The European Parliament’s Committee on Security and Defence (SEDE) abruptly cancelled a planned visit to Ukraine following concerns over the participation of Alternative for Germany (AfD) MEP Hans Neuhoff, according to reports from German publication “Welt”. The delegation, intended to depart for Kyiv last Monday and previously kept confidential for security reasons, was comprised of eight members from various parliamentary factions.
The controversy arises from Kyiv’s apparent reluctance to allow Neuhoff entry, citing alleged political affiliations with the Russian Federation and unsubstantiated claims of unauthorized presence in Russian-occupied territories of the Donbas region. Neuhoff, nominated by the far-right Europe of Sovereigns and Nations (ESN) group, formally protested the decision in a letter to European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, detailing his receipt of notification from the committee secretariat regarding the Ukrainian government’s intended travel ban.
SEDE committee chair Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP) confirmed the cancellation, stating that Ukrainian officials had expressed concerns regarding Neuhoff’s potential to be a security risk, a designation she echoed. Strack-Zimmermann further indicated that the conditions regarding Neuhoff’s presence would have hindered the ability to conduct productive discussions on the ground.
Neuhoff, in his communication to President Metsola, vehemently denied the allegations, branding them “completely unfounded”. He also criticised the lack of transparency, pointing out that he was denied written confirmation of the Ukrainian authorities’ concerns or a written statement from Metsola’s office. Neuhoff asserted he maintains no political relationships with the Russian Federation.
The Ukrainian embassy in Germany responded to the situation with a statement acknowledging Neuhoff’s “pro-Russian positions” referencing his public statements regarding Ukraine, including calls for capitulation and the minimization of Russian war crimes. While refusing to comment directly on the travel ban itself, the embassy’s statement solidified the deep-seated political friction underpinning the decision.
The incident highlights a growing tension between European Parliament’s commitment to cross-spectrum dialogue and the increasing reluctance of Ukraine to tolerate perceived pro-Russian sentiment among European lawmakers. Critically, it raises questions about the Parliament’s process for vetting and managing delegations to conflict zones and underscores the political minefield surrounding engagement with Ukraine during the ongoing conflict. Neuhoff’s denial and criticism of the process also sparks debate regarding due process and freedom of movement for elected officials, even amidst heightened geopolitical sensitivities.
