With a focus on recent developments in energy security and ocean policy and it’s impact on climate change
The BSPC Standing Committee met in the European Parliament in Brussels to learn more about the current situation and the activities of their partner organisations, the CBSS and HELCOM. Representatives of the European Parliament and European Commission spoke about the current challenges in Europe, energy security, and ocean conservation.
Further preparations were made for the annual conference in Helsingør on 25-27 August and the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Youth Forum while considerations were given to a BSPC Standing Committee Study visit to investigate the security situation at the eastern Finnish boarder line as an urgent topic of interest.
More than 40 participants, representatives and delegations of the European Parliament, the European Commission, the Council of the Baltic Sea States, the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (HELCOM) and the BSPC members from the Åland Islands, the Baltic Assembly, the European Parliament, Denmark, Estonia, the German Bundestag, Finland, Hamburg, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Nordic Council, Norway, Poland, Schleswig-Holstein and Sweden participated in the meeting.
Introduction
BSPC President Henrik Møller welcomed the Standing Committee to the European Parliament in Brussels.
Opening Remarks by Mr Andreas Schwab, Chairman of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Northern Cooperation and for relations with Switzerland and Norway and to the EU-Iceland Joint Parliamentary Committee and the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee
Mr Schwab pointed out that Baltic Sea cooperation might never have been as influential as it was in the present, stressing the unity of the nations. Given the ongoing security issues in Europe, he approved of the Danish BSPC presidency having chosen Safety in the Baltic Sea Region as their main topic, along with energy security, defence, and climate change. The security of the region and Europe hinged on the outcome of the war Ukraine had been fighting for more than two years against Russian aggression.
BSPC President Møller underlined the importance of continuing the support for Ukraine in its defence of Western democracies for as long as it would take. He cherished the fact that Sweden was now approved to join NATO, which, in the words of Jens Stoltenberg, would make all of them stronger and safer. Lasting unity and solidarity – between countries but also governments and their people – were more important than ever. Under various aspects, 2024 was becoming the test year for democracies. One such testbed would be the upcoming European Parliament elections. This was important not least because issues such as climate change could only be resolved in an international and global context, with the European Parliament as a major player.
BSPC Vice-President Johannes Schraps voiced his hope that in the coming term, the European Parliament would play a stronger role in its membership of the BSPC, reinforcing its part in Baltic Sea cooperation.
Presentations
Current Challenges in Europe and the Future of Europe
Mr Martin Hojsik, Vice-President of the European Parliament
Mr Hojsik appreciated Mr Schraps’ call for a greater commitment to the BSPC, not just from the European Parliament delegation but all of them. Historically, the Baltic Sea had been an abode of cooperation but also of division. With the Russian aggression since the 2014 annexation of Crimea, a split had once again occurred, profoundly affecting the security situation in the region. He echoed the appreciation for Sweden about to join NATO. Europe had to be able to defend itself as well as support Ukraine in defending their territorial integrity and freedom. Indeed, 2024 would be a crucial year for democracy. For him, one of the gravest concerns was that Russia was not only fighting directly but also waging a hybrid war seeking to destabilise the democratic countries from within. The other priorities of the Danish BSPC presidency, energy security and climate change, were also major issues in the European Parliament. Renewable energies were vital for the continent’s security as well, after having been so reliant on Russian gas. He highlighted Latvia’s transition to being able to run on 100 % renewable energy, at least for a while. Mr Hojsik hoped for even greater commitment to Baltic Sea cooperation.
BSPC President Møller asked about the establishment of a European military. EP Vice-President Hojsik saw closer collaboration than ever before in security in the future as Europe was realizing the necessity to defend itself. The EU and NATO collaboration had to be reinforced. Joint purchasing of arms across countries would save money and ensure better coordination of the militaries. Mr Schraps thanked Mr Hojsik for his call for more European Parliament engagement and assured him that the BSPC delegations would also encourage EP candidates from their countries to be active in Baltic cooperation.
