Robust security, notably through the coalition of volunteers, which will have a role to play at the appropriate time. In this regard, I want to recall that we have invited to Paris on July 13 for a summit of the coalition of volunteers all countries that are members, whether they are members of the European Union or not, to participate in the July 14 parade alongside the Ukrainian armed forces as well. Finally, the progress achieved in the accession process of Ukraine and Moldova this week are historic and I want to recall them here. They were welcomed during this Council. The opening of the fundamental chapters block, which marks the official start of accession negotiations, and I salute the commitment of Hungary and Ukraine on the subject of national minorities, which also allows the accession process of Ukraine to the European Union to be put back on track while remaining based on respect for the merits of each. So advancing on this subject and confirmation of the positive dynamic that was evident at the G7.
Next, on the situation in the Middle East. Here too, in continuity with the work we have conducted in recent days in Évian, we welcomed the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran, which allows the end of hostilities, including in Lebanon, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and opens the way to a resumption of negotiations toward an agreement to durably restore stability and security in the region. The Europeans are ready to contribute to the implementation of this agreement to restore freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz through the multilateral military mission that we have finalized, which can be deployed when conditions permit and at the request of stakeholders. So this is a readiness, but also for Iran to be able to coexist peacefully with its regional environment by framing its nuclear and ballistic programs, as well as the end of its destabilization activities in the region and in Europe.
In Lebanon, the unanimous position has been an immediate ceasefire and support for it obviously. A withdrawal of Israel from Lebanese territory. Also a withdrawal and disarmament by Hezbollah, and support for the policy led by General Aoun and now President Aoun and Prime Minister Salam to assume the monopoly of arms by the Lebanese armed forces. The European Union will mobilize its instruments to strengthen the Lebanese state and its armed and security forces. In this regard, I had the opportunity yesterday to meet Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and we will coordinate our efforts with the work currently underway in Washington between Lebanese and Israeli representatives. We will have the opportunity to finalize the calendar next week in coordination with the Lebanese authorities for a conference in support of the Lebanese armed forces and for reconstruction. We will organize this conference in Paris in the coming weeks to mobilize international funding, to support the Lebanese armed forces, but also to build, in very close coordination with Lebanon, solutions that will substitute for or continue the effort currently underway.
On the situation in Gaza, we will continue to push for implementation of the peace plan. The assessment is obviously clear. Today, the humanitarian situation is unacceptable and the political solution is not advancing. The massive and unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid is the priority. On the West Bank, the advances of the E1 settlement project undermine the perspective of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution and require swift action. Sanctions against the extremist and violent settlement in the West Bank. European-scale sanctions against extremist ministers. Deepening the differentiation between Israel's territory and illegal settlements in order to align our trade policy with international law.
This morning's debate allowed us to share everyone's convictions on this subject and to have conclusions that will allow both the Commission on one side and the Council to continue their work and take their decisions.
That covers the two major international issues that have in recent days been marked, as I said, first by the advances in this memorandum of understanding, which at least put an end to the bombings, with many issues that remain open, a lot of work ahead, but a reconvergence between Europeans and Americans and, I believe, positive prospects for evolution that still require much engagement from all on these two issues. We then spoke at length last night about global macroeconomic imbalances. The assessment is well known. It was very well described by the International Monetary Fund, by the experts we had mobilized for the G7, largely described and shared at the G7, and discussed yesterday. The Europeans first must do their part of the work: improve their competitiveness and increase their investment. This is consistent with what we described during our retreat last February and in all recent work.
Next, we see also that on their side, the United States and China have a part of the work to do. The need to reduce twin deficits on the American side, the need to address the Chinese monetary question, the need also to reduce excessive subsidies and insufficient domestic consumption on the Chinese side. The dialogue on global imbalances will continue. It allowed, within the framework of the G7, to advance by defining this G7-plus consensus, and also a few days before the G7 with the summit we held, what is called the convergence summit with India and China, involving for the first time in 20 years China in such work, and beginning to prepare this work based on what I just mentioned in view of the G20 at the end of the year.
The European Union must also in this context gain speed and efficiency. It is true that we must simplify, gain competitiveness, and invest more. The description given yesterday of the situation shows that the European Union still has excessive dependencies in many areas and that there is an acceleration in certain sectors of deindustrialization due to unfair competition, in particular coming from China. That is why the European Union must accelerate and mobilize its trade defense instruments to ensure fair competitive conditions for our companies. No conflict, no protectionism, but a clear-eyed use of fair protection instruments and a reduction of our dependencies. And so we must leverage the internal market, assume European preference in strategic sectors as we have started to do and as France has always supported, set our conditions for foreign direct investment with real technology transfer, local employment, and fundamentally have short-term measures that we must further strengthen, safeguard clauses, European preference, measures we have already started implementing and must continue in other sectors, complement them as needed, and assume a diversification policy like the one we are pursuing on critical minerals and rare earths.
And here too, the G7 allowed us to complement our European approach, since for the first time within the G7 we obtained an agreement with the Americans to jointly reduce our dependencies on critical minerals and rare earths, to cooperate, and we decided on nearly 200 joint projects for a total investment amount of just over 60 billion euros. And so we must continue this mechanism, which is the only one that will allow our industry to maintain its jobs and above all for innovation to happen and be mastered by Europeans. This is in particular the objective of the Industrial Accelerator Act that we must adopt rapidly.
It is also in this spirit that the initiatives we continue to push for securitization, single supervision, and fundamentally a true single market of capital and investment in Europe are imperative. Finally, we have entered the negotiation of the next multiannual budget of the European Union for the 2028-2034 period, starting from what is called this negotiated box proposed by the Cypriot presidency. Here, our objectives are quite simple: to try to clarify the debate, perhaps simplify it. On spending, we want this common budget to meet the sovereignty and security challenges of Europeans. And therefore that it preserve our traditional policies like the common agricultural policy, the fisheries policy, the one we have toward outermost regions important for France, and then cohesion policy, important for many countries and many of our regions. And then invest at the same time in key sectors for our future and our sovereignty.
European preference for defense, space policy, artificial intelligence, quantum, cleantech. And fundamentally, this increase, which corresponds to the Commission's proposal, is very consistent with the macroeconomic assessment I just made. Europe must invest more and therefore on spending we must assume this increase, but which also requires more collective efficiency, clear governance, in particular for the modernization and competitiveness fund, which requires that member states are fully associated with defining these objectives, that there is an excellence criterion that is well taken into account. And for this, on the revenue side, we must work in priority on new own resources in order to stabilize our national contributions to this budget. This is the sine qua non condition of a balanced agreement.
I want finally to salute the partial agreements found at the Council this week by the Cypriot presidency on three basic regulations of this future financial framework, which will allow preserving the CAP, fisheries, and specific support for our other policies, in particular the POSEI program. And we must continue this work to maintain the gains of recent months on technological neutrality, European preference in defense, and the role of states in governance. Finally, Europe's development aid, what we call Global Europe, must not serve today to finance things that do not fall under this policy, but must precisely assume Europe's influence, weight, and partnerships in the spirit of what France defends and what was agreed at the G7, namely a new partnership, solidarity investment, and defense of our interests with Southern countries, and not confuse the objectives we can have through this budget.
I will not be longer so I can answer your questions, but these are the few elements I wanted to share following this Council where we were able to advance through our discussions on structuring issues obviously for our Europe and to do so in continuity with the gains consolidated at the Évian G7. I will now answer your questions.
Well, on this subject, we had a very clear debate yesterday. Europeans are not mediators. There may have been allied powers that positioned themselves as mediators in this conflict. We are not mediators, we are alongside Ukraine. We provide it with aid and support, and we have sanctioned Russia. Second element, very simple, very clear, that we have always defended: the day there are negotiations, Europeans must be around the table because Europe's interests are at stake, shared with what is happening in Ukraine through the aid we have provided, the enlargement question that concerns Europeans, and the financial support and loans we have provided in its financial settlement. And therefore the European Union should be represented, and President Costa, insofar as his competencies are defined, will have a place. However, member states will also have their place; he cannot represent them when it comes to security guarantees, which will be a key element of any negotiation. So we are not mediators. Point one. Point two, we must be around the table of a negotiation when it takes place. And the representatives of institutions and the member states that are key for future security guarantees.
What has happened in recent weeks is that Europeans, in a negotiation that had been initiated by the Americans, must be part of it. It is also in this regard that President Zelensky had approached the E3 and had asked us to come to London eight days ago. Things have changed in recent days since the Americans, for the first time since President Trump's election, said 'We are with you, we support Ukraine, we will support even more strongly, and we will sanction Russia.' And so the question today is not who, when, how should go negotiate with Russia. It is to say clearly that we have clarified our position, and therefore it is up to Russia, to whom many offers have been made in recent months, to say when it is ready to negotiate. And the negotiation will first be between Russia and Ukraine and must involve around the table the Americans and the Europeans. I think we must be very clear on this debate and in the right order of things given what has happened in recent days. Our priority is military aid to Ukraine and support for it. It is support for its energy policy for next winter. It is increasing pressure on Russia and our readiness to receive a message from Russia if it were ready to negotiate seriously, which has not been the case to date.
