UEF - Union of European Federalists

Brussels, 15 January 2026

Dear Member of the European Parliament,

I am writing to you to emphasize the urgency and strategic importance of the recent statements issued by the Union of European Federalists (UEF) on the evolving crises in Venezuela and Greenland, and to respectfully request that the key principles and recommendations they contain be reflected in the resolutions you will consider during the European Parliament’s January 2026 plenary session. The complete texts of both statements are attached to this letter for your reference.
Recent events in Venezuela must be understood not just through the lens of the Maduro regime’s authoritarian and repressive nature, which we condemn unconditionally and unambiguously, but as a direct challenge to the principles on which Europe’s security and international position depend. The unilateral use of force by the United States, culminating in the forcible removal of Venezuela’s president, constitutes a serious violation of international law and the UN Charter, and sets a deeply troubling precedent: that a great power may claim the right to intervene militarily wherever it sees fit, outside any multilateral framework or legal constraint.

Such behaviour reflects a worldview in which power replaces law, sovereignty becomes conditional, and international norms are selectively applied. For Europe, this is not a distant or abstract issue. Allowing the logic of unilateral entitlement to go unchallenged undermines the rules-based international order that protects smaller states, erodes Europe’s own strategic autonomy, and weakens the credibility of the Union as a defender of multilateralism, sovereignty and international law. Europe’s hesitant and fragmented response risks reinforcing the perception that it is willing to tolerate breaches of fundamental principles when committed by powerful nations — a stance that ultimately diminishes both its security and its moral authority in the Global South.
This same logic of power politics and strategic entitlement is now manifest in relation to Greenland, an integral part of the Kingdom of Denmark and home to European citizens. Statements and actions that question Greenland’s sovereignty or treat it as a negotiable strategic asset represent a direct challenge to European territorial integrity and security. Strategic ambiguity in the face of such pressures does not preserve stability; it weakens deterrence and invites further coercion. For the European Union, Greenland is a test of political maturity and credibility: either Europe demonstrates that it is capable of defending its territory and citizens, or it accepts a gradual erosion of its sovereignty at the margins.

Against this background, I respectfully call on the European Parliament to demonstrate clarity, firmness and leadership in its January resolutions, instead of fear and delusion. In particular, the Parliament should reject any attempt to normalise a world in which President Trump — or any external leader — behaves as an unchecked “emperor of the West”, free to override international law and the sovereignty of states. It should also openly challenge the current strategy of appeasement displayed by the Council and the Commission, which risks emboldening further violations of international norms and the vassalisation of Europe.
Instead, the European Parliament should affirm that threats to Greenland engage Europe’s collective responsibility and require concrete action, including support for a credible European military presence or mission, at Denmark’s request, as a deterrent and a signal of resolve. More broadly, the Parliament should use this moment to call for the activation of the Union’s existing treaty provisions on defence and political integration, advancing decisively toward a genuine European Defence Union and a federal political union capable of acting autonomously when Europe’s security, values and sovereignty are at stake.

The credibility of the European Union as a global actor depends not on declarations alone, but on its willingness to uphold the principles it proclaims, regardless of who violates them, and to stand firm. Incorporating the substance of the attached UEF statements into the January plenary resolutions would send a clear message that Europe is prepared to defend the rules-based international order — and itself.
Yours sincerely,

Domènec Ruiz Devesa
Former Member of the European Parliament S&D
President of the Union of European Federalists

The Union of European Federalists (UEF) deplores US statements questioning the status of Greenland and the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark. These statements have created a situation of strategic ambiguity that directly affects the security of Europe and the credibility of the European Union as a political and security actor.

Greenland is not a marginal or remote issue. It is an integral part of the territory of a Member State of the EU and Greenlanders are EU Citizens. Any attempt to alter its status through pressure, coercion or force would constitute an aggression against a Member State and against the EU constitutional order itself.

1. A European responsibility

The UEF recalls that the security of any part of a Member State is a common European responsibility. Europe cannot accept grey zones in matters of sovereignty. Strategic ambiguity weakens deterrence and invites coercion. Clarity, unity and political resolve are therefore indispensable.