Energy Security on the Way to Climate Neutrality
Ms Paula Pinho, European Commission, GD Energy, the Director for Just Transition, Consumers, Energy Efficiency, and Innovation
Ms Pinho agreed with Mr Hojsik that the energy security and the clean transition were two sides of the same coin. Renewable energies replacing fossil fuels was the way forward to an autonomous Europe, although greater efficiency and energy saving were also vital. She pointed to the RePower EU plan to strengthen the continent’s security of supply by reducing the dependence on Russian gas, by diversifying supply sources, and by accelerating the energy transition to reach climate neutrality by 2050. Ms Pinho highlighted the effective bans on Russian gas imports by Baltic and other countries as part of the Baltic Sea region’s transition – ironically accelerated by Russia’s actions. Between the summer of 2022 and the end of 2023, gas consumption had been reduced by 18 % in the EU, exceeding the voluntary 15 % goal. That morning, the Energy Council had endorsed further reduction of gas demand. Diversification had also been exemplified by the Baltic Sea region through a range of sources including Norway or as LNG from the US but also shared usage of infrastructure across the region, e.g., flexible floating storage regasification units. The regulatory framework TEN-E had pushed forward a number of relevant infrastructure projects, such as the gas connection between Poland and Lithuania, further integrating the Baltic states and Finland into the European energy market. The Baltic Sea region benefited from competition and diversified supply sources.
At the same time, the importance of back-up supply lines had recently been highlighted. The Baltic electricity market had also been coupled with the Nordic market, another key step in the integration of all EU member states. This Baltic Synchronisation Project was still ongoing to fully integrate the Baltic states, aiming for early 2025. As for renewables, Ms Pinho pointed out that 2023 had been the first year that electricity had been produced more by renewable energy than fossil fuels. The potential of offshore renewable energy was particularly high in the Baltic Sea region. The decarbonisation of the energy market was proceeding well. However, the protection of critical infrastructure was of paramount importance, as evidenced by the damage to the Baltic interconnector or the disruption of the Estland tube. Legislation such as the Directive on the Resilience of Critical Entities from 2023 or the Directive on Measures for a High Common Level of Cyber-Security across the Union were key pieces of solidifying EU security.
President Møller pointed to the upcoming meeting of the BSPC Working Group on Energy Security, Self-sustainability, Resilience, and Connectivity two weeks later in Helsinki which would deepen a number of those concerns. In light of Ms Pinho’s comments about diversified sources and types of energy, Mr Staffan Eklöf raised the recently built nuclear reactor project in northern Finland which had stabilised the energy supply for Sweden as well. As such, he wondered about the Commission’s view on how nuclear power could be integrated in this transition. Ms Pinho replied that the Commission considered nuclear power part of the energy mix and the prerogative of member states to choose their own supplies, although the Commission was highly encouraging non-fossil energy sources. Prof Jānis Vucāns referenced the infrastructure security concerns, wondering about the financial tools that could protect this infrastructure. Ms Pinho noted that some stress tests were currently being run to determine opportunities for improved cyber protection. In that respect, additional funding was being discussed. Mr Johannes Schraps approved of Ms Pinho’s overview of what had already been achieved while he also appreciated the challenges still to be overcome. He asked about priorities in ensuring that all EU countries had sufficient numbers of connections. Ms Pinho said that there were two work streams here: One was the expansion of renewable energy as domestic energy sources. Yet gas could not be phased out quickly, and she highlighted the diversification of sources through new infrastructure projects over the past two years. The Commission continued to analyse where infrastructure could be reinforced or added. She underlined that they were already working on ensuring the energy supply for the next winter.
