Check against delivery!   

You have heard me quite a lot of times during those days. You heard my interventions in the opening and closing sessions of the [EU Indo-Pacific Ministerial] Forum, so I shall be brief. 

But I have to thank you. I have to thank the Swedish Presidency, and you, in particular, Minister [for Foreign Affairs of Sweden, Tobias Billström] and everybody. I know that tens of people, maybe hundreds of people, have been mobilised – from the interpreters to the waiters, to everybody who has been making this big event possible. I know from experience that it is quite difficult, and you have been very successful in the organisation of this Forum. 

You brought together 58 participants from the European Union and from the Indo-Pacific region, coming from very far away. This is a moment in which the Forum is becoming something that is here to stay. 

This is the second edition [of the Forum]. I think it has been more open to the dialogue. I remember last year’s Forum. Last year’s Forum took place just on the eve of the start of the war in Ukraine. We were in Paris and the following day, the war started. 

Now, one year [on], the aggression continues. I think it has created a different momentum, even for our relations with the Indo-Pacific countries and regional organisations/region. Our relations reflect this new reality. Maybe the feeling that the world needs more cooperation to face this challenging situation. 

Before launching the Forum, by the way, our Indo-Pacific partners were receptive with Minister [for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Dmytro] Kuleba, who had the opportunity to address them and convey concrete messages on the situation in Ukraine. From our Indo-Pacific partners, I think that we heard a clear message of solidarity and a strong commitment to the United Nations Charter. 

The Indo-Pacific region and the European Union are neighbours. You would say: “Neighbours? No, they are very far away”. Well, economically, we are neighbours. We are so interlinked that economically – certainly – we are neighbours.  And not only economically, but also from the geopolitical point of view and from the security point of view, we are very close. 

Cooperation between us and the Indo-Pacific must be a two-way relationship. And the Foreign Minister of Indonesia [Retno Marsudi], when she claimed that they want the Pacific to remain pacific. Remember that the name “Pacific” was given to the Pacific [Ocean] by the Spaniards who were surprised by how calm the waters were, and they called that Pacifico (Pacific). Our neighbours from the Pacific want the Pacific [region] to remain a space of peace.  

After the Second World War, it was the space of war, proxy wars – Korea, Vietnam. Now, they want to keep the waters calm, as pacific as they were when, for the first time, the Europeans went through these waters.  

Our friend Retno [Marsudi] from Indonesia used a key word: “collaboration”. I want to add another one: connectivity. We have to increase our connectivity. We have to get closer to each other, to listen more and better to each other. We need [to discuss] concrete issues with concrete actions.  

Allow me to remind you we have already done quite a lot. 

We have signed Partnership and Cooperation Agreements (PCA) with Malaysia and Thailand.  

We have opened new trade and investment opportunities, concluding the Free Trade Agreement with New Zealand, and negotiating new ones with Australia, India, Thailand, Indonesia, and Kenya. 

We have established digital partnerships with Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Singapore. By the way, today, many addressed the ‘digital divide’ and the challenges that represents – they point to the fact of being or not being digitalised means a new divide between people, new sources of inequality.  

The State Minister of the United Arab Emirates [Noura Al Kaabi] stressed the importance of fighting against digital divide, and that is why these digital partnerships are so important.  

Also, on security and defence, we are starting to build concrete partnerships with many of the countries in the region - starting with Japan and [Republic of] Korea - because the European Union is also a security provider.  

We have to continue advancing on many fields. We have signed the [EU-ASEAN] Comprehensive Air Transport Agreement (CATA), which is an important part of our connectivity purposes. 

Operation Atalanta has extended its tasks, from the coast of Somalia, down to the African coast, increasing their cooperation with partners in the region. 

So, we did a lot in this last year, and in the year that starts today, we will do more. We have 20 priority projects of our Global Gateway [Strategy] that will provide strategic investment in infrastructure in the region. 

These initiatives will be key to support our Indo-Pacific partners to face the existential threats posed by climate change, for example. 

So, let’s use this momentum because certainly, I felt that here in Stockholm, there was a certain momentum. Maybe because the world is facing more challenges and the war is something that scares all of us. All of us, want peace.  

And this has been a remarkable meeting. Thank you once again. Let’s continue working with this part of the world that will be the scenario of the history in the 21^st century. 

Thank you. 

Q&A 

 Q. The topic of today is the EU-Indo-Pacific relationship and cooperation, and we have so many representatives from the countries here, yet the main topic remains Ukraine. How do you comment on that? And the second question would be: what kind of concrete results have been achieved regarding China’s enhanced position in the Indo-Pacific, which is a real concern for the countries there? 

