Sometimes, you have to ask why the EU seems to operate in a vacuum, seemingly unable to fathom how it relates to the rest of the world. Violence is raging in the Middle East and the prospect of all-out war, after Iran’s latest missile attack on Israel, is growing by the day. Yet Europe’s core political community is missing in action.
Internally, the political dust is settling after June’s European parliament elections and a new five-year cycle is starting in Brussels. Ursula von der Leyen is back for a second term as the president of the European Commission, having sailed through her confirmation hearings in the European parliament. The policy glass on a range of key questions from climate to technology is at least half full.
The renewed wave of nationalist-populism in France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and now Austria has caused fractures within the European Council, where EU governments make decisions for the bloc. New and strengthened far-right groups are flexing their muscles in the European parliament. Yet so far, the EU’s policy direction when it comes to European relationships with the global west and east is coherent. It is only when you consider what lies south of the EU on the map that you see how the European predicament remains bleak.
Many had feared that the European elections would usher in a protracted period of internal chaos and paralysis. But the pro-European centre held. EU governments reached rapid agreement on new appointees to the top jobs in Brussels, with an ambitious yet well-balanced trio of von der Leyen as Commission president, António Costa as the European Council president, and Kaja Kallas as high representative for foreign affairs.
All three are committed Europeanists. Von der Leyen’s new team of commissioners are yet to be grilled in parliamentary hearings, and there could still be delays and replacements. But given the complex circumstances, it’s a case of so far, so good.
In policy terms, this is translating into an ambitious agenda on the economy, energy, enlargement and defence. The former Italian prime minister Mario Draghi recently presented a 400-page blueprint, commissioned by von der Leyen, on revamping Europe’s competitiveness. The plan amounts to a fully-fledged policy agenda for the next five years.
Draghi has not shied away from speaking truth to power. He has outlined a stark choice: against the backdrop of the economic-technological competition between the US and China and Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine and weaponisation of energy, EU leaders must either jump-start closer integration or their union is destined to a future of stagnation, if not disintegration. The report covers technology, (decarbonised) energy and defence, where Europe’s competitiveness is sagging and dangerous dependencies must be reduced.
The plan may never be implemented. The German finance minister, apparently unable to see the wood for the trees, has already rejected its proposals on common borrowing. Given the plan’s integrationist, perhaps even federalist approach, an even moderately more nationalist and Eurosceptic Europe is unlikely to execute Draghi’s prescriptions.
But at least the EU has a plan that enables it to get up on its feet economically, capitalise on its partnership with the US, stand up to competition with China and address Russia’s threat. A strong high representative, alongside the new defence commissioner, bodes well.
When it comes to the global south, however, Europe seems at a total loss, viewing much of the world as nothing but a source of unwanted migrants to be kept out. It wasn’t always like this. Only a decade ago, the EU was instrumental in brokering the Iran nuclear deal. Now, it is absent from attempts to stave off a regionalwar in the Middle East, with the exception of France’s (failed) attempt, together with the US, to broker a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah.
And little is being done or even considered to improve the EU’s relationships with the global south, even though pure self-interest requires a revamp. This is worse than neglect: it reflects a broader trend towards a more closed-minded and xenophobic Europe that threatens to fundamentally transform the European project.
Von der Leyen is appointing a new commissioner for the Mediterranean, but this seems essentially residual given the (absolutely necessary) appointment of a commissioner in charge of expanding the bloc. Other than managing highly problematic migration deals with a few north African states, and perhaps buying a few more such agreements in the coming years, it’s unclear what Europe’s policy towards north Africa actually is. There is also a commissioner for international partnerships, who will be focusing mainly on Africa. But given the protectionist mood in Brussels, and the growing belief that partnerships should be pursued transactionally in pursuit of EU interests (was it ever done differently?), it is unclear how much additional traction the EU will actually have in Africa.
So far, the EU has overpromised – for instance its €300bn global gateway initiative – and underdelivered. It has also been shockingly oblivious to the outcry in many countries of the global south to the protectionist effects of EU legislation, such as its carbon border adjustment mechanism and its flagship deforestation regulation. Both measures have a sound internal logic. Yet they were discussed and approved with hardly any external consultation, with potentially damaging effects on several African, Asian and Latin American countries.
All this is happening while there is no end in sight to the destruction of Gaza. Violence mounts in the West Bank, and Israel has moved to all-out war against Lebanon (and perhaps Iran). After months of division on the question of a ceasefire in Gaza, the EU is in agreement that there should be one, but hardly any members are willing to do anything about it – for instance, by suspending arms sales to Israel. There will be even less appetite for this in light of direct confrontation between Israel and Iran.
At the UN general assembly, where the vast majority of countries worldwide backed a resolution supporting the international court of justice’s opinion demanding Israel’s compliance with international law in the occupied Palestinian territory, Europe’s show was pitiful once again: 13 countries voted in favour, 12 abstained and two – Hungary and the Czech Republic – voted against the resolution. Time and time again, Europe is given the opportunity to turn the page, and to start rebuilding its reputation in the global south. At every turn, it misses the opportunity.
