Statement by MEP Fernand Kartheiser on the President’s letter to Mr. Boyer dated 11.06.2026

First, I have to express my surprise that I have not been informed of this letter by the Parliament administration. It is bizarre and alarming to be asked multiple times to provide comments by the press without having had a chance to first see the letter in question. Twelve hours after the first journalist called, I have now finally seen a copy, received through an unconventional channel, writes MEP Fernand Kartheiser.

Since May 2025, I have openly and transparently initiated and continued an informal dialogue with Russian parliamentarians. I was even expelled from the ECR political group for that reason, a fact widely reported on in the media. I find it surprising that the European Parliament “discovers” only now that activity and launches a procedure against me while my social media accounts are filled with my engagements and updates on this topic. The matter is already of public knowledge for more than a year.

It is all the more surprising to see European Parliament authorities react in such a manner at the present time, given that the Council now openly discusses restarting a dialogue with Russia on the governmental level, even if they are still unable to agree on an EU representative or on that envoy’s mandate. In the Saint Petersburg Declaration cited in the letter, participants supported these precise evolutions in the Council.

There is indeed no alternative to dialogue to address the challenges that we are facing. At some point, the Parliament will also have to restart an official dialogue with corresponding Russian institutions. The current situation in which the EU is the only major actor in the world with no relations with the Russian Federation is simply not sustainable. Such an attitude serves no constructive purpose. Adopting endless resolutions condemning Russia at nearly every plenary session is no substitute for active diplomacy oriented towards conflict resolution.

No activity aiming at peace or international understanding can ever be considered as undermining the dignity or credibility of an institution. Quite to the contrary, activities of a confrontational and aggressive nature pose moral challenges. The EU is a peace project, rewarded with the Nobel Peace prize in 2012 for “advancing the causes of peace and reconciliation”. Should it not once again be a motor for peace?

A decision aiming at stopping an informal dialogue would not strengthen the Parliament’s credibility but would rather send a further negative signal just as European politics shifts to a more dialogue-oriented approach. Numerous leaders, including Presidents and Prime Ministers, have now called for dialogue with Russia. In this context it has also to be recalled that the United States—the EU’s most important international partner—is now openly envisaging a “constructive relationship” between the US and Russia. The European Parliament should take these evolutions into account and adopt a forward-looking and realistic attitude.  

Share this article: