Ursula von der Leyen had to listen to a lot of criticism for her clear position on Israel’s side, as demonstrated by her quick solidarity visit to Tel Aviv last week. However, always only behind closed doors: According to diplomats, no participant voiced direct criticism of the Commission president at the two-and-a-half-hour video conference of EU heads of state and government on Tuesday evening.
Von der Leyen also reacted and adapted her message: “It is clear to everyone that Israel has the right to defend itself, in line with international and humanitarian law,” she said at the subsequent press conference. She said there was also no contradiction between solidarity with Israel and humanitarian aid for the Palestinians.
This seems to be the tone in which the EU is gradually settling after a few days of cacophony between the states that had clearly positioned themselves on Israel’s side after the cruel attacks by Hamas and those that emphasized the Palestinians’ perspective more strongly. Among the first group was German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who traveled to Tel Aviv yesterday and joined at times from the German Embassy. Israel’s security is Germany’s reason of state, he stressed during an appearance with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
At the end of their meeting, the leaders received reports that several hundred people had been killed and injured in an Israeli air strike on a hospital in Gaza, according to Hamas. The incident provoked sharp reactions from the Egyptian government and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, for example. Council President Charles Michel also expressed concern: “An attack on civilian infrastructure is not in line with international law,” he said.
Von der Leyen, however, did not want to comment given the unclear situation. Shortly thereafter, Israel’s military denied responsibility: A spokesman referred to information according to which a failed missile launch by the Islamic Jihad organization was responsible. Which account is true, remained open yesterday. Perhaps the President of the Commission did well not to jump the gun this time.
After the Council is before the trilogue – this EU maxim has rarely been as true as after yesterday’s meeting of energy ministers in Luxembourg on the electricity market reform. There was essentially a stalemate between Berlin and Paris in the dispute over subsidies for French nuclear power plants. The decisive points of contention will probably not be clarified until the trilogue with Parliament, there will be a first meeting as early as tomorrow.
A trick was used yesterday in the general approach to disguise the still-simmering dispute over Contracts for Difference (CfDs) for existing power plants. In the now unified Article 19b, only new plants are subject to an obligation to organize direct price support only via CfDs, the sections on lifetime extensions for old plants were deleted.
“This special treatment, which would have exclusively benefited France, could now be completely deleted from the EU Commission’s draft. Many member states supported the German position,” negotiating circles rejoiced after the decision. But the German government has by no means achieved its goals.
In the newly worded recital 30, the member states are given the option of also promoting repowering, capacity increases and lifetime extensions of existing power plants via contracts for difference. This would also make a subsidized industrial electricity price or redistribution to companies possible in principle for Paris.
The German Ministry of Economics had previously advocated clear criteria for the limitation of subsidies – for example, through a subsidy quota based on an EU average. Instead, an addendum was included stating that the EU Commission should now decide according to the usual competition rules – as if those did not apply anyway. “The regulation is unclear and there will be disputes,” predicts Michael Bloss, who will negotiate for the Green MEPs in the trilogue.
Many a member state is also secretly betting that France will be more hemmed in during negotiations with the Parliament. In the trilogue, safeguards and controls would certainly be strengthened, said an EU diplomat yesterday after the agreement.
Bloss now has a kind of minimum price for the industry in mind. “The French can finance lifetime extensions of nuclear power plants through CfDs, but they must not lower the price so that it tops the German industrial electricity price,” says the party comrade of Economics Minister Robert Habeck. Nuclear power must also face cost competition from renewables, he adds.
The fears of the opposition in the Council were formulated most clearly by the representative of the Hungarian government. The regulations for nuclear power should not be so complex that investors would be deterred in practice. Germany’s allies, such as Luxembourg, on the other hand, tried to clarify that they were not against nuclear energy per se. Rather, no other country except France has such a large nuclear power plant park and thus such great possibilities for price support.
Further subsidies for Polish coal-fired power plants will also meet with resistance in Parliament. Capacity payments for particularly carbon-intensive power plants had actually already expired across the EU in 2019. However, Poland had been granted an extension until mid-2025.
The government in Warsaw nevertheless failed to provide sufficient new power plants and therefore saw the supply at risk. The Council now wants to grant a further exemption until the end of 2028. However, Bloss announced that the loopholes for “Poland’s dirty coal-fired power plants” would not be accepted.
