We have not received any apologies. Today's agenda, which will be split into two, is a continuation of our discussion on enlargement and our engagement with countries seeking to accede to the European Union. As part of this module of hearings, the committee is engaging with ambassadors and diplomats accredited to Ireland to discuss their countries' perspectives on current developments in the accession process, which we all recognise as being very important.

For the first part of the meeting, I am very pleased to welcome the representatives from Ukraine, namely H.E. Ms Larysa Gerasko, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to Ireland, who many of us know very well, and Ms Antonina Shliakotina, deputy head of mission at the Embassy of Ukraine, who is also very well known to us. I thank them for coming.

As noted at our previous meeting, the aim today is to have an informative discussion with our witnesses, not only to enhance our understanding of progress to date but also to explore the challenges that remain for any of the countries engaged in the negotiations. While the enlargement process remains merit based and is deeply rooted in the Copenhagen criteria, it is encouraging to see enlargement re-emerge on the EU agenda. I certainly expect it to be a focus of the Irish Presidency later this year. It is something that we in this committee have often said is very important. It is not just good for the countries coming in; it is good for the Union as a whole. It is certainly good for Ireland. We welcome the debate on accession and the refocusing on enlargement issues. We had a very productive engagement three weeks ago with diplomatic representatives of Albania, Georgia, Moldova and Türkiye. We plan to have further hearings with interested stakeholders later in the year.

I remind members that this session is only scheduled for a maximum one hour. In that context, I ask them to be concise in their interactions.

I am obliged to read a privilege notice which the witnesses will have heard before. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially inflammatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks, and it is obviously important they comply with such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice the effect they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. We do not have any members joining online, so I will not go through that part of the note.

Today's sessions are intended to be informative in the context of our work on this subject and the subsequent report that will emerge and to garner an understanding of the perspective of each candidate country on current developments. The ambassador has prepared an opening statement, for which we set five minutes aside. I invite her to make that statement now.

I thank the Chair and distinguished members of the committee for the opportunity to address them and to share an update on Ukraine's progress toward European Union membership. Ukraine maintains a strong momentum on its path toward the EU membership, continuing to implement the course toward European integration, despite unprecedented challenges caused by Russia's full-scale war of aggression against it. Notwithstanding the security risk and considerable strain on public institutions, European integration remains one of the key priorities of Ukrainian State policy. Ukraine remains committed to moving forward decisively on these paths.

The year of 2025 was one of the most dynamic periods in Ukraine's EU integration process. Ukraine completed the screening phase in record time, developed and launched key reforms, roadmaps and action plans and is fully technically ready to formally open all six negotiation clusters with the EU. This has been confirmed by the European Commission and was reflected in the conclusions of the EU Council Presidency on enlargement in December 2025.

These results clearly demonstrate that Ukraine delivers when the process is predictable, feedback is constructive and co-operation with European partners is close and continuous. In this context, our dialogue today is particularly timely as Ireland prepares for its forthcoming Presidency of the Council of the European Union. We highly value Ireland's consistent and principled support of Ukraine, as well as its strong commitment to advancing the EU enlargement policy. Enlargement today is not merely a technical or procedural process. In the current political context, it has become a strategic investment in peace, stability and resilience across the Continent. The European integration of Ukraine, alongside Moldova and the Western Balkan countries, is essential to building a stronger and more resilient European Union. At the same time, since February 2025, Hungary has blocked the necessary steps to open cluster 1. Overcoming this obstacle is our primary objective. The absence of a formal opening of cluster 1 did not slow down reforms.

On the contrary, the front-loading mechanism and the early transmission of key benchmarks for clusters 1, 2 and 6 helped sustain reform momentum, enabled early alignment with the EU acquis and made technical co-operation with the Commission more focused and effective.

On 17 March last, Ukraine took stock of the work carried out within the front-loading process. Ukraine received the key benchmarks for the remaining three negotiating clusters, namely clusters 3, 4, and 5, which means that the EU has informally opened all six clusters. Such an approach will allow Ukraine to continue all necessary reforms to align with EU norms and standards despite the complex political landscape. The main goal of Ukraine is to take as many steps as possible to secure formal approval once the veto is lifted. This will also allow us to include the tasks aimed at closing all six negotiating clusters in the national programme for the adoption of the EU acquis, NPPA.

Ukraine is committed to the reform process. On 16 March, the Government of Ukraine released the report on the implementation of the association agreement between Ukraine and the EU for 2025. This document reflects Ukraine’s progress on implementing reforms and aligning legislation with EU standards. In 2025, Ukraine continued its active work to implement the provisions of the association agreement with the EU, including the deep and comprehensive free trade area. Implementation of the agreement remains a key tool for Ukraine’s integration into the EU Internal Market and preparation for future membership.

According to the 2025 results, overall implementation of the agreement rose from 81% in 2024 to 84% in 2025 - an increase of three percentage points. The greatest progress in fulfilling association agreement commitments was achieved in the financial sector and in the areas of social policy and employment, customs matters and agriculture. It was the final report on the implementation of the association agreement. The remaining steps required for EU membership will be reflected in the NPPA.

It is the single, comprehensive framework covering all six negotiation clusters and 35 chapters providing a systematic and coherent roadmap for Ukraine’s integration into the European Union. The NPPA was developed through an inclusive and phased process involving 168 institutions and organisations, including civil society, based on detailed screening reports and EU recommendations. The draft NPPA is in the final stage of preparation.