The UEF calls for the establishment, at the request of Denmark, of a limited and multinational European deterrent presence in Greenland. Such a presence would not be directed against any ally, nor would it imply the militarisation of the Arctic. Its purpose would be purely to increase deterrence, to internationalise the security of Greenland, to increase the political cost of any hostile action, and to demonstrate Europe’s readiness to defend its Member States in practice. This would also be the occasion for a military exercise of the European Union Rapid Deployment Capacity in Greenland, which has conducted 3 exercises in continental Europe and went operational last year.

2. Making mutual assistance credible

The UEF stresses the importance of Article 42.7 of the Treaty on European Union. This clause creates a binding obligation of aid and assistance between Member States in the event of armed aggression.

The UEF suggests to Denmark to make clear, in advance, that any armed aggression against Greenland would lead it to request the activation of Article 42.7 TEU. Such advance notification would strengthen deterrence by removing uncertainty and by affirming that an attack on Greenland would automatically trigger a European response.

3. Reintegrating Greenland into the European legal order

Security measures alone may not be sufficient. The long-term protection of Greenland requires a stronger anchoring within the EU legal and political framework.

The UEF supports the opening of a political process allowing Greenland, if it so decides democratically, to seek a change of status and to become a Region Outermost of the European Union. This would entail full inclusion in the Union’s legal order, with the adaptations foreseen by the Treaties.

Such a process would require the consent of the people of Greenland and a revision of the Treaties. It would nevertheless send a clear message: Greenland is fully part of Europe’s political community and of its constitutional space.

4. Denmark at the core of Europe

Denmark has already taken an important step by abolishing its defence opt-out. Two issues remain. The UEF calls on Denmark to commit to joining the euro and to renounce its remaining opt-out in Justice and Home Affairs. Full participation in these areas would strengthen Denmark’s role at the core of European decision-making and enhance collective security and coherence. These steps should not be seen as concessions nor conditions for EU solidarity, but as strategic investments in EU’s unity and resilience.

5. A decisive European Council

The UEF calls on the President of the European Council to convene an extraordinary summit dedicated to the situation in Greenland and to European defence.

This European Council should:

express full political backing for Denmark,
affirm readiness to provide mutual assistance under Article 42.7 TEU, if requested.
and launch concrete steps towards the implementation of Article 42.2 TEU, with a view to building a genuine common European defence, to be accompanied by political federalisation through the reform procedure of article 48 TEU.

Conclusion

The situation surrounding Greenland is a test of EU’s maturity as a political union. A EU deterrent presence, a credible commitment to mutual assistance, the reintegration of Greenland into the EU legal order, Denmark’s full participation in the Union, and renewed momentum towards common defence and political unification together form a coherent and necessary response.

The UEF calls on European institutions and Member States to act accordingly. European Union must protect its Member States, its territory and its constitutional order—without ambiguity and without delay.

Brussels, 7 January 2025

Domènec Ruiz Devesa, President of the UEF and MEP 2019-2024

Mathilde Baudouin, Secretary General of UEF

The Union of European Federalists condemns the aggression against Venezuela and the unprecedented abduction of its president on 3 January 2026, carried out by the United States administration under President Donald Trump. Notwithstanding the authoritarian and illegitimate nature of Nicolás Maduro’s regime, this act constitutes a grave violation of international law and of the rules-based multilateral order.

The US has clearly violated the United Nations Charter, which states in Article 2 that “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” The UN Charter proposes different mechanisms to prevent conflicts or even mandate member states to use force to maintain or restore international peace and security under Chapter VII. The US administration chose not to even try to use the possibilities offered by the international organisation it has founded in 1945 in San Francisco. The Trump government is showing its complete disdain for a global regulation of conflicts and wars, where peoples are always the victims of the will of a few.

As such, the act should have been unequivocally condemned by the European Union and its Member States. This has not occurred so far, showing the weakness that arises from the division of Europeans, and the impotence that comes from acting on the international stage based on one's own national point of view. Except for Spain, European leaders have largely remained silent. This silence is not accidental. It reflects, first, a misplaced conflation between legitimate criticism of the Maduro regime and the principles of international law; and second, more seriously, a reluctance to confront President Trump.

Beyond the Venezuelan case itself—which the U.S. administration appears intent on managing unilaterally as a colonial power, without even engaging the democratic opposition, and seemingly with the primary objective of securing control over oil resources—the global consequences of this action are profound. It represents another step in Washington’s imperialist drift already visible in explicit territorial ambitions regarding Canada, Panama, and Greenland, and in the normalization of force as a tool for settling international disputes, following previous military actions in Iran and Nigeria. Trump has already hinted at similar actions toward Cuba and Colombia.