Ms. Thun, how did the opposition manage to win the election even though the state media promoted PiS and the election campaign was very dirty?
It wasn’t just the election campaign that was dirty. It has been eight dirty years. PiS and its helpers turned the public media, which everyone in Poland pays for, into propaganda tools against democracy. They also bought the local press, newspapers and radio stations and instrumentalized them for their own purposes. They have subsidized hideous weekly newspapers. It was opinion-mongering against Germany, against Europe, against the opposition. It cost billions. Unlike Hungary, however, Poland fortunately still has two independent national daily newspapers and a TV station.
The high turnout of 74 percent is an indication that Poles really wanted to get rid of PiS.
The turnout was sensational. I had not expected it. I knew people were angry. At the same time, I feared they were somewhat lost because society is very divided, the disinformation was immense, and in the age of social media, everyone is inside their bubble. Unfortunately, a large part of the church was also on the side of PiS. My concern was that voters would stay home. For once, however, people in this post-communist country understood what was at stake. The success can also be explained by the fact that women went to the polls and a great many young people.
Will the PiS relinquish power?
PiS, together with the fascist party Konfederacia (Kon), simply has too few deputies in the Sejm and also in the Senate. It will have no choice but to give way. The mood in Poland is so euphoric about the opposition’s victory that PiS would destabilize the country if it hesitated too long now.
Is the Alliance prepared to take over the government?
The parties have been working together for a long time. Their experts have been working for quite some time on the bills that are now necessary, for example, to restore the independence of the judiciary. The four heads of the parties involved, Civic Coalition (KO), Third Way and the Left, know each other very well. Apart from Tusk, who is already 66 years old, the other three are young, in their early 40s. They have been cooperating for years. During the election campaign, they supported each other rather than played politics against each other.
Does that mean the future coalition partners will be able to quickly agree on a government program?
It’s clear to everyone involved that we have no other choice. If such a large country as Poland is governed by populists and anti-Europeans, then that is a threat to the entire EU. The heads of the parties involved are all pro-European. They are doomed to work well together. They agree on the essential issues: independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press, separation of church and state, turning to Europe.
Tusk promised to unleash the withheld funds from the Covid Reconstruction Fund (ARF) in Brussels. At stake are €23 billion in grants and €11 billion in loans. The prerequisite is the restoration of the independence of the judiciary.
There is not much left do to now. PiS has already been forced to introduce reforms by the EU Commission. I say: For me, the reforms demanded by the Commission are not far-reaching enough. But the final steps are no longer difficult. Poland’s solicitors – lawyers, judges and prosecutors – have already been active and have the due draft laws in the drawer. The Commission will also be happy when it can finally get rid of the money.
How is press freedom to be restored?
The local newspapers used to belong to Passauer Neue Presse. Then, with Orlen, they were bought by a large state-controlled group that owns gas stations and refineries. The editors of the newspapers were kicked out and brought into line. It would be enough to put Orlen in other hands and ensure the papers become politically independent. It must be ensured that the public broadcasters no longer continue to stir up hatred but instead satisfy people’s need for information again.
In EU agricultural policy, Poland has opposed Brussels on imports from Ukraine. Will it stick to that?
A course correction is needed here. The government must ensure that products from Ukraine are not sold on local markets. Poland should be a transit country. Romania has managed this well. I understand that Poland’s farmers are angry about cheap imports. Polish EU Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski, who was sent by the PiS, is also a nuisance.
The PiS has recently announced it will not supply any more weapons to Ukraine.
They said something like that. But this government is not to be taken seriously.
The two highest-ranking Polish soldiers resigned a few days before the election.
Ten other officers also resigned. No one knows what is behind this. They remain silent. What is clear is that the defense minister is a very bad minister. For example, he tried to instrumentalize the military in the election campaign. It was the same with the police. The PiS’s influence on the police and military must be eliminated. Poland must find its way back to Europe in security policy.
Poland is taking legal action against the Green Deal before the ECJ. Will climate policy also be corrected?
I think that the lawsuits will be withdrawn. Nevertheless, it has to be said that climate policy will not be easy for the future government. My party, Poland 2050, is the greenest party in the Alliance. However, the Tusk party, which belongs to the Christian Democratic family of parties, believes that the Green Deal from Brussels is too ambitious.
