One sees China as a possible mediator in the Ukraine war, while the other wants to gain more distance from Beijing: Talks will not be easy when French President Emmanuel Macron and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen travel to China. But a common position would be all the more important, analyzes Amelie Richter.
Finally: a “deal” in the entangled dispute between Serbia and Kosovo! This was announced in the past by the EU foreign affairs representative Josep Borrell, but there is no sign of it anymore. Before Tuesday’s meeting between Aleksandar Vučić and Albin Kurti, expectations are therefore deliberately kept low. Despite this, Borrell’s credibility has been scratched, writes Stephan Israel.
In Finland, the conservative National Coalition Party won the most votes in the election. A coalition with the right-wing populist party The Finns is likely. This means that the shift to the right in Europe is continuing – with consequences for the EU, reports Eric Bonse.
There is no end to the travel from Europe: After the meeting with Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, the next Europeans, France’s President Emmanuel Macron and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, are heading to Beijing this week.
And it continues after the Easter holidays: German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock will visit the Chinese capital as part of an Asia tour. Baerbock is expected to visit China, South Korea and attend the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting in Japan from April 12 to 18, as circles confirmed to Table.Media. The German government’s China strategy is also expected to play a role in the talks during Baerbock’s visit. Further items on the agenda are not yet known.
Macron, von der Leyen and China’s head of state Xi Jinping plan to meet on Thursday. According to the Élysée, there will be a dinner with both Europeans the evening before. A bilateral meeting between von der Leyen and Xi is currently not on the official agenda.
Macron will also meet with Premier Li Qiang and the President of the National People’s Congress, Zhao Leji, on Thursday. He will then continue to Guangdong. France’s President will be accompanied by a business delegation of around 50 members.
Von der Leyen was a guest in Paris on Monday to discuss the joint trip. Over lunch, the “analyses on important points that we should raise with President Xi” were exchanged, von der Leyen posted on Twitter. Preparation was necessary, as the Head of the EU Commission and France’s President had not always shown the same direction on key issues on the China agenda recently.
After Sánchez already urged Xi last week to seek talks with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, Macron now wants to try and win Beijing’s support for ending the war against Ukraine. Given the “close relations” between China and Russia, it is obvious that the People’s Republic is one of the few countries in the world, “if not the only country in the world”, that could be a “game changer” in the conflict, according to Élysée circles. Macron spoke to Zelenskiy on the phone on Saturday.
Von der Leyen, for her part, painted a sober picture of the expectation regarding an official intervention by Beijing in her China speech last week. The images of the meeting between Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin would have said more “than a thousand words”. Xi was sticking to the “borderless friendship” with Putin, von der Leyen emphasized.
Some see Beijing as a beacon of hope, while others believe the Chinese are hopelessly lost as mediators for Ukraine. But it is precisely here that the EU must find a single voice, says French China observer Antoine Bondaz. Bondaz focuses on Asia and the People’s Republic for the French think tank Fondation pour la recherche stratégique (FRS). Macron and von der Leyen must show “sustained unity” in Beijing, Bondaz told Table.Media.
“Playing ‘good cop’ versus ‘bad cop’ in Beijing between Macron and von der Leyen would immediately weaken the European narrative,” Bondaz believes. In fact, Macron’s priority is to demonstrate European unity in Beijing.
France’s expectations of China as a mediator should nevertheless be “limited and realistic”, Bondaz demands. In order for Beijing not to provide military aid to Moscow, it would need warnings rather than concessions. However, France, as a nuclear weapons state, has the legitimacy to ask China for an official reaction to Russia’s intention to station nuclear weapons in Belarus.
Foreign policy plays a rather subordinate role in France – as is so often the case, but nevertheless particularly noticeable at the moment. The violent protests and strikes over the pension reform have pushed topics like the Ukraine war and also Macron’s trip to China rather to the fringes of discourse. A debate on the government’s approach towards Beijing, as is the case in Berlin in the Chancellery and ministries in light of the planned China strategy, does not exist in this form in Paris.
In her speech, von der Leyen called for “de-risking”, not decoupling, economic relations with China. To what extent Macron’s trip will bring economic benefits will probably emerge as the week progresses: Airbus is negotiating a new round of aircraft orders with China, Reuters reported on Monday, citing French government and industry sources.
Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury is also part of the business delegation. The closing of mega-contracts for Airbus and other companies has almost become a tradition. In 2019, Airbus received a 30-billion-euro order from the People’s Republic. The French government has “no intention” of disengaging from China, the Élysée said before the trip. However, the EU’s trade defense measures would be supported.
Given the hardening of Chinese policy, Europeans should be able to respond in a united way and enforce newly created economic policy instruments now, says French European politician Marie-Pierre Vedrenne. “Both Macron and Ursula von der Leyen have already made it clear that Europe is ready for dialogue and trade with China, but on an equal footing,” Vedrenne told Table.Media. “Our trade policy with China must respect Europe’s values and independence.” This would include the use of new and planned trade policy instruments.
The German Engineering Federation (VDMA) demanded that von der Leyen also address the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) during her visit. “Because after all Chinese sanctions against EU individuals and institutions have been lifted, the agreement could be taken out of the freezer,” Ulrich Ackermann, head of VDMA foreign trade, said.
In her speech, however, von der Leyen rejected the idea of resuming work on CAI in the near future. The framework conditions had changed significantly in the past years since the political agreement, said the EU Commission President.
Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign affairs representative, does not want to raise great expectations this time ahead of the new round in the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. He said that they would discuss the next steps in Brussels on Tuesday on how to implement the agreement on normalization between Serbia and Kosovo, including its annex. Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vučić and Kosovo’s Prime Minister Albin Kurti confirmed their participation. They said that only “technical issues” would be discussed. Therefore, no press statements are planned.
The media shyness is not without reason. Twice in recent weeks, Josep Borrell has announced an agreement, and both times he was disavowed shortly thereafter. Meanwhile, the credibility of the EU’s foreign policy chief is at stake. First, at the end of February, an agreement was reached on the mutual recognition of passports, diplomas, car license plates and customs stamps. Both sides committed themselves, at least on paper, not to block each other on the way to the EU. Belgrade also agreed to no longer obstruct Kosovo’s membership in international organizations such as the UN or the Council of Europe.
It is the idea of the Franco-German plan of a de facto recognition of Kosovo by Serbia, on the model of the 1972 Basic Treaty between the FRG and the then GDR. Kosovo committed itself at the same time to accept autonomy for a federation of ten Serb-majority municipalities. The concept is said to have come from Jens Plötner, Chancellor Scholz’s foreign and security policy advisor. A follow-up meeting at Lake Ohrid then dealt with an annex, with a timetable and sequence of steps for both sides.
Both sides agreed that no further discussions on the agreement were necessary, Borrell announced after the first meeting. They had a “deal”, the EU foreign affairs representative said after the discussion on the annex. There was only one statement at a time; no questions were allowed. Therefore, there is also confusion as to why neither document has been signed. Vučić and Kurti did not have to sign until the annex was also ready, it had originally been said. Signatures are not necessary at all, Brussels now says. The agreement and annex are an integral part of Serbia’s and Kosovo’s rapprochement with the EU.
The reason for the lack of signatures, however, probably lies elsewhere: He has “unbearable pain” in his right hand, Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vučić said on television at home after the latest round of the so-called Belgrade-Pristina dialogue. And that pain would most certainly continue until the end of his term in four years. Belgrade’s strong man wanted to tell the domestic TV audience that he would never sign a treaty with Kosovo binding under international law.
Even de facto recognition is out of the question for Vučić, under pressure from ultra-nationalists at home. He says Kosovo is “nothing” to him and prefers to speak of “the Albanians”. Numerous points in the Franco-German plan are difficult or even unacceptable, Serbia’s president says. Most recently, the leadership in Belgrade had sent letters to EU capitals not to accept Kosovo’s application for membership. The short-term goal is to join the Council of Europe. Here, too, Belgrade is frustrating Kosovo’s efforts to become a member.