In parallel, as a high priority, Ukraine continues to advance rule-of-law and anti-corruption reforms to implement the European Commission’s recommendations. These include judicial reform, particularly the establishment of specialised administrative courts with decisive involvement by international experts, the renewal of the constitutional court and the strengthening of judicial governance bodies. Preparation of the new anti-corruption strategy for 2026 to 2030 is in its final stage and has already been submitted to the European Commission.

Ukraine has also made tangible progress in protecting the rights of national minorities, advancing comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation, updating the legal framework on minority rights and language use and strengthening institutional capacity in this field. Dialogue with neighbouring partners continues both at political and expert levels.

Reforms in the areas of justice, freedom and security, public governance, public finance management and democratic institutions continue in line with European standards, including the development of a post-war electoral framework aligned with OSCE recommendations and enhanced parliamentary oversight.

Ukraine has set a clear and measurable objective, which is to complete all internal work relating to fulfilling the obligations necessary for EU membership by the end of 2027. In this context, greater clarity regarding the possible timeline for accession does not undermine the merit-based approach. On the contrary, it strengthens it by establishing clear conditions, mutual obligations and stronger incentives for reform. Ukraine also believes that the exchange of views on new approaches to the European Union’s enlargement policy is timely, particularly in light of its growing role as a strategic security anchor. Against this background, we see a current discussion on Ukraine’s accession not as a political short cut but as an instrument of strategic clarity, political discipline and accelerated reforms fully consistent with a merit-based approach. This model could be based on full political integration and phased economic integration into the internal market and EU policies aligned with the completion of obligations under each negotiation cluster.

Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine has made one thing absolutely clear - Europe’s security is indivisible. Ukraine plays a significant role in safeguarding Europe, with one of the most capable armed forces on the Continent, advanced defence technologies, unique experience in modern warfare and resilience. Its accession to the EU is not a matter of enlargement policy or political solidarity; it is a direct investment in the strength of the EU itself. Ukraine is grateful to Ireland for its principled and consistent support for our European integration. We count on Ireland's Presidency to play an important role in advancing Ukraine's accession process, including facilitating progress towards the formal opening of the negotiation clusters.

We generally talk about the necessity of both the Copenhagen criteria and alignment. Then we have to deal with the reality that Ukraine is fighting a war following the continuation of an abjectly illegal Russian invasion. The ambassador spoke about the varying societal spheres that need to be dealt with, including the governance spheres, in the context of alignment. That will involve a significant level of reform. The ambassador spoke about Ukraine's intent to meet these criteria. There have been issues regarding corruption, and we have seen action taken. My questions concern dealing with the latter and alignment.

What are the issues in respect of which the Irish Presidency can help? It is impossible not to deal with the fact of the war. We have seen what I would consider to be illegal attacks by the US Administration and Israel that have created chaos in the Middle East, but they have obviously changed the circumstances relating to Russia. There has been a lifting of or at least less strict enforcement of some of the sanctions on Russia, particularly as regards oil. If that is the case, it means that Russia has more in its coffers when it comes to fighting a war against Ukraine. What is the ambassador's view on that? Can she give the Ukrainian view on what we will call negotiations? As much as we have always had an interest in peacebuilding, I understand that this can only happen when you have a player who wants to play and fair arbiters. I am not sure we have either at the moment.

As I mentioned in my statement, we are implementing the necessary reforms to meet all criteria. Our membership should be based on the merit-based approach. It is obvious that we do not take membership for granted.

With regard to peace, Ukraine wants peace as much as any other nation because we are paying the highest price; it is human life, that is, the lives of Ukrainians. Yesterday, during the day, Russia launched over 500 drones and missiles across different parts of Ukraine. We need peace. Our negotiating delegation just returned from the US. We have been discussing security guarantees, which is the key issue for us. We do not want to repeat the same mistakes like with the Budapest Memorandum. We need real security guarantees. We hope that we will find a solution to how to stop this war. As we see, Putin does not want any peace solution. Unfortunately, that is a reality. We rely on the US and our European partners to put more pressure on Russia to force it to end the war.

What about the fact that they are able to move oil since the-----

Gas and oil. Unfortunately, that is the reality of it. Some sanctions were lifted from Russia by the US, so we are negotiating with the US. The Russian economy should suffer from the sanctions. It is one of the main purposes of the sanctions. We must combat circumvention of the sanctions as well. That is another issue.

Gabhaim buíochas.

I thank the ambassador for her contribution. I congratulate her country on completing so many chapters in a very difficult situation. Even if Ukraine gets through all the chapters, obviously nothing is going to happen until we have an official ceasefire. That ties in with Moldova as well. I want to go beyond that point for a second. I know it is very hypothetical. Have there been any discussions at an EU level on an interim arrangement? For example, we do not know whether Russia will agree a ceasefire or agree to draw a line where it is in the Donbas region. If there is peace or a ceasefire, Ukraine may still have territorial claims. We hope there is not going to be one until we know that Russia is not going to re-engage. That is why the security guarantees are essential. Are there any parts of eastern Ukraine that would be under Ukrainian control at the end of a peace process that would already be considered a neutral area? How would that relate to EU membership and trading agreements? That is my first question.

The second one again projects a little bit. Does the ambassador believe that in the medium term, when things settle down after accession to the European Union, and Ukraine gets back to trading economically in a normal manner, that there would be a knock-on attraction effect for some places, so that the Russian-speaking areas that would have considered themselves Russian, as opposed to the Russian-speaking areas that would still want to be part of Ukraine, might want to rejoin Ukraine under EU membership?

First of all, with regard to Russian-speaking people who live in Ukraine; they are Ukrainians. We do not want to divide our people into those who are Russian-speaking or Polish-speaking. For us, they are Ukrainians.

I am talking about the ones who - even if the ambassador does not like it - remain outside Ukraine as part of an agreed peace process. Whether we like it or not, there are some people – I accept it is a minority – in the Russian-speaking parts of Ukraine who would have an affinity with Russia, even though the territorial integrity of Ukraine has been violated.

All those Ukrainians who live in Ukraine as of now are Ukrainians and they recognise themselves and consider themselves as Ukrainian citizens. The majority of our population – some 90% of our population - support the EU integration. I do not remember the last survey. Maybe after the end of the war those Ukrainians who live in occupied territories would wish to move to Ukrainian territories that are under Ukrainian control.

With regard to the next question on a neutral area-----

The neutral area as the EU border versus Russia's border.

It is very early to discuss a neutral or grey zone. As far as I understand, the Deputy is talking about a grey zone. Some territory-----

I am not talking about the exact border but surely it has been discussed that something will be needed for final accession because we cannot have a very large disputed area in the European Union.

I never heard that a neutral zone is a subject for the peace negotiations. I cannot comment on a hypothetical-----

I am not asking the ambassador to do that. I am just asking if that has been discussed at any level.

No. There has been no discussion about a neutral zone. What do we mean by "neutral"? Is it militarily neutral?

No. We have what is defined as Ukraine but then obviously-----

Ukraine is Ukraine. It is within recognised borders.

Just to be clear. I know 100% that the entire territory of Ukraine since 2014 is Ukraine. I am with the ambassador on that. I am asking the question, that after-----

The other territories are occupied territories.

Yes, but after the war, when Ukraine gets security guarantees and there may have to be EU forces in some sort of neutral zone, how would the European Union as an entity operate? I ask because there may be questions raised about calling an area of protection the European Union, because we have to have a safer area for trade. That is what I am talking about.

It is a very complicated issue. That is the main obstacle to finding a common position to end the war. We never recognised the occupied territories as Russian territories. That is very clear. Ukraine exists within internationally recognised borders. We will see after the end of the peace process. If we find a peace solution, we will negotiate how the EU or others and Ukrainian authorities will operate in this territory.

I thank the ambassador for her presentation. It is very important to recognise the great progress that was made in 2025 in terms of fulfilling the association agreement commitments in the financial sector, social policy, employment, customs matters and agriculture. That is despite the fact that there is a war going on in the country. Ukrainian people are fighting for their country and, honestly, it should be recognised that they are fighting for Europe as well.

What mechanisms safeguard legislative and administrative reforms so far? Can that progress be secured? Can all clusters be dealt with by the end of 2027? The ambassador mentioned that in her speech but is it achievable?

We are doing everything possible to achieve our goal, despite all difficulties. It is very difficult to conduct and implement reforms during war, air strikes and endless bombardment. All the time, we are repairing our critical infrastructure in order to sustain our economy. But yes, we have the ambition to achieve our goal by 2027.

I wish the ambassador well.

The ambassador is very welcome. I was looking at social media last night. A picture came up of a normal street scene with traffic going up and down the road. The next minute a drone came in and hit a building.

In Lviv.

It is the new normal for many people in Ukraine. It brings it home that there is a sense of normality in many areas but it is not normal. That is the reality of what is going on. The ambassador said Ukraine has opened up all six clusters and 35 chapters. People listening at home probably will not know what that means. The ambassador touched on judicial review. That was one of the things that came up before the conflict broke out. Will she explain what is involved in that and what Ukraine is trying to do?

The EU wants particular borders. It is not comfortable with fluid borders. We raised it with other ambassadors who came in and who had similar difficulties. How important is it in the negotiations that there will be permanent borders or fluid borders? Post Brexit in Ireland, we did not want hard borders. Solutions came up in relation to that. There was flexibility. Similarly regarding people's constitutional views, we came up with allowing people to consider themselves British, Irish or Northern Irish. There are ways to deal with issues that seem insurmountable. How realistic is the idea that EU members will allow Ukraine to join while the conflict is ongoing? Is that a realistic possibility as Ukraine moves forward?

The reconstruction effort after the conflict obviously will take some years. Have there been any discussions on that?

There are tensions with some of Ukraine's neighbours in relation to the likes of agriculture. There was easing in respect of the wheat and grains. Will some member states have a difficulty with opening the market to Ukrainian grains and wheat? What are the really big obstacles at this stage? There is so much goodwill across all parties in the EU but the next step is to get them to agree to move forward. The judicial reform is hugely important. The ambassador pointed out the difficulty of any reforms when the main focus of the country is survival and keeping people safe. It is difficult to do all these things but there is an expectation that they be done if Ukraine is to advance. If it does not happen by 2027, what impact will that have within Ukraine?

For all the challenges the ambassador's country faces, I believe we can collectively come up with solutions to them. If her country wants to join the EU, we should not be putting obstacles in its way. We should be trying to come up with solutions that will smooth that path. I realise that there are challenges with some of Ukraine's neighbours on some issues. When Poland was joining the EU, there were challenges around agriculture. In other countries, there was not free access to travel and so on. There are negotiations within negotiations. The fluidity at the moment and the fact there are no borders in a conflict situation are huge barriers that Ukraine will face. I do not think they are insurmountable but they are huge challenges. There will be reluctance to allow any country join the EU if there are challenges with borders. Given the Irish example, we can come up with solutions.

We are not afraid of challenges because we are living in a challenging time and struggling for our independence and our EU inspiration. Why did Russia invade Ukraine? It is, first of all, our EU inspiration. Our people, our nation, decided to choose another way; the European way. To implement reforms is very difficult, particularly at this time, but we will keep going with this process.

With regard to borders, we are completing our homework but we need a word or a sign from the EU side. Going back to internationally recognised borders, it is Ukraine within 1991 borders but it depends how the war ends. All EU legislation, etc., will apply to the territory of Ukraine which will be under the control of the Ukrainian authorities.

There were a lot of questions. I am sorry if I missed something.

I asked about the situation with grain.

When other big agricultural countries were becoming members of the EU, member states faced challenges. I am pretty sure we will integrate into the EU market and it will have a positive impact on the economy of the European Union. I want to underline that we are protecting the EU as well.

Our membership would be a win–win situation because we will strengthen European and EU security.

Does the ambassador expect full integration? Does she believe it will happen by 2027?

Maybe not full integration by 2027, but we have such ambitions.

I thank the ambassador. She has very kindly acknowledged in her statement the contribution Ireland has made both here and in Ukraine. I am wondering about Irish business and whether the ambassador could rate the investment and supports received from Irish companies in Ukraine.

I thank the Cathaoirleach for his question. We have developed a bilateral economic relationship with Ireland. Two Irish companies invested in Ukraine even after the full-scale invasion. I can mention Kingspan and CRH. CRH has operated in our market since the late 1990s but it has increased its investment following the full-scale invasion. Our Government has fulfilled all its obligations. For example, we built the necessary infrastructure for Kingspan to launch its activities. As the Cathaoirleach knows, last December during President Zelenskyy’s visit, the first Ukraine-Ireland economic forum took place. We expect the second to take place by the end of this year.

We encourage Irish companies to enter our market and to invest and do business in Ukraine. Even now, before the end of the war and certainly afterwards, Ukraine is and will be a country of opportunity for international and foreign businesses in terms of participating in reconstruction projects. The next conference on reconstruction and recovery will take place at the end of June in Poland, and some Irish companies will participate.

Great. That is good to hear. I wish to ask a slightly controversial question. I have been to Ukraine a number of times, both before and since the full-scale invasion, as have other members of this committee. We visited, for example, for Independence Day last August. There was subsequently a COSAC meeting in Ukraine, attended by members of this committee.

One has to be in Ukraine to experience the determination of its people. At the start of the full-scale invasion, I assumed Ukraine would not be able to withstand the might of the Russian army, but so many of us have been proven wrong. When you go to Ukraine and meet ordinary Ukrainians, as well as those involved in managing the country and the war effort, you note there is extraordinary determination, which has served the country very well.

When the war ends, as it will – it is a question of how more than anything else – how prepared will Ukraine be for the problems that now seem secondary, for example, the return from the war of soldiers, mostly men, who may have post-traumatic stress disorder or catastrophic injuries? How prepared is it for the proliferation of small arms in the country, the availability of explosives and the potential for criminal activity in this regard? How is civil Ukraine preparing for that situation?

Our Government has already launched many programmes to integrate Ukrainians who will return from abroad. Seven million fled the country. We are working on how to reintegrate them into society. We will encourage the young generation to return to Ukraine.

We have also established a Ministry of Veterans Affairs, which is developing programmes for reintegration and mental health treatment for our soldiers. Even now, many soldiers who have returned from the battlefield require reintegration. Civil society participates in this process very much. For instance, a few weeks ago, one of our NGOs working in this area visited Ireland and had not only meetings but also dialogue with the Ukrainian community here and Irish authorities, because we want to learn from Ireland’s experience. All of these processes are under way.

Does the ambassador believe achieving results from those programmes will be central to achieving EU membership? How does she envisage the two things interacting?

These processes should proceed in parallel.

The other thing I want to ask about is Crimea. Some members have already raised this. One concern, of which I know the ambassador is aware, is that reintegrating Crimea into Ukraine would involve displacing the current population, who are essentially Russian planters. Has Ukraine thought about how this could be achieved without breaking international law? Does the ambassador believe it will become a condition of European membership to reintegrate Crimea, or will it be part of a longer term situation?

It would be a long process. First of all, Russia has changed the demographic composition in Crimea. Many Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars fled Crimea after the occupation in 2014 and after the full-scale invasion, under threat of mobilisation to fight against their own people. After 2014, Russia settled approximately half a million Russian citizens from other parts of Russia in Crimea. Therefore, integration will be a long process.

I thank the ambassador.

I apologise for my being delayed. I was at another committee. If my questions have been addressed already, please bear with me. I very much welcome the ambassador and thank her for being with us today.

Which clusters or chapters present the most technical or political challenges, and how is Ukraine managing to address these challenges while under wartime conditions?

Could the Senator clarify her question?

I am asking which cluster presents the most political or technical challenges.

I am so sorry.

The Deputy asked about political and technical challenges. I do not see any political challenges or problems for the integration from the Ukrainian side because the majority of the Ukrainian population supports EU membership. We need to meet all of the Copenhagen criteria, of course, and develop and implement many reforms, including, for instance, improving our post-war electoral system. That is obvious. I do not see any difficulties otherwise.

How does the ambassador think that Ukraine is linking its sectoral policies, looking in particular at agriculture and energy, with European standards and how are the issues of competing priorities being addressed?

We are under constant attack and our critical energy infrastructure is under constant attack and has been destroyed. Let us say we redevelop our energy infrastructure according to the European standards right now. Of course, we would need financial support to do that. We have spent a lot of funds repairing, for instance, power stations and small electricity stations. In a big city like Odesa, all of the electricity stations were damaged. One hundred per cent of them were damaged. We have repaired some of them to maintain the normal life of our population, but mostly we renew according to EU standards.

With regard to agriculture, I mentioned when answering another question that our country is one of the biggest agricultural counties. We will enrich the EU and our agricultural sector will develop a European market. It is not about some technical issue.

The resilience and strength that has been shown by the Ukrainian people and leaders throughout the war is nothing short of astonishing. What does Ms Gerasko think Ukraine has learned from continuing to implement reforms during wartime and continuing its dedication? What has been learned during wartime that could serve as a basis or guideline for EU support of other candidate countries that are facing conflict situations?

Will the Deputy repeat the question?

I talked about the resilience and strength that has been shown by the Ukrainian people throughout the war and their continuing commitment to the European Union. Ukraine has continued to implement reforms and to carry on down the path towards membership. It has done all of that during a war. What has Ukraine learned from continuing these reforms during a war that could serve to help other potential member states that are dealing with conflict situations as they look towards membership?

As I mentioned, despite Russia's aggression, all the suffering and all the challenges we are facing, we continue developing all our sectors. Of course, we need support in this. We developed our agriculture and industry. To be very dedicated, we implement all reforms. We are combating corruption, which is a big problem in Ukraine. That is true, and we recognise it. We have established a specialised court. We improved our financial, monetary and audit functions. We developed and improved the process of control of assets. Even our members of parliament lost immunity from criminal prosecution. We have removed many obstacles in criminal procedures. We have special bodies, such as a national anti-corruption agency to investigate all cases quite fast, let us say. We have new functions for the constitutional court. We have international expert and civil society participation in the vetting of judges. That helps to ensure the transparency of judicial powers.

I thank the ambassador. Nobody else is indicating. I thank the ambassador again for her time. When this process is complete and the accession takes place, one of the things that will stand to Ukraine is how many of its citizens have experience of the European Union. Its citizens are now living in every state of the European Union. Here in Ireland, we have benefited enormously from the contribution that the ambassador's countrymen and countrywomen have made to our communities the length and breadth of the country. I thank her for that. As the ambassador said, the reintegration of those people into Ukraine, when the time comes, will be a challenge for Ukraine. It will also be a challenge for us because we will lose all those members who have contributed so much. We wish the ambassador the very best at home and in the accession talks. We thank her for her time.

As I said at the first session, the purpose of today's meeting is to discuss the potential enlargement of the European Union and engage with representatives of candidate countries. Like in the first session, our aim is to have an informative discussion with our witnesses, not only to enhance our understanding of progress to date, but perhaps more important, to explore the challenges that remain. I am pleased to welcome representatives of the Republic of Kosovo this afternoon, His Excellency Mr. Ilir Kapiti, ambassador of the Republic of Kosovo to Ireland and Ms Arta Qehaja - I hope I said that correctly - first secretary at the embassy of the Republic of Kosovo. I thank them both for attending today, particularly as they travelled to do so. We appreciate their time and commitment and recognise that since submitting its application in December 2022, Kosovo has been designated a potential candidate. Its application to join the European Union is more complex than others and the reasons for that will be explored further in this session. The ambassador will make reference to it in his opening statement.

Once again, I remind members that the session is only one hour long so while we may not get through everything, I hope it will be the beginning of an engagement between the committee and the witnesses on this process.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is important they comply with any such direction. I do not feel the need to remind members, but I will stress that today's sessions are intended to be informative and I know members will take that view.

I invite H.E. Mr. Ilir Kapiti to make his opening statement.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach agus na comhaltaí oirirce den Chomhchoiste um Ghnóthaí an Aontais Eorpaigh. I thank the Chair and distinguished members of the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. It is an honour to represent the Republic of Kosovo and to update the committee on our progress towards European Union membership.

Ireland’s experience demonstrates how European integration can transform economies, strengthen democratic institutions and deliver lasting stability and prosperity. We deeply value Ireland’s long-standing support for Kosovo’s EU membership and its principled engagement in promoting democracy, the rule of law and regional co-operation across the western Balkans. For Kosovo, Euro-Atlantic integration - membership of the EU and NATO - remains the central strategic objective. We believe this path provides the security, stability and prosperity our citizens seek. Public support for EU membership remains among the highest in Europe, reflecting our strong identification with European democratic values.

Kosovo formally applied for EU membership in December 2022, marking an important milestone. While we are at an earlier stage than some partners in the region, we are fully committed to advancing reforms and aligning with the EU acquis. The stabilisation and association agreement continues to serve as the cornerstone of our relationship with the EU. Through it, we have advanced legislative alignment and strengthened institutional capacity across key sectors. We have consistently aligned with the EU’s foreign and security policy, including on sanctions against Russia and Belarus and in response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, demonstrating that Kosovo is a reliable and committed partner. At the same time, we are implementing ambitious reforms in the rule of law, public administration and economic governance. We are strengthening judicial independence, improving the efficiency of the justice system and enhancing our capacity to combat corruption and organised crime. These efforts are essential, not only for EU integration, but for building trust in our institutions.

Kosovo is also actively engaging with the EU growth plan for the western Balkans. Our reform agenda focuses on economic competitiveness, improving the business environment, advancing the green and digital transitions, and modernising public administration. This will enable greater integration into EU programmes and increased financial support. A particularly important milestone for our citizens was visa liberalisation, which entered into force in January 2024. This has strengthened people-to-people contacts and opened new opportunities for students, professionals and businesses. It was not only a technical achievement, but a meaningful signal of trust.

Kosovo remains fully committed to peace, stability and co-operation in the western Balkans. We continue to engage constructively in the EU-facilitated dialogue with Serbia. A comprehensive, legally binding agreement based on mutual recognition would be a decisive contribution to long-term regional stability. At the same time, Kosovo’s European path should not be held hostage to Serbia’s obstructive and increasingly anti-European behaviour. We are concerned that broader geopolitical developments are being misused to destabilise the region.

Regional co-operation remains a cornerstone of our foreign policy. Kosovo actively participates in initiatives that promote economic integration, connectivity and reconciliation. For us, EU enlargement is not merely an institutional process. It is a strategic investment in a democratic, stable and united Europe. A credible, merit-based enlargement policy strengthens both candidate countries and the European Union, especially in today’s geopolitical context. Kosovo is fully committed to this path. Our objective is clear: to become a stable, democratic and prosperous member of the European family, not only as a beneficiary, but as a contributor to a stronger and more resilient Europe.

We deeply appreciate Ireland’s continued support for the European future of the western Balkans. With its upcoming EU Presidency, Ireland is uniquely positioned to help advance Kosovo’s membership application, encourage further recognition within the EU and ensure that Kosovo’s path is assessed on its own merits. We look forward to strengthening our co-operation and continuing this journey together. Go raibh maith agaibh. I welcome your questions.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Ambasadóir Kapiti as ucht a chúpla focal. I thank him for using the Irish language. We are also grateful that the ambassador was spot on, time wise. I start with Deputy Crowe. It is the same as the previous session with five minutes for questions and answers.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an ambasadóir. I welcome the ambassador to the meeting. Probably the main obstacle to Kosovo's membership of the EU has to be the failure to date of five members to recognise Kosovo. While the necessary legal, economic and legislative reforms are an important part of its membership it would be imperative to make sure that all existing member states are on board. I will start with a question on that. How are the recognition efforts proceeding with what we will call the holdouts? There are different internal and external reasons for some of the countries. Will the ambassador outline who the countries are? I think it is Spain, Romania, Cyprus and Greece.

There is also Slovakia.

Yes.

There are five non-recognisers for various reasons. For example, we believe there is no analogy between Kosovo and Catalonia, nor with Greece, Slovakia, Romania or Cyprus. We have good relations with Greece and other countries that have not recognised Kosovo. Unfortunately, we have not managed to get recognition so far. I think the EU should come up with a proposal or a way to move forward because we do not see any problem with recognising Kosovo regardless of the problems they might have with minorities in their own countries. We have good progress on exchange and trade with a few of them. Spain decided a year ago to recognise the Kosovo passport so we can travel there. We have good economic relations with Greece too, and we have an economic office in Athens. We are making every effort to explain the Kosovo case is sui generis and we invite everybody to start co-operation with Kosovo on this matter.

The ambassador is suggesting that if the EU or the Presidency of the EU were to take that role it would be helpful. However, he is also saying that Kosovo has made outreach. The outreach to Spain has advanced. Is that something the ambassador would like the Irish Presidency to focus on?

That is definitely something Ireland can contribute. I pointed out two ways. The first is progressing the applications we have made to join the European Union. The second is talking to the five non-recognisers about Kosovo. We would be grateful if Ireland helped us to continue. It is important to say that if and when Kosovo joins the European Union it will contribute to stability in the region.

Reforms are ongoing in Kosovo to meet the criteria. Will the ambassador outline some of those? The previous group mentioned corruption, judicial reform, democratic values and a free press.

Regardless that we have not opened any chapter yet, as the Deputy may know, we are fully aligned with the foreign and security policy of the European Union and we are working hard to strengthen the judicial system, fighting corruption and organised crime. We have been successful in the past four years at stopping crimes in our country, investing in economic developments and aligning all the policies with the EU. We believe that once we open the chapters and start work more technically with the European Union all of the demands we should fulfil will already be there.

On corruption, is there outreach to European bodies? Is it done with the support of others in relation to the judiciary? Are there ongoing reforms? How does Kosovo bring them up to the expected membership standards?

There are ongoing reforms of the judicial systems. The European Union has an ambassador in Kosovo. We are fully in contact with all the people who want to contribute to this cause. We welcome everybody if they want to co-operate closely with us.

I know Deputy Ó Murchú is under pressure.

I was listening. It is the usual problem around here where you need to be in two places at once and do everything badly. The ambassador has gone into it. Kosovo has had a difficult history, even in the recent period, and is still dealing with the outworkings of that. There is its relationship with Serbia and the Serbian relationship with Russia. We are in a different world than we were even ten years ago. From Kosovo's point of view, it is about how an Irish Presidency can help in this regard. It is about how it can thread the needle to make the journey with the difficulties that are there. We have a lot of what we can easily call bad actors, who obviously do not want to see further accession into the European Union. There will definitely be people who do not want to see Kosovo make that journey. How can we help, and what are the real difficulties? We have seen tensions have arisen from time to time. Can the ambassador give an update on how he sees things now?

As the Deputy has pointed out, we went through troubles. However, nowadays Kosovo is a democratic republic and belongs to all the people who live in Kosovo regardless of ethnicity, religion or colour. Most of the minorities are integrated into the Kosovo republic, including Serbs. The majority of Serbs lived in the south of Kosovo and not the north. The problems we had were in the north. Nowadays it is a different picture. There are three communities, municipalities, in the north governed by Serbs and we want them to be that way because they live there. We want them to contribute and have benefits that Kosovo offers to all minorities. In the past, as the Deputy may be aware, Kosovo had an attack organised by criminals who lived there and were clearly supported by Serbia. It was implicit in the attack that happened in 2023, and the perpetrators are still free in Serbia. One should make all adjustments to bring them to justice. We want to treat everybody in Kosovo equally and the rule of law should apply to everybody. Minorities have all rights, seats in the parliament and official language. Although the Serbs are only 3% or 4% of those living in Kosovo, they are Kosovans. We want them to be part, and we want to co-operate with them as with everybody else.