Róża Maria Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein has been a member of the European Parliament since 2009. Initially, she was a member of the Christian Democratic EPP group in the European Parliament and Civic Platform in Poland. In 2021, she resigned from Civic Platform and switched to the Polska 2050 party, which belongs to the Third Way with the Peasants’ Party. In the European Parliament, she now belongs to the liberal Renew parliamentary group. She was heavily involved in the election campaign but has ruled out joining the future government. She has not yet decided whether she will run again for the European Parliament.
The success of Lutz Güllner and his team can also be measured in numbers. On the home page of EU vs Disinfo it says: 15,972 cases of disinformation collected and refuted (as of October 17, 5 p.m.). For Güllner, this is a small proof of his team’s successful work. But the nearly 16,000 cases reflect only a portion of his work. Lutz Güllner is head of the Strategic Communications, Task Forces and Information Analysis department. In other words, he is the European Union’s foremost fighter against disinformation.
Güllner does not really like the word disinformation. Too much is associated with it, he says, and too often it is also used to discredit what is actually valid information and arguments from the political opposing side. “We are not concerned with checking opinions for their truth content,” says Güllner. “Rather, it’s about exposing and preventing state-coordinated and supported manipulation and interference in European discourse and educating people about it.”
If, for example, someone thinks Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine is a good thing, Güllner believes a society should be able to endure that. He and his team only get involved when it comes to particularly sophisticated tactics, technical aids and the use of state intelligence services to achieve a desired political goal. “We are most concerned when these campaigns are state-organized and supported and use technical and intelligence tools. Some of these campaigns aim to destabilize societies and erode trust. This is a danger to our democracy,” says Güllner.
Systematic work against disinformation first began in 2015, when EU leaders initiated the East Stratcom Taskforce. Today, this communications team is part of the department that Güllner has headed since 2017.
Güllner had already developed a keen interest in international relations as a teenager and later studied it in Paris and Berlin. He then worked, among other things, for the French Ministry of the Environment and at a political affairs consultancy. In 2013, he moved to the European Union as a civil servant, where he fits in perfectly.
As a child, he already spent a lot of time traveling abroad in the EU and later married a Dutch woman whom he met while studying in Paris. “My anchor point has always been Europe,” says the Munich native.
Since 2013, the 52-year-old has worked continuously in the service of the EU – including as head of communications for trade policy in the Commission. He became known to the public when, as an EU official, he campaigned for the ratification of the TTIP free trade agreement before the election of Donald Trump in the United States scuttled the trade deal. “In the discussion surrounding TTIP, I learned how much our media behavior and communication have changed,” Güllner says.
That is why professional political communication that can also respond to concerns and reservations is more important than ever for political projects, he says. “And we see the danger of manipulated and twisted facts in a debate,” says Güllner. “There is then a strong emotionalization, which can definitely harm the debate. We see this in many other policy areas today,” he recalls.
His team includes data analysts and teams of political experts who uncover techniques of manipulation, debunk misinformation, drive regulation in the field, and even do the groundwork for sanctions. “The team is big enough to be able to make a difference here. But it’s comparatively small at the same time, especially given the immense challenge.” A little reinforcement wouldn’t hurt. Nils Wischmeyer
Ursula von der Leyen had to listen to a lot of criticism for her clear position on Israel’s side, as demonstrated by her quick solidarity visit to Tel Aviv last week. However, always only behind closed doors: According to diplomats, no participant voiced direct criticism of the Commission president at the two-and-a-half-hour video conference of EU heads of state and government on Tuesday evening.
Von der Leyen also reacted and adapted her message: “It is clear to everyone that Israel has the right to defend itself, in line with international and humanitarian law,” she said at the subsequent press conference. She said there was also no contradiction between solidarity with Israel and humanitarian aid for the Palestinians.
This seems to be the tone in which the EU is gradually settling after a few days of cacophony between the states that had clearly positioned themselves on Israel’s side after the cruel attacks by Hamas and those that emphasized the Palestinians’ perspective more strongly. Among the first group was German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who traveled to Tel Aviv yesterday and joined at times from the German Embassy. Israel’s security is Germany’s reason of state, he stressed during an appearance with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
At the end of their meeting, the leaders received reports that several hundred people had been killed and injured in an Israeli air strike on a hospital in Gaza, according to Hamas. The incident provoked sharp reactions from the Egyptian government and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, for example. Council President Charles Michel also expressed concern: “An attack on civilian infrastructure is not in line with international law,” he said.