For Kosovo’s government, this is an indication that Aleksandar Vučić is not concerned with the Serbian minority. Only with Kosovo’s membership in the Council of Europe could members of the Serbian minority sue for rights in Strasbourg. In Pristina, it goes down badly that Borrell, despite Vučić’s public disavowal, more or less clearly blames Kosovo Albanians for the slow progress in the dialogue. Unlike Vučić, Kurti has been willing to sign agreements and annexes, Pristina says. There, the neutrality of Borrell and his special envoy Miroslav Lajčák is in doubt. Both come from EU states that have not recognized Kosovo.
Kosovo as a supposedly weaker adversary is being put under pressure, while Serbia as the largest state in the region is being spared, according to the criticism. Borrell no longer believes in normalization between Belgrade and Pristina. Against the background of the conflict in Ukraine, the EU’s only goal is to get Serbia out of Russia’s sphere of influence. It remains to be seen whether this calculation will work. Serbia’s president has so far been quite successful in his seesaw policy between Brussels and Moscow. Either way, everything points to Kosovo’s hopes for normalization falling by the wayside.
In Sunday’s parliamentary elections in Finland, the Social Democrats of Prime Minister Sanna Marin, who have been in power until now, did make gains – they gained 2.2 percentage points to 19.9 percent. However, they still fell to third place behind the conservative National Rally Party of former Finance Minister Petteri Orpo (20.8 percent) and the right-wing populist party The Finns (20.1 percent).
Now a coalition with the participation of the right-wing populists is emerging, said Rikhard Husu, EU correspondent for the Finnish Broadcasting Corporation, at an event organized by the State Representation of Hesse in Brussels. There are no political fears of contact in Finland, the (“True”) Finns were already involved in the government in 2015. A change of course can now be expected, at least in financial policy.
Fiscal policy had already dominated the election campaign in Finland, along with migration. The Social Democrats were accused of running up too much debt and endangering the country’s financial stability. Against this backdrop, Husu said he expected a return to austerity policies. In addition, Helsinki is likely to oppose an EU sovereignty fund, as demanded by France.
It is unclear what consequences the election result will have for Marin, who is well-known and popular far beyond Finland. In Brussels, she is being considered as a possible top candidate for the Social Democrats in the European elections in the spring of 2024. Opinions differ as to whether she needs a ministerial post in the new Finnish government or not. Marin’s possible rivals include Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans, who is said to have ambitions in his native Netherlands, and Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, should the latter lose the parliamentary elections at the end of the year.
But for now, the Social Democrats are looking at the Finnish election results with concern. The election results are “no reason to celebrate“, Katarina Barley of the German Social Democrats told Table.Media. In Finland, the strongest party is always the head of government, this time the National Coalition Party. The latter is considering cooperation with the anti-EU party The Finns.
“This continues a pattern that seems to be becoming habitual among European conservatives”, Barley criticizes. To expand power in the European Council, EPP member parties collaborated with Europe’s enemies – most recently in Italy and Sweden. “Conservatives therefore bear a special responsibility: whoever gets involved with Europe’s enemies buries the European project”.
First of all, however, the European Social Democrats should be worried, says Nicolai von Ondarza of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. With the defeat in Finland, the “short revival” of the social democratic party family in the European Council is also coming to an end: After the defeat in Sweden and Finland, only five Social Democrats are still represented at the EU summit.
Besides Germany, only Spain, Portugal, Malta and Denmark are still governed by Social Democrats. However, the EPP also no longer has the majority. That could change, however, with the election in Spain in December, according to von Ondarza: If, as expected, the conservatives win, the EPP would regain the upper hand a few months before the European elections.