Such behaviour consolidates the strategy of partitioning the world among big autocratic imperial powers. It also legitimises wars of aggression already underway, notably Russia’s, and encourages others that may be contemplated, including a potential Chinese move against Taiwan, and brings the world closer to political chaos and a new devastating world war.

As the first anniversary of President Trump’s return to office approaches, Europe must urgently draw several lessons:

First, President Trump must be taken seriously—always. This applies equally to his public statements and to official documents such as the U.S. National Security Strategy of December 2025. His conception of power, rooted in a logic reminiscent of Carl Schmitt, recognises no moral or legal limits. He acts from a position of dominance, fully aware that he wields the largest “stick”, and he uses it systematically—whether through military threats or economic coercion—as the starting point of any negotiation, with the aim of extracting maximum concessions and submission. This approach has already been applied successfully against the European Union in the field of trade relations. Any pretence that his actions are driven by democratic principles is illusory.
Second, weakness in the face of abuse only incentivises further abuse. Appeasement does not work—neither in human relations nor in international politics. It did not work with Hitler, and it will not work with Putin or with Trump. The European Union must make itself respected, reaffirm its commitment to a rules-based international order, and refuse to accept faits accomplis imposed by force. This requires the forging of new alliances to organise the resistance, including with Mercosur, now more relevant than ever, the African Union, ASEAN, Japan, Canada, Australia, and so on; and the urgent launch of a process of federal-type political unification, developed in parallel with the establishment of a European defence capacity independent of the United States.

This course of action is fully in line with the proposals advanced by the renewed Action Committee for the United States of Europe, bringing together figures such as Enrico Letta, Danuta Huebner, Josep Borrell, Isabelle Durant, Guy Verhofstadt, Domènec Ruiz Devesa, Gabriele Bischoff, Pascal Lamy, Daniel Cohn Bendit, and many others. It must be pursued by those Member States willing to do so. Those European leaders who openly sympathise with Putin or Trump should remain outside this process.

Third, President Trump’s ambition to establish political, economic, technological, and cultural hegemony explicitly encompasses the so-called “Western Hemisphere”, in line with a revived Monroe Doctrine. This includes not only the American continent, but also Greenland—part of the European Union through Denmark—as well as much of Europe, Africa, the Middle East and parts of the Pacific. Trump appears to recognise only two material limits to his ambitions: Putin’s Russia and Xi Jinping’s China, both large nuclear powers, each accorded de facto freedom of action within their respective “spheres of influence”, provided they do not interfere with his own—which would be the largest of the three.

The EU member states must choose between European independence through the European Union, or becoming fully-fledged vassals of the United States, as they already partially are through NATO dependency. In such a scenario, President Trump would effectively become the dictator of the West—able to impose his will, or even his whims, across half the world, from San Francisco to Sydney, without any meaningful counterbalance.

The Union of European Federalists therefore calls on European leaders, parliaments, and citizens to recognise the gravity of the moment and to act accordingly. In the face of imperialism, it must urgently put an end to its strategic dependencies and declare its independence. The question should no longer be whether Europe should react, but when. What else must happen before European elites understand the danger we are facing? European citizens are overwhelmingly in favor of a European army and diplomacy, and that can only be created by uniting into a federation which will save our democratic way of life, peace and freedom, while at the same time respecting the autonomy of its member states.

As Europeans, we know perhaps more than others the cost of totalitarian adventures. Our continent has been ravaged several times at the cost of annihilating entire generations. We had learned the lessons of the past by understanding that autocrats who push for war do so for their own benefit, and not for that of the people they use to carry out their project of power and destruction. It is therefore our historical duty as European peoples to finally unite into a European federation, to carry this flickering light and responsibility so that the world does not return to the shadows of the apocalypse.

Brussels, 6 January 2026

Domènec Ruiz Devesa, President of the UEF and MEP 2019-2024

Mathilde Baudouin, Secretary General of the UEF

The Union of European Federalists presents a new short video reel from the series Federal Sketches, produced in collaboration with Czech comedian Dominik Dabrowski.

This first episode, titled “Americans lecturing Europeans on freedom”, uses political satire to address a recurring narrative in transatlantic debates: the idea that deeper European integration would inevitably lead to a loss of freedom.

