Poliflw

ReportA8‑0031/2019Anna Elżbieta Fotyga

Follow up taken by the EEAS two years after the EP Report on EU strategic communication to counteract propaganda against it by third parties(2018/2115(INI))

Motion for a resolution (Rule 170(3) of the Rules of Procedure) replacing non-legislative motion for a resolution A8-0031/2019

European Parliament resolution on follow up taken by the EEAS two years after the EP Report on EU strategic communication to counteract propaganda against it by third parties

The European Parliament,

– having regard to Article 11 of the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union, which provides for the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers, and for the freedom and pluralism of the media to be respected,

– having regard to Rule 113 of its Rules of Procedure,

1. Recommends the following to the Council and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy:

to express concern about deteriorating media freedoms and cases of journalists, bloggers and social media users being targeted for merely expressing their opinion; to underline that Member States are capable of addressing concerns regarding disinformation, propaganda, and attacks against their electoral processes in their respective countries and that too much EU interference runs contrary to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; to encourage Member States to adopt effective and clear legislation that ensures the transparency of media ownership and to pay particular attention to the funding, transparency and objectives of NGOs and mainstream media outlets; to encourage social media platforms to promote a level playing field for all political, philosophical and religious beliefs in accordance with the right to freedom of expression; to condemn the practise by social media platforms of demoting, banning or demonetising social media users on the sole basis of expressing their opinion; to heed against the EU becoming a self-proclaimed “Ministry of Truth” and thereby limiting the freedom of expression and the right to impart information and ideas without interference by public authority; to prevent the EU from becoming a (counter)propaganda machine silencing all forms of opposition against its narrative; to avoid imposing self-censorship on EU citizens by creating the fear that any form of criticism against the EU will be silenced and/or sanctioned; to ensure that the strategies against disinformation and propaganda are not used as a tool to prevent or stifle criticism being levelled against the EU;

2. Instructs its President to forward this recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Voorzitter,

kort geleden ben ik een regionaal ontwikkelingsproject gaan bezoeken in Bulgarije. Daar is met negen miljoen euro subsidie een middeleeuws fort omgebouwd tot een plastic kasteel. Het doel daarvan was om er een toeristische trekpleister van te maken. Maar goed, u begrijpt het al. Er komt geen hond. Ik kwam daar op zaterdagmiddag om drie uur en toen werd er met de hand een toegangskaartje uitgeschreven en ik had bezoekersnummer één.

De grootste klap kwam eigenlijk pas 's avonds. Toen had ik een gesprek met professor Gradev. Hij is hoogleraar cultuur en religie aan de universiteit van Sofia. Hij vertelde mij dat de 10e—eeuwse fundamenten van dat fort gesloopt zijn, om ze vervolgens vol te storten met beton, zodat de plastic elementen erop gezet konden worden.

Dat is een trieste, maar treffende metafoor. De EU subsidieert de sloop van nationale historische fundamenten, niet alleen in fysieke zin, maar ook in overdrachtelijke zin, in maatschappelijke zin, in sociologische zin. De enige randvoorwaarde die zij daarbij hanteert, is dat het heel veel geld moet kosten. En wie betaalt dat? De belastingbetaler.