Sophia Besch builds bridges between different perspectives on security issues. In Berlin, Paris, London and Brussels, she has become familiar with the accents of security policy used there. Last fall, she moved from the Center for European Reform (CER) in Berlin to Washington to join the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
When Besch was studying politics and humanitarian law at the University of Münster, the question of a possible intervention in Libya was on the table: “I found it unsatisfactory that Germany did not take a position”, she says. During her studies for her master’s degree in Paris and London, she studied EU defense strategies and NATO. She is currently in the final stages of her doctorate at Kings College in London on the role of the EU in arms policy.
In her research, the 32-year-old observes how German security policy is perceived abroad. The US disciplines the Europeans on arms deliveries for Ukraine, she says. “America has taken the lead in Europe on arms issues”. The fact that Olaf Scholz, after much hesitation, sold the commitment to supply battle tanks for Ukraine as an example of German leadership caused irritation in Washington, she says – the definitions of leadership are different in Berlin and Washington.
“We as Europeans expect America to deal with our specific historical and cultural characteristics”, she elaborates. Europe can no longer rely on its special status with the Americans, she explains. That makes it all the more important for Europe to speak with one voice instead of negotiating individually with the United States. That also applies to procurement, she claims: “I hope we think European in arms matters and don’t cement the fragmentation of past decades”.
Burden-sharing among supporter countries is increasingly criticized in the United States, Besch explains. It was particularly paradoxical that transatlantically minded Republicans were promoting more support at the Munich Security Conference, while Republican voters were increasingly skeptical about support for Ukraine.
Transatlantic relations are coming under increasing pressure, Besch says. She cites three reasons for this: First, the issue of China and the Pacific region is taking up more and more attention. Second, she says, a generational change is imminent, and third, isolationism is advancing. “This administration could be the last true transatlantic administration”, she states. “America wants to withdraw from the world”. That goes for Republicans and Democrats, she adds.
The past year was turbulent, even for her. International media are looking to her for explanations. At the same time, she says, she has realized that despite a great interest in daily news, she still wants to continue focusing on her research projects: “I think it’s important to deepen my expertise and then comment when I really have something to contribute to the debate”. With the stress of the past year, however, she still has time to relax. In Washington, she has discovered comedy clubs for herself. Lukas Homrich
One sees China as a possible mediator in the Ukraine war, while the other wants to gain more distance from Beijing: Talks will not be easy when French President Emmanuel Macron and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen travel to China. But a common position would be all the more important, analyzes Amelie Richter.
Finally: a “deal” in the entangled dispute between Serbia and Kosovo! This was announced in the past by the EU foreign affairs representative Josep Borrell, but there is no sign of it anymore. Before Tuesday’s meeting between Aleksandar Vučić and Albin Kurti, expectations are therefore deliberately kept low. Despite this, Borrell’s credibility has been scratched, writes Stephan Israel.
In Finland, the conservative National Coalition Party won the most votes in the election. A coalition with the right-wing populist party The Finns is likely. This means that the shift to the right in Europe is continuing – with consequences for the EU, reports Eric Bonse.
There is no end to the travel from Europe: After the meeting with Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, the next Europeans, France’s President Emmanuel Macron and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, are heading to Beijing this week.
And it continues after the Easter holidays: German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock will visit the Chinese capital as part of an Asia tour. Baerbock is expected to visit China, South Korea and attend the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting in Japan from April 12 to 18, as circles confirmed to Table.Media. The German government’s China strategy is also expected to play a role in the talks during Baerbock’s visit. Further items on the agenda are not yet known.
Macron, von der Leyen and China’s head of state Xi Jinping plan to meet on Thursday. According to the Élysée, there will be a dinner with both Europeans the evening before. A bilateral meeting between von der Leyen and Xi is currently not on the official agenda.
Macron will also meet with Premier Li Qiang and the President of the National People’s Congress, Zhao Leji, on Thursday. He will then continue to Guangdong. France’s President will be accompanied by a business delegation of around 50 members.
Von der Leyen was a guest in Paris on Monday to discuss the joint trip. Over lunch, the “analyses on important points that we should raise with President Xi” were exchanged, von der Leyen posted on Twitter. Preparation was necessary, as the Head of the EU Commission and France’s President had not always shown the same direction on key issues on the China agenda recently.
