The plenary session at the European Parliament building in Strasbourg last week focused on Ukraine and the broader issue of Russian intervention. Debates on these topics produced a wide agreement among Members of Parliament, who welcomed the European Council’s aid package with optimism while urging member states to probe potential links between European political parties and Kremlin-connected agents. In an interview with El Periódico de Cataluña, part of the Prensa Ibérica group, David McAllister, who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee, urged EU governments to bolster collective defense and prepare for a possible shift in the political landscape should Donald Trump return to the presidency in the United States.
The interview begins by evaluating the outcomes of the extraordinary summit in Brussels. McAllister expressed approval of the European Council’s decision on funding for Ukraine, noting that a Christmas agreement would have been ideal given the urgency. He added that diplomacy conducted in the background helped accelerate the process, and that the Hungarian prime minister faced a moment of isolation, which signaled to Hungary that continued obstruction would leave the remaining 26 members moving forward without him. Such dynamics, he argued, limited any leverage Hungary might have had to block progress.
When asked whether Viktor Orbán should lose his voting rights in the Council, McAllister acknowledged that this is a highly delicate issue. He emphasized that any such move must be legally sound and grounded in solid democratic principles, including the rule of law and freedom of the press. On foreign and security policy, he stressed the need for unity among member states and suggested that the scope of decisions could increasingly be taken by qualified majority in the near future.
The conversation then turned to the United States, where Joe Biden faces challenges in securing Ukraine aid. McAllister highlighted the EU’s substantial support over the past two years, totaling around $82 billion, including military assistance, and stressed the importance of maintaining flexibility in funding through 2024–2027 to provide Kiev with predictable support. He noted that US congressional action remains uncertain and urged Congress to resolve the debate, as Ukraine depends on reliable U.S. backing. He also warned that the outcome of the November elections could influence transatlantic decisions, whether in a Biden or a Trump administration, and urged readiness for either scenario.
Asked about a possible Plan B, McAllister advised keeping channels open with both Democratic and Republican lawmakers who advocate stronger transatlantic ties. He suggested explaining to lawmakers that the war’s outcome would have global consequences and could signal that borders may be altered by force, a message that needs careful, ongoing dialogue.
The discussion then touched on the question of freezing Russian assets to fund war reparations. The European Parliament’s stance is clear: seized funds should be used to rebuild Ukraine within a robust legal framework, supported by sound legal arguments that enable such actions.
On the risk of legal uncertainty within the EU, McAllister described Russia’s aggression as illegal, brutal, and violent, violating fundamental principles. He argued that the response should be firm and just, ensuring that those who benefit from the Russian system bear the consequences.
Regarding interference detected in various countries, including alleged Kremlin activity in Catalonia, he urged serious investigations. Drawing on his own experience living in West Germany in the 1970s and 1980s, he noted that espionage and destabilization attempts by Russian and East German entities were longstanding. For Putin, maintaining unity is crucial, he said, and he called on Europeans to back a renewed sanctions package. He pointed to sectors vulnerable to action, such as steel, and stressed the need to prevent evasion through Central Asia, along with a ban on importing liquefied natural gas that would weaken Russia’s ability to acquire high- tech components for military purposes.
Finally, on the question of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and potential future divisions, McAllister asserted that international law remains clear. He affirmed Kyiv’s right to restore its borders to those from 2014 and urged continued support for Ukraine for as long as necessary. The decision, he argued, lies with Kyiv, and the time will come when Ukraine itself determines the next steps.