I think Ireland is the best example of overcoming those problems because, regardless of any sensitivity it has with Northern Ireland, Ireland is one of the first countries to accept Kosovo as an independent country. That is a good signal for all five non-recognisers to accept reality. This is what they should do. We invite all these non-recognisers to come to Kosovo-----

I point out that does not mean that a number of us are particularly happy with the circumstances on this island, but there is obviously a journey we can make ourselves.

I recognise that Kosovo has been through considerable difficulty and the only option that was right from an Irish point of view was to recognise Kosovo.

Yes. There is a way to overcome that with talks. Prime Minister Kurti accepted that we should sign the agreement and implement the Ohrid Agreement. However, one should be aware that the Serbian Prime Minister has written a letter to a European Union clearly saying that he will not endorse the terms of reference that were agreed in the Ohrid Agreement. By withdrawing this letter, sitting down to talks, and signing the agreement between Kosovo and Serbia, I believe progress would be made easy.

Again, it is that thing of it being a difficult journey. Kosovo does not have full control over all the interactions. Negotiations are important but Kosovo needs to have somebody who wants to get there. My fear at the minute is that there are an awful lot of people who are not necessarily in support of seeing accession. It is that other piece, as the ambassador says. Ireland is a good example but it is a matter of how we can facilitate things. The entire western Balkans would have given out over the years that we spoke about accession, but there was not an incredible seriousness. There is now and it is about just making sure that we meet people halfway, particularly when they are attempting to do all they can from an alignment and a reform point of view.

It should be based on merits. We cannot make Serbia join the European Union. In Kosovo, 95% of people are pro-European and want to join Europe. Unfortunately, in Serbia it is less than 50%, and we cannot convince them. I do not think it is correct to link our progress with that of Serbia.

That is a fair point. Go raibh maith agat.

Deputy Scanlon is next. I have to step out briefly. Excuse me, ambassador. I hope to come back. I propose that Deputy Crowe take the Chair. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank the Chair and I thank the ambassador for his presentation. I have two questions. The first is, what immediate steps does Kosovo hope to take in 2026 to advance its application towards candidate status? The second question is related. How can Ireland best support progress on the EU questionnaire during its Presidency later this year?

First, it can do so by encouraging all the states in the European Union to appreciate that Kosovo should not be an exception, as it is a part of the western Balkans. All the states in the western Balkans, including Kosovo, belong to Europe. Kosovo should be judged based on its merits and achievements. It would be very good if we could continue to work more closely and have an answer from the European Union on our application, which so far we have not had. Second, it is a question of the other five non-recognisers, as I pointed out earlier. It is time to start to talk to all of these countries more intensively in order to overcome the problems of recognising Kosovo. We have relations with all of them, but we are not yet at a stage where they accept Kosovo as a free country, although they are part of the EU.

I know. I see that the five countries in question are Greece, Spain, Slovakia, Cyprus and Romania. What is the reason for that? Is there a political reason or a financial reason?

This is a good question to ask them because I have never understood why they would not accept Kosovo. I guess Cyprus has the same problem with the minorities that live there and with Türkiye. I never understood why Slovakia has taken this position. When I look at the trade that it has with Serbia, I see that it is negligible. I really do not know what the answer is. Maybe it is just a question of time but we would love to find out what the obstacle is and then we can overcome it. By talking to them as friends, it may be a good starting point. We want to do so.

Maybe it could be a focus for the Irish Presidency later on this year. I thank the ambassador.

It is lovely to see the ambassador again. I met him before in relation to Council of Europe business. When I was in a coffee shop in my own town of Newbridge the following week, a gentleman came over to me and told me I had met his uncle last week. I think the ambassador's nephew is living in Naas but working in Newbridge.

Yes.

He had seen a photograph of me on the ambassador's Facebook and he recognised me in a coffee shop in Newbridge. That just shows how small the world is and how connected we all are. I met the ambassador at that point in relation to the possibility of Kosovo becoming a full member of the Council of Europe. Unfortunately, that has stalled as well. In recent times I was in contact with the Irish ambassador to Hungary, H.E. Ragnar Almqvist, who has Kosovo as a secondary accreditation. He speaks of a very engaged Government in terms of how they can move things forward. Through the Council of Europe I also got to know Frank Power, an Irish member of staff at the Council of Europe, who spent five years in the office of the Council of Europe in Kosovo. He worked really closely with it on the rule of law, human rights and democracy and trying to ensure there was a pathway for Kosovo and indeed he would speak very fondly of that as well. I know that the Irish ambassador to Hungary works very closely with Nancy Soderberg, who is head of the National Democratic Institute in Kosovo. There is a lot of really excellent work going on. I think a lot of countries are supportive of Kosovo and are working to help Kosovo find the roadmap. My colleague, Deputy Scanlon, has just spoken about five countries that have a different position. It would seem that work needs to be done both from Kosovo and on its behalf by countries such as ours.

I want to ask the ambassador a question. Due to the current political deadlock, full executive power is not functioning at the moment. It is important that we would get a sense of what Kosovo is doing to overcome that. In addition, Kosovo is not benefiting from the western Balkans growth plan at the moment. What support does the country need to maximise the benefits from that? What can Ireland do to help during its Presidency? It is important that we would work to try to help Kosovo during our Presidency.