Well, no. Ukraine is an important issue, but I would not say that this Forum has been devoted to Ukraine. No, not at all. Minister [for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Dmytro] Kuleba was invited. He addressed the participants of the Forum, but I do not agree with you. We have talked about Ukraine, but marginally. We have been talking about [EU-]Indo-Pacific relations. Certainly, for us, Ukraine is an existential problem, and everything is related to Ukraine. But today, I am sorry to say, we have not been talking only about Ukraine. In Spanish, they would say: “Niego la mayor”. Je refuse l’à priori. 

We have not talked about China a lot either. Ukraine and China, certainly, were the topics of our Gymnich [Informal meeting of EU Foreign Affairs Ministers that took place] yesterday. Maybe, you make a reference to our meeting [of] yesterday, because yesterday, yes, we talked about China and Ukraine. But today, no. Certainly, you talk about the Indo-Pacific, China is there. But I do not see that we have been discussing a lot about China – at least, not in the roundtables. Maybe you are making a reference to our [Informal meeting] of EU Foreign Affairs Ministers [that took place] yesterday.  

Q. Yesterday, you were talking about EU-China relations [and] you emphasised differences in values, with a focus on “individual and collective human rights”. When making economic and political ties with countries in the Indo-Pacific, will human rights be an important aspect to emphasise even there? And if so, how is the European Union planning to do so?

Yes, certainly. Human rights are an issue at any moment for the European Union. It is part of our DNA and every time we have a relationship with third countries, we discuss human rights. I mentioned clearly that one of the problems of the region is the fact that there are authoritarian regimes. Some of them were not here, in particular, that pose a problem for the security. You understand very well which ones I am referring to. And yes, human rights are a big issue in the region, and we discussed about it, and it is part of our relationship. 

Q. The representative from the Pacific Islands, who moderated the session on Security, described it as “sobering”. When we had the opportunity to ask some questions to Ministers on their arrival, we did pick up on some really big differences on how they viewed the situation pertaining to Ukraine. For example, you mentioned that there was alignment on the United Nations Charter but some of the Ministers were saying that the fighting should stop immediately rather than the broad European view that [President of Ukraine, Volodymyr] Zelenskyy’s Peace Plan is really the only solution for this. I just want to get the tick from the High Representative about perhaps the differences of opinion on thorny geopolitical issues between your Indo-Pacific partners, and whether you have had any success in maybe convincing them of what the European Union’s point of view is when it comes to creating peace in Ukraine. 

The purpose was not to convince them. We are not on a Crusade. The purpose was for them to have the opportunity to listen to the representative of a country [Dmytro Kuleba] who is travelling around the world – he was coming from Latin America attending another meeting – in order to get first-hand information of the causes and the consequences of the war. But we – particularly – do not want to convince anyone. We just want to share an analysis of the causes and consequences of the war. And I know perfectly – I knew before coming here – that several members of the Indo-Pacific region are in a position which is not the European position with respect to the war – clearly not. And I had the opportunity to exchange, for example, with my friend the Indian [Foreign Affairs] Minister [Subrahmanyam Jaishankar] about the prospects. He had met recently with Minister [for Foreign Affairs of Russia, Sergueï] Lavrov. This gathering is also an opportunity for us to share what we know about what is going on, and happily, I think that everybody shares the same concern - and the concern is that the war will continue. This is a serious concern that we share. Everybody wants the war to stop – yes, but it depends how. 

Q. How can you discuss the Indo-Pacific without China? And the importance of an inclusive dialogue together – political dialogue – and move forward? 

We can perfectly discuss about Indo-Pacific without China. Which is the problem? In fact, we have been discussing about the Indo-Pacific. Each moment has its opportunity. There are places and moments to discuss with China. 

Q. Where does China fit into this? Because obviously, it is still the elephant in the room and it is an important issue for all of these countries, and the EU Strategy says it is a partner, and economic competitor and a systemic rival. So, where does China fit in this discussion? Is this about building Europe as a stronger alternative to China in the region?  

No, we do not have this ambition. It would be completely out of question being an alternative to China.  

The Indo-Pacific is a broad region that goes from the coast of Africa to the coast of the United States with [thousands] of islands in the middle. 58 countries, we have been gathering together. I think that we can discuss a lot of things without having China [present]. It does not mean that we do not count on China. It is impossible not to count on China but there are places in which we can discuss our common interests without having to have China among us. It does not mean that we neglect China, it does not mean that we want to substitute China, it does not mean anything about China. But there are moments in which the Indo-Pacific region - which exists - and the European Union – which also exists -, we have links, we have complementarities, we have common endeavours, we have common projects, we work together to discuss about it. I do not see where the problem is. 

There is nothing against China. The fact that China was not here does not mean we have anything against China. 

Thank you. 

Link to the video (starting from 4:03): https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/video/I-240709