Mr Alfons Röblom from Åland noted the recent explosion of interest in offshore wind farms. He asked if the Commission could provide guidance to smaller states and communities, such as best practice examples or on investment. Ms Pinho noted the high-level group BEMEP as an example of a forum identifying and sharing best practices. The Commission also provided guidance on offshore energy facilities. Ms Anna Kassautzki pointed to a German tech fund for open source software development for infrastructure and cybersecurity. She asked if a European equivalent, crossing borders, was being developed. Ms Pinho said that the directives she mentioned before also addressed the software aspect of cybersecurity. They were also intended to promote training in the respective skills. Secretary General Bodo Bahr stressed that by far the major CO2 emitters in the world were China, the USA, and India. He wondered how the progress of the Baltic Sea region and Europe as a whole could influence these countries to curtail their emissions. Ms Pinho concurred since the countries in question represented more than 50 % of greenhouse gas emissions while the EU produced 9 %. One example of the EU’s influence was the global pledge by 130 countries at the latest COP to double energy efficiency by 2030 and tripling renewable energy capacity. This pledge had been initiated by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Decarbonisation was no longer just a European journey but a global one. President Møller added that Denmark had a minuscule share of global emissions, but the Danish solutions could impact the world, noting a green partnership with India.
Progress Report from the Council of the Baltic Sea States
Ambassador Helena Tuuri, Chair of the Committee of Senior Officials of the
Council of the Baltic Sea States, Ambassador for Baltic Sea Affairs,
Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Finland
Ms Tuuri listed the three cross-cutting themes of the Finnish CBSS presidency: overall societal security, crisis preparedness, and resilience. The CBSS was strictly divided in the political level and practical cooperation. The latter made up the major task of the organisation across several ministries. The Russian war of aggression had deeply changed and modernised the CBSS, renewing the working group level and concentrating the practical work on a safe and secure region – one of the fundamental priorities of the organisation. Ms Tuuri noted that member states had become more interested and invested in this work. A recent innovation was the youth forum which was also contributing to the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea region as well as cooperating with the BSPC in their own youth forum. A youth ministerial meeting – focused on the activation of young people in elections – would accompany the foreign ministers’ meeting. The latter, looking into resilience and such geopolitically influenced topics, was still being prepared by the Finnish delegation.
Mr Bodo Bahr noted the BSPC’s recommendation for the CBSS to return to head of governments’ meetings alternating with the foreign ministers’ meetings. He wondered about any progress in this regard. Ms Tuuri said there had been a few conversations but no concrete achievements. Mr Johannes Schraps was glad that democratic cooperation in the Baltic Sea region had been reinforced and was no longer seen as just a bridge to Russia. He cherished the CBSS secretariat’s work in youth participation. Mr Staffan Eklöf appreciated the practical side of the CBSS, such as working on solutions to the horrors of human trafficking. He wondered if more topics would be opened up in that approach. Ms Tuuri regretted that was not the case at this time.
Progress Report on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Oceans and the Current Main Activities of the EU Commission regarding the Ocean Policy with a Particular View to the Baltic Sea
Ms Veronica Manfredi, European Commission, GD Environment, the Director for Zero Pollution
Ms Manfredi remarked that the biodiversity crisis had not spared the Baltic Sea where pollution was still ever-present as was eutrophication. Together with pressure from shipping, vital socio-economic activities were affected, in particular the fishery sector. Here, she noted that even if all fishing were to stop at this moment, rebuilding the fish stocks would take several decades. Thus, a holistic approach beyond just fishing quotas was needed, also targeting aforementioned issues such as eutrophication. The Commissioner had organised two Our Baltic ministerial conferences, leading to significant developments. Overall, the implementation was advancing rather well. Efforts on improving marine biodiversity and reducing pollution had progressed far; eutrophication, though, needed more work. Commitments on a sustainable economy were still at an early stage. At the European level, implementation was going well, too, especially thanks to the Green Deal. She was proud of four achievements in particular: Between 2022 and 2023, EU-wide limits for marine litter, seabed loss, and other water noise had been enacted. In January 2024, new European rules supplementing the urban wastewater directive had been adopted, strengthening nutrient standards and treatment of nitrogen and phosphorus. At the regional level, in 2021, HELCOM had updated the Baltic Sea Action Plan with more than 200 measures aimed to achieve a good environmental status of the Baltic Sea. At the national level, all Baltic Sea member states had complemented the other measures with their own initiatives to reduce plastic pollution. Nonetheless, it was clear that more still had to be done. The focus in revamping efforts should be on eutrophication as this was suffocating the sea and marine life. Ms Manfredi highlighted efforts to save the harbour porpoise. Fishing impacts had to be reduced.
