these refugees. Where is the European Union's asylum and refugee policy heading? Is there any progress on whether there will be any agreement, on whether the Dublin Treaty will go down in history?

We have been discussing the same thing for ten years, a new proposal is being presented this week (compared to the Dublin Treaty) and I hope we will reach a successful conclusion. What we have not managed to do is to get Parliament to agree on a quota system, a relocation system and to try to strike a balance.

Because it is very difficult to give a firm hand to those who are unable to obtain refugee status in their country of origin. In other words, to have a hard hand with illegal immigration. But at the same time we must have solidarity with all those who deserve this protection and, to this end, a system of quotas is needed to achieve solidarity between the Member States as well. 

It does not make sense that the same countries (which have a border with some countries in the south or even in the east at certain times) should always have to bear the excessive burden of integrating all the people who arrive very suddenly at a border due to a war, such as Syria. 

I see that we are making progress in the idea that we have to know how to play with both sensibilities: security at external borders and solidarity with them. What Ursula Von der Leyen called the "end of the Dublin system" is taking shape, in an attempt to achieve another system with more solidarity, with quotas that can even sanction countries that are not complying with this reception capacity.

This is a clear message to all the countries that lack solidarity and have a rather questionable internal policy, such as Poland and Hungary. This is opening up a gap within the European Union, especially when on the subject of immigration there are those who differentiate between refugees and immigration for socio-economic reasons and not because of wars and conflicts. There the solution would be to invest in the countries of origin such as sub-Saharan Africa and avoid thousands of people having to emigrate to Europe.

This could be one of the solutions, a wager that the EP has always made. Antonio Tajani, who was the previous President of the Parliament, always called it this "Marshall Plan for Africa" that we need to invest in these countries of origin and ensure that they have an opportunity and a dignified life there. And so they don't have to risk their lives constantly. These people have every right to seek a better life. But when they come to our borders we have a conflict that is not being solved as it should be.

This is indeed one of the levers we have to use: more investment in Africa. All this at a time when the African continent is experiencing a very interesting demographic explosion, where there are very clear investment opportunities and while Europe is having very clear demographic problems with an ageing population. 

We have problems in paying all the pensions that we are going to have to pay in a few years' time. When you look at it coldly, objectively and even selfishly, it is very clear that we need people to come and work on the European continent. We are an ageing continent and we need labour in many types of services and in any other company, also skilled labour. 

That is why it is extremely important to regulate a migration system that helps us to solve this problem and that is not the fighting cock that the most Europhobic or populist parties always use to agitate in Parliament, national governments or the European project. 

Now we are going to look at the Sahel, where terrorist groups are gaining strength every day, particularly the Daesh terrorists who have managed to flee from Iraq and Syria, which are reorganising. Also the local Al-Qaeda groups... There Europe, not only Spain, (France and Spain are the most aware with troops training the army of Mali), should pay more attention to this area. These terrorist groups also use Libya with the human trafficking mafias, constituting a real destabilisation in Europe

You are right, we must pay more attention to that part of the world. And I think that, unfortunately, we in Europe remember those territories when we are bombed outside a mosque in France, or when we are faced with a new violent attack by international terrorism. 

In Spain we have a lot of experience with this, it's true. Moreover, many of the directives on judicial cooperation are inspired by the Spanish model, in the fight against terrorism, especially international terrorism.
There we have made great progress, I would say that, in the last legislature, if there was one thing we were able to do well, although in the area of immigration we did not manage to resolve it, it was the issue of the fight against international terrorism. 

We advanced in being able to penalise people who were financing people who go there to train as terrorists and return. In the seizure of goods, capital, in many areas we have managed to have a legal system and police and judicial cooperation that works. 

Now, we need to pay more attention to the Sahel and also invest money there. In the end, terrorists are often desperate people who see no other future and who end up being absorbed by some radical movement. If they had perhaps had a chance a few years earlier, they would never have ended up there. You have to look at it from that point of view.