I thank Senator O'Loughlin. It is very nice to see her again. When somebody talks to these five non-recognisers, it is very important to point out that the International Court of Justice ruled that Kosovo did not breach international law by declaring independence. The question to the International Court of Justice was submitted by Serbia, not by us.

Secondly, it is very important that we continue to grow economically by developing in particular small- and medium-sized businesses, including in the areas where the minority lives. It will enhance the relations between people and between countries. Kosovo was very unfortunate that it stopped receiving help because of measures which I never understood the reasons for in the first place. Nevertheless, now that problem is gone. It does not exist and Kosovo is a part of the EU growth plan. We have very complete ways to develop the legal system, which is just. We are also fighting crime and organised crime and corruption.

We are investing in education and in infrastructure which will connect the whole western Balkan region. It is very important these developments continue to build bridges between our country and neighbouring countries. We are very interested in doing so. Ireland is in a unique position in that, during its Presidency, those questions will arise regarding working towards accepting the western Balkans and Kosovo into the European Union as soon as possible. It will bring peace and stability to the region. Kosovo resisted for many years the malign influence of a few states, including Russia, China and Iran. There is no influence of those states in politics or developments in Kosovo, which we are very glad of. We need help to further grow and develop our economy and to be part of the European Union for peace and stability.

I hope the application to the Council of Europe next time will be successful. We fulfilled all the criteria. Dora Bakoyannis also suggested we should be part of the EU. All the criteria and questions have been answered by Kosovo. Hopefully next time will be successful. It is good for minorities who have any problems to go with the questions to the Council of Europe to solve them.

I understand. I hope so too. Thank you, ambassador.

I thank the ambassador for being with us today and for the insight he has provided into Kosovo's candidacy for membership. Some of my colleagues touched on reforms that are being made in order to progress candidacy. Will the ambassador talk about reforms being made in the areas of rule of law and public administration?

One of the key priorities the Government has is rule of law and judicial system improvements. We are working hard on seeing all the problems the system inherited from the past and coming up with solutions for the future. One of the top priorities of our Government is that the judicial system should be reorganised and more effective.

How will those judicial reforms take place? Is there a requirement for a vote of the executive or of the people? Kosovo experienced deadlock in terms of political leadership for quite a while, which was only resolved recently. How is the executive functioning now after being at a stalemate for some time?

It appears we are very good at organising elections. We had a few elections last year and everybody accepted them. The last one was a few months ago. It was a very democratic election, accepted internally and externally. It was a landslide won by one political party but, unfortunately, our constitution is designed in a way that the President is chosen by the Parliament and a two thirds majority is needed. So far, the new Parliament has failed to elect a President and now the question has been submitted to the constitutional court as to whether Parliament should be dismissed and go to election within 45 days, or whether it is given two months to elect a President and, if not, it has 45 days to go to election. My hope is they will find a way to overcome this problem. What is good about the last election is all the minorities took part, competing for positions in the Government in the municipalities that they lead, and that everybody accepted the results. It would be difficult for me to comment on the case before the constitutional court comes up with the answer. The best thing is to wait. Once it goes to the court, one should only wait and then find out how to proceed further. I hope we will not have new elections but we will see.

Staying with the theme of governance and rule of law, what measures are being taken to strengthen these frameworks in Serb-majority areas?

During past events, particularly in the northern municipalities, they resigned and left positions under the instruction of President Vučić. Now that gap is being filled by new members and there are members from Serbian minorities that are coming back. Obviously, it was a big mistake to leave municipalities in that way, to leave the prosecution in the north and to leave the positions as judges in which they used to work. The good sign is they are coming back to the positions they had - new members, not the old ones - including the police.

Over the past four years, the Government fought many criminal groups that were very active, particularly in the northern municipalities. Nowadays, most of those criminal gangs do not exist there. The Serbians who live there have been liberated from them. They were blackmailed but are now getting integrated into Kosovan society. One can see the progress nowadays. I hope that will continue. We need to encourage more and more Serbians to get into the system and contribute to their country. Kosovo is a country for all who live there.

I understand that. Integration at any level poses challenges, particularly in the situation of Serbia and Kosovo with the history that exists there. It is very challenging and it is good to hear progress is being made.

What sectors would find it most difficult and face the most challenges in complying with EU standards? In the areas of energy, environment and agriculture, where does the ambassador see difficulties in terms of bringing them to EU standard?

We are getting prepared on all of these points, particularly the transition to green energy. Kosovo produces the worst sort of electricity, produced by lignite, but it is fully committed to green energy. The Government is investing in windmills and solar panels. We believe that by 2030 we will be almost fully aligned with the European Union on green energy.

Did the ambassador say this will happen by 2030?

Yes. One should take into account that the way we want to do it is gradually because we have to run an economy. We are compared most of the time with other countries that produce energy using water, which is not the case in Kosovo. We have plenty of sun and windmills, which we are trying to utilise.

We would like some of your sun, along with your windmills. I thank the ambassador for coming in. Are there any more questions? No. There has been a common theme from members. The committee does not have powers but when we go into private session we can talk about recommendations to the Irish Presidency and take up the common theme. On behalf of the committee, I thank the witnesses for their engagement. It has been a very informative discussion and I am sure it could go on longer. It was really helpful. We will go into private session to discuss a few housekeeping matters before adjourning.

I propose we suspend for a few moments to allow our witnesses and attendees to depart.