After Sánchez already urged Xi last week to seek talks with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, Macron now wants to try and win Beijing’s support for ending the war against Ukraine. Given the “close relations” between China and Russia, it is obvious that the People’s Republic is one of the few countries in the world, “if not the only country in the world”, that could be a “game changer” in the conflict, according to Élysée circles. Macron spoke to Zelenskiy on the phone on Saturday.
Von der Leyen, for her part, painted a sober picture of the expectation regarding an official intervention by Beijing in her China speech last week. The images of the meeting between Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin would have said more “than a thousand words”. Xi was sticking to the “borderless friendship” with Putin, von der Leyen emphasized.
Some see Beijing as a beacon of hope, while others believe the Chinese are hopelessly lost as mediators for Ukraine. But it is precisely here that the EU must find a single voice, says French China observer Antoine Bondaz. Bondaz focuses on Asia and the People’s Republic for the French think tank Fondation pour la recherche stratégique (FRS). Macron and von der Leyen must show “sustained unity” in Beijing, Bondaz told Table.Media.
“Playing ‘good cop’ versus ‘bad cop’ in Beijing between Macron and von der Leyen would immediately weaken the European narrative,” Bondaz believes. In fact, Macron’s priority is to demonstrate European unity in Beijing.
France’s expectations of China as a mediator should nevertheless be “limited and realistic”, Bondaz demands. In order for Beijing not to provide military aid to Moscow, it would need warnings rather than concessions. However, France, as a nuclear weapons state, has the legitimacy to ask China for an official reaction to Russia’s intention to station nuclear weapons in Belarus.
Foreign policy plays a rather subordinate role in France – as is so often the case, but nevertheless particularly noticeable at the moment. The violent protests and strikes over the pension reform have pushed topics like the Ukraine war and also Macron’s trip to China rather to the fringes of discourse. A debate on the government’s approach towards Beijing, as is the case in Berlin in the Chancellery and ministries in light of the planned China strategy, does not exist in this form in Paris.
In her speech, von der Leyen called for “de-risking”, not decoupling, economic relations with China. To what extent Macron’s trip will bring economic benefits will probably emerge as the week progresses: Airbus is negotiating a new round of aircraft orders with China, Reuters reported on Monday, citing French government and industry sources.
Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury is also part of the business delegation. The closing of mega-contracts for Airbus and other companies has almost become a tradition. In 2019, Airbus received a 30-billion-euro order from the People’s Republic. The French government has “no intention” of disengaging from China, the Élysée said before the trip. However, the EU’s trade defense measures would be supported.
Given the hardening of Chinese policy, Europeans should be able to respond in a united way and enforce newly created economic policy instruments now, says French European politician Marie-Pierre Vedrenne. “Both Macron and Ursula von der Leyen have already made it clear that Europe is ready for dialogue and trade with China, but on an equal footing,” Vedrenne told Table.Media. “Our trade policy with China must respect Europe’s values and independence.” This would include the use of new and planned trade policy instruments.
The German Engineering Federation (VDMA) demanded that von der Leyen also address the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) during her visit. “Because after all Chinese sanctions against EU individuals and institutions have been lifted, the agreement could be taken out of the freezer,” Ulrich Ackermann, head of VDMA foreign trade, said.
In her speech, however, von der Leyen rejected the idea of resuming work on CAI in the near future. The framework conditions had changed significantly in the past years since the political agreement, said the EU Commission President.
Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign affairs representative, does not want to raise great expectations this time ahead of the new round in the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. He said that they would discuss the next steps in Brussels on Tuesday on how to implement the agreement on normalization between Serbia and Kosovo, including its annex. Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vučić and Kosovo’s Prime Minister Albin Kurti confirmed their participation. They said that only “technical issues” would be discussed. Therefore, no press statements are planned.