Through a fictional dialogue between an American and a European, the reel humorously exposes the contradictions and double standards often present in such arguments. While Europe is portrayed as “too bureaucratic” or “potentially authoritarian,” real-world examples from the United States reveal that restrictions on freedom, censorship, and repression are not exclusive to any political system — nor prevented by constitutional slogans alone.

Behind the comedy lies a serious political message:
the debate on European federalism is not about limiting freedoms, but about strengthening Europe’s capacity to act democratically, collectively, and effectively in a complex geopolitical environment.

The Federal Sketches series aims to make complex political issues more accessible through humour, reversing perspectives and challenging clichés surrounding the European Union, sovereignty, and democracy.

📺 Watch the reel on UEF Instagram Page channels and follow the series for upcoming episodes.

Watch the new video produced by EU Made Simple (EUMS) with sponsorship of the UEF, about the steps towards a Federal Europe.

2025 has been a strong year for European federalism. From EU Parliament votes on deeper integration to the EU borrowing €90 billion together for Ukraine, the Union is taking steps that would have been unthinkable not long ago.

To understand why this matters, this video looks back at how the United States moved from a loose confederation to a true federation in the 1780s.

The lesson is simple: shared debt creates shared power, and with it, pressure for real fiscal authority at the centre. Slowly but surely, the EU may be sleepwalking toward a stronger, more federal Europe.

Germany’s postwar miracle didn’t begin with prosperity—it began with resolve.

At 73, Konrad Adenauer stepped into a country shattered by dictatorship, occupation, and moral collapse. Yet from this devastation, he rebuilt not only a democratic Germany but the entire political architecture of the West. This is the untold story of the Chancellor who anchored Germany firmly in NATO and the emerging European Community, forging the foundations of a peaceful, stable, and prosperous Europe. Through discipline, diplomacy, and an unshakeable belief in the rule of law, Adenauer transformed a defeated nation into a trusted partner—and helped define the West as we know it. Discover how one statesman’s strategic choices rewove Germany into the fabric of Europe, ensured its place in the Western alliance, and shaped the institutions that still guarantee European security today.

This is Episode 3 in our Founding Mothers & Fathers of Europe series from EU Made Simple.

Watch here the other two episodes LINK

This Declaration by the Action Committee for the United States of Europe, open to signatures, has been published by the following Newspaper: La Repubblica (Italy), El Pais (Spain), Le Soir (Belgium) , Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland), Le Monde (France)

If you wish to support, you can do here: SIGNATURE LINK

The European Union is facing unprecedented challenges at a time in which the UN-based multilateral order is under attack. The strategy of appeasement towards Donald Trump — from the NATO Summit to deregulation of digital, artificial intelligence, and environmental rules, including the Turnberry tariff humiliation — is not working. Concessions and accommodation have neither reduced Trump´s unpredictability and hostility. On the contrary, they have deepened Europe’s strategic vulnerability, have produced an unacceptable capitulation plan for Ukraine, and a political declaration of war on the EU in the form of US national security strategy, in which he calls for a return to a Europe of nations and announces in consequence an alliance with the continent´s national-populistic political forces.

Europe must therefore draw the necessary conclusions: its security, prosperity and democracy can no longer depend on the changing will of the United States. Strategic autonomy is no longer an option but a necessity. The European Union must be able to act independently, assume full responsibility for its own defence, and pursue its interests and values on the global stage with sovereignty and credibility.

A more productive and competitive Europe is a precondition of geopolitical power and social welfare. Thus, we must ensure by 2028 full implementation of the Letta and Draghi reports on the completion of the single market, European competitiveness. Furthermore, we need a multi-annual budget that supports further investments, public and private, in key and innovative industries. Thus, we call on the Commission to table a new, beefed-up and more ambitious Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) proposal able to finance European public goods, including new priorities in defense and research, while preserving the social and environmental dimensions, cohesion and agriculture, in respect of parliamentary control and the role of European regions and cities, and financed with real EU own resources.

But regaining competitiveness and modernizing the budget is not sufficient to build a geopolitical Europe. Just like in 1950, we must concentrate on a critical point, which is the establishment of a European Common Defense backed up by a stronger political union. Only a more federal Europe can cope with these challenges, ensuring the respect of our fundamental values and rights, unless we are ready to accept Trump as the world political authority, in ambiguous partnership with Putin and Xi Jinping. Recognizing the security threat that the EU is facing and Trump’s open hostility, confirmed by the National Security Strategy, we call on the Member states in the European Council to establish a European Common Defence, as foreseen in article 42 of the Treaty on the European Union, which can also be done through a new Permanent Structured Cooperation by the willing Member States in case of lack of unanimity. This will constitute a European Defence System able to coordinate a national armed forces in the event of an aggression to any Member State. This requires an EU a Command-and-Control Centre.