She also spoke on sea-dumped munitions, a favoured topic of the BSPC: Some 50,000 tonnes of conventional and chemical weapons were estimated to be on the bottom of the Baltic Sea, posing a danger to human and marine life as well as to economic development. Offshore wind farms, undersea cables and pipelines as well as their security increased the odds of encountering these munitions. The Commission had been working on a holistic approach since 2019, inventorying the extent of the munitions in the Baltic Sea as well as funding projects such as DAIMON I to develop appropriate, environmentally friendly tools and technologies to tackle this matter. Today, it was known that these munitions already heavily affected marine biology. At a 2023 meeting, further commitments had been agreed upon, strengthening all regional forums as well as comprehensive mapping and risk assessment. Priorities for coordinated action would be set by 2027. Meanwhile, relevant financial options for funding retrieval measures would be explored. The Commission had allocated 2 million euros for this purpose.
Ms Anna Kassautzki, BSPC Rapporteur on Sea-Dumped Munitions, appreciated the topic being on the Commission’s agenda. Rather than 50,000 tonnes, her information was that there were 400,000 tonnes of conventional munitions and 40,000 of chemical ordinance in the Baltic Sea. She underlined the BSPC’s goal of having these munitions removed within the coming twenty years, also in light of the Baltic Sea’s slow water exchange, worsening the impact on the local ecosystem. Moving on, she noted that the rules on state aid were hindrances to her state transforming their fishery fleet to a sustainable model. She wondered if changes might be implemented in the future. Ms Manfredi underlined the current EU call for developing the highly complex technology needed for munitions retrieval and disposal. Regarding the fishery question, she was not aware of any such plans, yet pointed to a financial tool of the EU that might be of help. Mr Alfons Röblom wondered about the Commission’s view on deep-sea mining as its effect on the ecosystem was not fully explored. Ms Manfredi answered that the permission process echoed that on land, i.e., that sufficient understanding of the risk had to be provided. In deep-sea mining, the Commission called for maximum caution. Mr Staffan Eklöf asked how the Commission decided which resources to allocate for which desired outcome as well as how conflicting goals were tackled, such as offshore wind farms being built on bio-intensive shallows. Ms Manfredi replied that the political priorities were set by the president of the Commission, to be validated by the European parliament and the EU heads of state. One such priority was the Green Deal. She noted that major environmental risk assessments were required before such placements were chosen so that – in an ideal world – no such permit should be granted and irreparable damage avoided. Mr Johannes Schraps applauded the fact that directors like Ms Manfredi were well-versed in the fields the BSPC had been working on and encouraged the Commission to launch more initiatives which would receive the BSPC’s support. He asked about the Commission’s current stance on CO2 storage. Ms Manfredi agreed the high importance of such marine storage which was likely to play a greater role than land-based restored nature. Secretary General Bahr noted that the member governments of the BSPC provided overviews on their implementation of the BSPC resolution’s demands. He suggested a similar statement, on topics such as sea-dumped ammunition or biodiversity, from the EU Commission. Prof Jānis Vucāns saw the problem of local fishing was often hampered by too little information, sometimes because of lacking cooperation across scientific institutions in various regions. He also asked about fish farms and marine laboratories to investigate the effects of wind farms. Ms Manfredi was glad that all the Commission’s work was based on scientific advice, noting that scientific communities were moving closer and closer together, especially in fishery. Here, she highlighted HELCOM. For offshore wind farms, the Commission was aiming for win-win situations for all sides which could also include connected fish farms and targeted fishing permits as well as tourism. “Being smart by design” was her headline for these activities.
