President Petro Poroshenko spoke of an “historic moment”, which indicates that the possibility of Ukrainian EU-membership has not been abandoned.
PVV-member Vicky Maeijer and party leader Geert Wilders put questions in writing to Prime Minister Mark Rutte: “Tell the Dutch why you keep watching while democracy is being savaged in this way, and explain your addendum to the Treaty noting the outcome of the Dutch referendum in which 61 percent said no, and which Mr Tusk appears not to have read.”
The main question to the government was however: “Can you guarantee that the Netherlands will never, ever agree to Ukraine’s accession to the EU?”
Earlier Wilders had also asked the government: “Do you agree that this statement by EU President Tusk is a big middle finger to the Dutch vote in the Dutch referendum and the included addendum, which states that the Treaty does not mean EU membership?”
SP-member Sadet Karabulut attacked Rutte from the left about the NATO ambitions of Ukraine. Poroshenko said earlier this month that he expected his country to meet the terms of a possible membership of the Alliance by 2020. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg did not want to make any promises but did not express his opposition to the idea either. In addition, he revealed that Ukraine received 40 million euros from NATO for “digital defense”.
Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko told the press after meeting NATO chief Stoltenberg in Kiev on Monday, 10 July: “Today it has been emphasised that we should start a discussion about establishing a membership action plan [MAP] and our proposals … were accepted with understanding.” He said recent polls showed more than 60 percent of Ukrainians wanted to join the Western alliance.
“We have a clear-cut time table as to what we have to do by the year 2020 in order to meet the membership criteria,” he added.
Karabulut wanted clarification from Dutch Foreign Minister Bert Koenders (PvdA): “Do you share the view that military support to Ukraine can be perceived by the country as encouragement to continue the armed struggle in the east of the country and that it should be reconsidered?” And: “Do you share my concern that Ukraine’s inclusion in NATO can contribute to greater insecurity for the alliance, especially because of the conflict between that country and Russia?”
D66 also went on the attack on Wednesday. European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker this month changed his mind in Kiev, maintaining that a special anti-corruption court in Ukraine was not necessary and that setting up special rooms within the existing courts was enough.
EU officials flip-flopped on corruption and fumbled their political communique at a summit in Kiev on Thursday, 13 July. Juncker had said earlier corruption was “one of the big problems of this country … corruption is undermining all the efforts that this brave nation is undertaking”, but then changed his mind.
MEPs Maarten Groothuizen and Kees Verhoeven said they prefered an independent court. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has always been a supporter of an anti-corruption court, they told Koenders.
The D66s want “corruption cases to be tried by expert, independent judges who are free from pressure and whose security is guaranteed”. Corruption is rife in Ukraine and the government does nothing to stop it.
Juncker’s flip-flop even surprised his own press office, who emailed a statement on the same day which repeated that “setting up a high anti-corruption court” was “vital”.