More generally, EU institutions and leaders must fully exploit the Lisbon Treaty, through a federalist interpretation of it in all domains, as it was done with the response to the Coronavirus pandemic, also following Draghi´s call for a “pragmatic federalism”. The EU would not have been a trade powerhouse with this policy subjected to unanimity. We need to overcome the vetocracy in foreign policy, defence, and finances. A stronger EU budget benefitting certain Member States could be made conditional on their support to the activation of the passarelles to move from unanimity to majority voting. In parallel, the European Council must coherently follow-up on the Parliament´s proposal to reform the Treaties to abolish unanimity in the EU decision-making system – budget and fiscal, foreign, security and defence policies, and enlargement should all fall within the ordinary legislative procedure – including on future Treaty amendments.

We consider that the European Parliament can play a fundamental role in the implementation of the needed institutional reforms, also in view of the enlargement. First, by conditioning its support for the next annual budgets and MFF to the European Council´s acting on the above-mentioned requests. Second, by promoting an Interparliamentary Assembly (Assises) to advocate for the full implementation of those objectives, along with an ad-hoc European Citizens’ Assembly to engage the people and the European public sphere at large.

To this end, we support the creation of a renewed cross-partisan and inter-institutional pro-European coalition encompassing the most committed Member States in the European Council, the pro-European majority in the European and National Parliaments, the European Commission, and regional and local institutions, over and above the particular inertias of each institution, and the pro-European organised civil society. We call on them all to mobilize locally, nationally, and transnationally to support these requests for a more sovereign and democratic Union.

This text is based on the declaration adopted by the relaunched Action Committee for the United States of Europe, 18 October 2025, Jean Monnet House, Houjarray/ Bazoches-sur-Guyonne, France

Guy Verhofstadt, President of the European Movement International, former Prime Minister of Belgium, former Member of the European Parliament (Belgium)
Domènec Ruiz Devesa, President of the Union of European Federalists, former Member of the European Parliament (Spain)
Josep Borrell Fontelles, former High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and former President of the European Parliament (Spain)
Danuta Hübner, economist, former European Commissioner for Regional Policy, former Member of the European Parliament (Poland)
Enrico Letta, President of the Jacques Delors Institute, former Prime Minister (Italy)
Hans-Gert Pöttering, former President of the European Parliament (Germany)
Javier Cercas, writer (Spain)
Daniel Cohn-Bendit, writer, former Member of the European Parliament (France and Germany)
Robert Menasse, writer (Austria)
Dominique Méda, sociologue and philosopher (France)
Jacques Attali, writer, former President of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Special Adviser to President Mitterrand (France)
Pascal Lamy, former Director-General of the World Trade Organization, former European Commissioner for Trade (France)
Paolo Gentiloni, former European Commissioner for Economy, former Prime Minister (Italy)
Isabelle Durant, former Vice-President of the European Parliament, former Acting Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (Belgium)
Othmar Karas, former First Vice-President of the European Parliament (Austria)
Mercedes Bresso, former President of the European Committee of the Regions and former Member of the European Parliament (Italy)
Rosen Plevneliev, former President of the Republic (Bulgaria)
Petre Roman, former Prime Minister (Romania)
Gabriele Bischoff, President of the Spinelli Group, Member of the European Parliament (Germany)
Nicolas Schmit, former European Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights (Luxembourg)
Enrique Barón Crespo, former President of the European Parliament (Spain)
Andrea Wechsler, President of Europa-Union Deutschland, Member of the European Parliament (Germany)
Klaus Hänsch, former President of the European Parliament (Germany)
Luca Visentini, former President of the European Trade Union Confederation (Italy)
Monica Frassoni, President of the European Centre for Electoral Support (ECES), former Member of the European Parliament (Italy and Belgium)
Moritz Hergl, President of the Young European Federalists (Germany)
Brando Benifei, Member of the European Parliament, former President of the Spinelli Group (Italy)
Daniel Freund, Member of the European Parliament, former President of the Spinelli Group (Germany)
Sandro Gozi, Member of the European Parliament, former President of the Spinelli Group (Italy and France)
Richard Corbett, former Member of the European Parliament, co-rapporteur on the Constitutional Treaty and on the Lisbon Treaty (United Kingdom)
Elmar Brok, Former Member of the European Parliament, former President of the Spinelli Group (Germany)
Jo Leinen, former Member of the European Parliament, former President of the European Movement International (Germany)
Monica Baldi, former Member of the European Parliament (Italy)
Pierre Larrouturou, former Member of the European Parliament (France)
Andrew Duff, formerMember of the European Parliament, former President of the Union of European Federalists (United Kingdom)
Virgilio Dastoli, President of the Consiglio Italiano del Movimento Europeo and collaborator of Altiero Spinelli (Italy)
Francesca Ratti, former Deputy Secretary-General of the European Parliament (Italy)
Laure Niclot, European Economic and Social Council member, former President of JEF France (France)
Roberto Castaldi, professor, Secretary General of the Movimento Federalista Europeo (Italy)
Luisa Trumellini, President of Movimento Federalista Europeo (Italy)
Hervé Moritz, President of the European Movement France (France)
Alessia Centioni, President of Civico Europa and European Women Association (Italy)
Chloé Fabre, President of the Union of European Federalist - France (France)
Aurore Laloux, President of the Young Europeans France (France)
Francisco Aldecoa Luzárraga, political scientist, President of the Spanish Federal Council of the European Movement (Spain)
Gaëlle Marti, jurist, Director of the Center for European Studies-Lyon 3 (France)
Yann Moulier Boutang, economist and essayist (France)
Céline Spector, philosopher (France)
Michele Fiorillo, philosopher, co-initiator of Citizens Take Over Europe (Italy)
Slavoj Žižek, philosopher (Slovenia)

For more signatures if you have to click HERE

Statement by the Union of European Federalists on the European Council Conclusions of 18 December 2025 on Ukraine

Brussels, 19 December 2025

The Union of European Federalists welcomes the decision of the European Council to resort to the issuance of common EU debt to grant Ukraine financial assistance to the tune of ninety billion euros, with the backing of the EU budget. This measure is fundamental to continue its defence operations in face of Putin´s unprovoked aggression, also for the benefit of European security as a whole.

This decision also constitutes a further and significant step - after SURE, NextGenerationEU, and SAFE - in the development of a genuine European fiscal capacity, confirming that the Union can act beyond convention, even if once again only in times of existential crisis. Still, the EU must introduce real own resources, that is, non-dependent from national contributions, to finance its debt issuances.

At the same time, we regret that the European Council failed to agree on the use of the frozen assets of the aggressor state to finance Ukraine’s defence and reconstruction. This omission represents a missed opportunity to deliver a better deal for EU taxpayers, and a strong and credible political signal, both to President Putin and to those who question Europe’s resolve, like Trump´s US. We call for continued engagement on this solution.

More broadly, the conclusions once again reveal the political unsustainability of unanimous decision-making, particularly when a few national leaders are effectively Putin´s allies, and of ad hoc arrangements in the face of strategic challenges. Effective unity of action can only be achieved by making full use of the qualified majority voting possibilities already provided for in the Treaties, and ultimately by reforming the Treaties themselves to endow the Union with the powers required to act decisively with full democratic legitimacy.

In this context, the Union of European Federalists calls on the President of the European Council, to place on the agenda of the next European Council meeting the activation of the Common Defence provisions of Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union, as well as the follow up of the proposal to reform the Treaties in accordance with Article 48 of the Treaty of the European Union.

Further use of the emergency procedure of article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be accompanied by an inter-institutional agreement to ensure the involvement of the European Parliament.

Finally, we call on the European Parliament to assume its political responsibility and to take the lead in convening a European Parliamentary Assembly (Assises), bringing together elected representatives and citizens, with the aim of relaunching the European integration process on a federal basis and with a renewed democratic mandate.

Read here the presentation

Workshop UEF 2025 - II On communication Download

Rewatch here the webinar

Here the article published by the Greek Newspapar TO BHMA about the recent political event in Athens and then the following days of working on the Federal Committe meeting.

Here the online article.

Read here the article:
"The annual meeting of the Federal Committee of the Union of European Federalists - The need for the creation of a European federation - took place in Athens for the first time."