HELCOM Update 2023, 2024 – and beyond
Mr Rüdiger Strempel, Executive Secretary of the Helsinki Commission
Mr Strempel noted that HELCOM was all about the Baltic Sea – a unique and vulnerable sea with a huge catchment area quadrupling the sea area itself. HELCOM had ten contracting parties, including Russia and the European Union. He underlined that HELCOM was science-based, referring to the expert groups feeding scientific information to the – currently eight – working groups, structured around the Secretariat and the meetings of the Heads of Delegations. Based on the Helsinki Convention, HELCOM issued recommendations to governments, which, though not legally binding, were generally implemented. Action plans and projects – in particular the Baltic Sea Action Plan at the heart of the organisation’s activities – addressed the bigger picture. Monitoring and assessments reviewed the progress made. The geopolitical changes since 2022 had necessitated a so-called strategic pause, postponing all official HELCOM meetings, with informal consultations of the other nine Contracting Partners (H9) taking their place. Due to the unanimity requirement, decisions taken by the H9 were communicated to Russia through the Secretariat by means of a written procedure. Russia’s willingness to cooperate on this basis had decreased over time.
He moved on to the third HELCOM holistic assessment of 2023, detailing the state of the Baltic Sea, providing decision-makers with the state of the environment during the period assessed, as well as information on the spatial variation, trends in development over time, the distribution of pressures, and the effects of enacted measures. Unfortunately, there had been scant overall progress in the review period from 2016 – 2021. However, regional measures were seen to have a beneficial effect on the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. Mr Strempel pointed to HELCOM’s central roadmap towards a healthy status of the Baltic Sea, the2021 Baltic Sea Action Plan (2021 BSAP), focusing on a healthy ecosystem, hazardous substances and litter, sustainable sea-based activities, and eutrophication. Overarching topics interacting with those focuses comprised climate change, financing, knowledge exchange, and monitoring, among others. The 2021 Baltic Sea Action Plan’s 199 actions each had individual target years for implementation, specific criteria to assess said implementation, and ownership had been assigned to certain HELCOM bodies. Mr Strempel highlighted the HELCOM Explorer on their website, allowing real-time tracking of progress in implementing the 2021 BSAP for any visitor. Other tools HELCOM had developed included the Climate Change Fact Sheet – detailing current scientific understanding, the Science Agenda, and a regional roadmap for maritime spatial planning.
As for the present activities, the Baltic Sea Action Plan would continue to be implemented. In 2023, HELCOM had restructured its working groups and completed its third holistic assessment. That assessment had also shown that hazardous substances appeared to be equally significant as eutrophication as a major problem in the Baltic Sea, which HELCOM would address with greater vigour. A few days before, the annual Baltic Stakeholder Conference had been held in Helsinki, dedicated to Protect Baltic, a biodiversity-related project and the biggest projtc HELCOM had ever engaged in. In April, the Informal Consultation Meeting of the Helsinki Commission would be held in Riga, followed back to back by the Ministerial Meeting on the Baltic Sea Marine Environment. In conjunction with that, HELCOM would celebrate its 50th anniversary, also in Riga. Mr Strempel stressed HELCOM’s cooperation with partner organisations, such as the BSPC, and a number of regional and global frameworks, including the EU and the CBSS.
He mentioned that HELCOM was currently chaired by Latvia, which would hand over to Lithuania in July 2024. Latvia’s priorities were maintaining HELCOM as an effective and well-functioning organisation, the implementation of the Baltic Sea Action Plan as well as strengthening the role of regional cooperation. The priorities of Lithuania were still being defined and would likely be announced at the upcoming ministerial meeting in April 2024. In the future, the work on the Baltic Sea Action Plan with its goal of 2030 would continue while the fourth holistic assessment was being prepared.