The media shyness is not without reason. Twice in recent weeks, Josep Borrell has announced an agreement, and both times he was disavowed shortly thereafter. Meanwhile, the credibility of the EU’s foreign policy chief is at stake. First, at the end of February, an agreement was reached on the mutual recognition of passports, diplomas, car license plates and customs stamps. Both sides committed themselves, at least on paper, not to block each other on the way to the EU. Belgrade also agreed to no longer obstruct Kosovo’s membership in international organizations such as the UN or the Council of Europe.
It is the idea of the Franco-German plan of a de facto recognition of Kosovo by Serbia, on the model of the 1972 Basic Treaty between the FRG and the then GDR. Kosovo committed itself at the same time to accept autonomy for a federation of ten Serb-majority municipalities. The concept is said to have come from Jens Plötner, Chancellor Scholz’s foreign and security policy advisor. A follow-up meeting at Lake Ohrid then dealt with an annex, with a timetable and sequence of steps for both sides.
Both sides agreed that no further discussions on the agreement were necessary, Borrell announced after the first meeting. They had a “deal”, the EU foreign affairs representative said after the discussion on the annex. There was only one statement at a time; no questions were allowed. Therefore, there is also confusion as to why neither document has been signed. Vučić and Kurti did not have to sign until the annex was also ready, it had originally been said. Signatures are not necessary at all, Brussels now says. The agreement and annex are an integral part of Serbia’s and Kosovo’s rapprochement with the EU.
The reason for the lack of signatures, however, probably lies elsewhere: He has “unbearable pain” in his right hand, Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vučić said on television at home after the latest round of the so-called Belgrade-Pristina dialogue. And that pain would most certainly continue until the end of his term in four years. Belgrade’s strong man wanted to tell the domestic TV audience that he would never sign a treaty with Kosovo binding under international law.
Even de facto recognition is out of the question for Vučić, under pressure from ultra-nationalists at home. He says Kosovo is “nothing” to him and prefers to speak of “the Albanians”. Numerous points in the Franco-German plan are difficult or even unacceptable, Serbia’s president says. Most recently, the leadership in Belgrade had sent letters to EU capitals not to accept Kosovo’s application for membership. The short-term goal is to join the Council of Europe. Here, too, Belgrade is frustrating Kosovo’s efforts to become a member.
For Kosovo’s government, this is an indication that Aleksandar Vučić is not concerned with the Serbian minority. Only with Kosovo’s membership in the Council of Europe could members of the Serbian minority sue for rights in Strasbourg. In Pristina, it goes down badly that Borrell, despite Vučić’s public disavowal, more or less clearly blames Kosovo Albanians for the slow progress in the dialogue. Unlike Vučić, Kurti has been willing to sign agreements and annexes, Pristina says. There, the neutrality of Borrell and his special envoy Miroslav Lajčák is in doubt. Both come from EU states that have not recognized Kosovo.
Kosovo as a supposedly weaker adversary is being put under pressure, while Serbia as the largest state in the region is being spared, according to the criticism. Borrell no longer believes in normalization between Belgrade and Pristina. Against the background of the conflict in Ukraine, the EU’s only goal is to get Serbia out of Russia’s sphere of influence. It remains to be seen whether this calculation will work. Serbia’s president has so far been quite successful in his seesaw policy between Brussels and Moscow. Either way, everything points to Kosovo’s hopes for normalization falling by the wayside.
In Sunday’s parliamentary elections in Finland, the Social Democrats of Prime Minister Sanna Marin, who have been in power until now, did make gains – they gained 2.2 percentage points to 19.9 percent. However, they still fell to third place behind the conservative National Rally Party of former Finance Minister Petteri Orpo (20.8 percent) and the right-wing populist party The Finns (20.1 percent).
Now a coalition with the participation of the right-wing populists is emerging, said Rikhard Husu, EU correspondent for the Finnish Broadcasting Corporation, at an event organized by the State Representation of Hesse in Brussels. There are no political fears of contact in Finland, the (“True”) Finns were already involved in the government in 2015. A change of course can now be expected, at least in financial policy.
Fiscal policy had already dominated the election campaign in Finland, along with migration. The Social Democrats were accused of running up too much debt and endangering the country’s financial stability. Against this backdrop, Husu said he expected a return to austerity policies. In addition, Helsinki is likely to oppose an EU sovereignty fund, as demanded by France.
It is unclear what consequences the election result will have for Marin, who is well-known and popular far beyond Finland. In Brussels, she is being considered as a possible top candidate for the Social Democrats in the European elections in the spring of 2024. Opinions differ as to whether she needs a ministerial post in the new Finnish government or not. Marin’s possible rivals include Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans, who is said to have ambitions in his native Netherlands, and Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, should the latter lose the parliamentary elections at the end of the year.
But for now, the Social Democrats are looking at the Finnish election results with concern. The election results are “no reason to celebrate“, Katarina Barley of the German Social Democrats told Table.Media. In Finland, the strongest party is always the head of government, this time the National Coalition Party. The latter is considering cooperation with the anti-EU party The Finns.
“This continues a pattern that seems to be becoming habitual among European conservatives”, Barley criticizes. To expand power in the European Council, EPP member parties collaborated with Europe’s enemies – most recently in Italy and Sweden. “Conservatives therefore bear a special responsibility: whoever gets involved with Europe’s enemies buries the European project”.
First of all, however, the European Social Democrats should be worried, says Nicolai von Ondarza of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. With the defeat in Finland, the “short revival” of the social democratic party family in the European Council is also coming to an end: After the defeat in Sweden and Finland, only five Social Democrats are still represented at the EU summit.
Besides Germany, only Spain, Portugal, Malta and Denmark are still governed by Social Democrats. However, the EPP also no longer has the majority. That could change, however, with the election in Spain in December, according to von Ondarza: If, as expected, the conservatives win, the EPP would regain the upper hand a few months before the European elections.
Sophia Besch builds bridges between different perspectives on security issues. In Berlin, Paris, London and Brussels, she has become familiar with the accents of security policy used there. Last fall, she moved from the Center for European Reform (CER) in Berlin to Washington to join the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
When Besch was studying politics and humanitarian law at the University of Münster, the question of a possible intervention in Libya was on the table: “I found it unsatisfactory that Germany did not take a position”, she says. During her studies for her master’s degree in Paris and London, she studied EU defense strategies and NATO. She is currently in the final stages of her doctorate at Kings College in London on the role of the EU in arms policy.
In her research, the 32-year-old observes how German security policy is perceived abroad. The US disciplines the Europeans on arms deliveries for Ukraine, she says. “America has taken the lead in Europe on arms issues”. The fact that Olaf Scholz, after much hesitation, sold the commitment to supply battle tanks for Ukraine as an example of German leadership caused irritation in Washington, she says – the definitions of leadership are different in Berlin and Washington.
“We as Europeans expect America to deal with our specific historical and cultural characteristics”, she elaborates. Europe can no longer rely on its special status with the Americans, she explains. That makes it all the more important for Europe to speak with one voice instead of negotiating individually with the United States. That also applies to procurement, she claims: “I hope we think European in arms matters and don’t cement the fragmentation of past decades”.
Burden-sharing among supporter countries is increasingly criticized in the United States, Besch explains. It was particularly paradoxical that transatlantically minded Republicans were promoting more support at the Munich Security Conference, while Republican voters were increasingly skeptical about support for Ukraine.
Transatlantic relations are coming under increasing pressure, Besch says. She cites three reasons for this: First, the issue of China and the Pacific region is taking up more and more attention. Second, she says, a generational change is imminent, and third, isolationism is advancing. “This administration could be the last true transatlantic administration”, she states. “America wants to withdraw from the world”. That goes for Republicans and Democrats, she adds.
The past year was turbulent, even for her. International media are looking to her for explanations. At the same time, she says, she has realized that despite a great interest in daily news, she still wants to continue focusing on her research projects: “I think it’s important to deepen my expertise and then comment when I really have something to contribute to the debate”. With the stress of the past year, however, she still has time to relax. In Washington, she has discovered comedy clubs for herself. Lukas Homrich