Mr Enn Eesmaa asked if HELCOM had considered the possible effects of the Gulf Stream changing or ceasing to exist. Mr Strempel pointed to HELCOM’s Climate Change Fact Sheet which also scientifically investigated future impacts, although no changes to the Gulf Stream were included here. Ms Anna Kassautzki regretted that pressing security concerns had reduced the focus on the issue of sea-dumped ammunitions, wondering if that could be pushed to the fore at the meeting with environmental ministers in the autumn. Mr Strempel still saw sea-dumped ammunition as a firm part of the agenda, having gained momentum in the past couple of years. It was also part of the Baltic Sea Action Plan. While it might not be central to the public discussion, the munitions were still at the forefront of HELCOM’s efforts. Mr Mikko Polvinen inquired about the contacts to Russia. Mr Strempel considered the effect of the Russian war of aggression on HELCOM to be more institutional rather than environmental. He referred back to the strategic pause on the political level taken by the organisation. Some technical and scientific data, though, had been provided by Russia, although he could not foretell if or for how long this would continue. It was impossible to tell if Russia was implementing the Baltic Sea Action Plan.
Future Accommodation of the BSPC Secretariat and Related Questions
The BSPC had discussed finding a new accommodation for the BSPC Secretariat for a long time, mulling over a number of options with various pros and cons. Ms Kristina Herbst, President of the Parliament of Schleswig-Holstein, submitted the offer to take on these tasks. From the 2025 budget on, the parliament could take over the budgetary functions from the state parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern as well as serve as an employer for the Secretary General and an assistant. Ms Herbst deepened two alternatives. Schleswig-Holstein was offering to provide these services for five years, with an option to negotiate an extension if needed.
President Møller remarked that the previously explored options had proven more complicated than expected.
Prof Jānis Vucāns maintained that at some point in the future, the BSPC would have to become an officially registered international organisation with a headquarters of their own.
BSPC President Henrik Møller, Mr Alfons Röblom, Ms Kristina Herbst, Prof Jānis Vucāns, Mr Johannes Schraps, Ms Carola Veit, Mr Staffan Eklöf and Mr Bodo Bahr further considered this matter.
BSPC President Møller noted that this discussion would be resumed at the upcoming meeting on the Faroe islands, envisioning a decision to be taken in Helsingør in August.
Possible Joint Meetings of the BSPC with other parliamentary assemblies
President Møller reviewed the situation and development since the Standing Committee meeting in Maribo. He noted the letter from the BSPC member organisation Baltic Assembly stating their position regarding the current situation unequivocally.
Mr Johannes Schraps, Mr Staffan Eklöf, Mr Andrius Kupčinskas, Ms Carola Veit
pointed out their current view on the situation.
The meeting underlined it’s decision from November not to pursue joint meetings with other parliamentary organisations if an apparent and sufficient distancing from the aggressor is not fulfilled.
President Møller said that this discussion would be continued at the next meeting on the Faroe Islands.
Various Matters
President Møller remarked that the first meeting in Riga of the Working Group on Energy Security, Self-sustainability, Resilience, and Connectivity (ESSRC) had been quite interesting and voiced his hope for the next meeting in Helsinki to be equally fruitful.
Ms Anna Kassautzki, Rapporteur on Sea-Dumped Munitions, was pleased that the European Commission was still focused on this topic since the national discussion in Germany had been dominated by questions of the Russian war against Ukraine. She called on her colleagues to expedite the governmental response to this topic. Furthermore, she said that she would continue her cooperation with the CBSS and HELCOM to remove the ammunition from the Baltic Sea in the next 19 years.
Mr Alfons Röblom, the new head of the Åland delegation, was appointed Vice-President of the BSPC, as a precursor to serving as President of the BSPC during the Åland BSPC Presidency 2024 – 2025.
The Standing Committee approved the budget report for the preceding year and the budget for 2024.
Mr Mikko Polvinen suggested an informal meeting of the Standing Committee in the near future in his home country. He noted that Finland had the longest land border with Russia, citing the rise of hybrid attacks in recent times, including the push of migrants into democratic countries. As such, he asked for the Standing Committee to more deeply investigate the security situation of the Baltic Sea region. Part of that was to learn from the Baltic states how they had handled similar events.
Further photos are available under the following link.: https://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/en/photoset/p_EP-165505A