Von der Leyen, however, did not want to comment given the unclear situation. Shortly thereafter, Israel’s military denied responsibility: A spokesman referred to information according to which a failed missile launch by the Islamic Jihad organization was responsible. Which account is true, remained open yesterday. Perhaps the President of the Commission did well not to jump the gun this time.
After the Council is before the trilogue – this EU maxim has rarely been as true as after yesterday’s meeting of energy ministers in Luxembourg on the electricity market reform. There was essentially a stalemate between Berlin and Paris in the dispute over subsidies for French nuclear power plants. The decisive points of contention will probably not be clarified until the trilogue with Parliament, there will be a first meeting as early as tomorrow.
A trick was used yesterday in the general approach to disguise the still-simmering dispute over Contracts for Difference (CfDs) for existing power plants. In the now unified Article 19b, only new plants are subject to an obligation to organize direct price support only via CfDs, the sections on lifetime extensions for old plants were deleted.
“This special treatment, which would have exclusively benefited France, could now be completely deleted from the EU Commission’s draft. Many member states supported the German position,” negotiating circles rejoiced after the decision. But the German government has by no means achieved its goals.
In the newly worded recital 30, the member states are given the option of also promoting repowering, capacity increases and lifetime extensions of existing power plants via contracts for difference. This would also make a subsidized industrial electricity price or redistribution to companies possible in principle for Paris.
The German Ministry of Economics had previously advocated clear criteria for the limitation of subsidies – for example, through a subsidy quota based on an EU average. Instead, an addendum was included stating that the EU Commission should now decide according to the usual competition rules – as if those did not apply anyway. “The regulation is unclear and there will be disputes,” predicts Michael Bloss, who will negotiate for the Green MEPs in the trilogue.
Many a member state is also secretly betting that France will be more hemmed in during negotiations with the Parliament. In the trilogue, safeguards and controls would certainly be strengthened, said an EU diplomat yesterday after the agreement.
Bloss now has a kind of minimum price for the industry in mind. “The French can finance lifetime extensions of nuclear power plants through CfDs, but they must not lower the price so that it tops the German industrial electricity price,” says the party comrade of Economics Minister Robert Habeck. Nuclear power must also face cost competition from renewables, he adds.
The fears of the opposition in the Council were formulated most clearly by the representative of the Hungarian government. The regulations for nuclear power should not be so complex that investors would be deterred in practice. Germany’s allies, such as Luxembourg, on the other hand, tried to clarify that they were not against nuclear energy per se. Rather, no other country except France has such a large nuclear power plant park and thus such great possibilities for price support.
Further subsidies for Polish coal-fired power plants will also meet with resistance in Parliament. Capacity payments for particularly carbon-intensive power plants had actually already expired across the EU in 2019. However, Poland had been granted an extension until mid-2025.
The government in Warsaw nevertheless failed to provide sufficient new power plants and therefore saw the supply at risk. The Council now wants to grant a further exemption until the end of 2028. However, Bloss announced that the loopholes for “Poland’s dirty coal-fired power plants” would not be accepted.
Ms. Thun, how did the opposition manage to win the election even though the state media promoted PiS and the election campaign was very dirty?
It wasn’t just the election campaign that was dirty. It has been eight dirty years. PiS and its helpers turned the public media, which everyone in Poland pays for, into propaganda tools against democracy. They also bought the local press, newspapers and radio stations and instrumentalized them for their own purposes. They have subsidized hideous weekly newspapers. It was opinion-mongering against Germany, against Europe, against the opposition. It cost billions. Unlike Hungary, however, Poland fortunately still has two independent national daily newspapers and a TV station.
The high turnout of 74 percent is an indication that Poles really wanted to get rid of PiS.
The turnout was sensational. I had not expected it. I knew people were angry. At the same time, I feared they were somewhat lost because society is very divided, the disinformation was immense, and in the age of social media, everyone is inside their bubble. Unfortunately, a large part of the church was also on the side of PiS. My concern was that voters would stay home. For once, however, people in this post-communist country understood what was at stake. The success can also be explained by the fact that women went to the polls and a great many young people.
Will the PiS relinquish power?
PiS, together with the fascist party Konfederacia (Kon), simply has too few deputies in the Sejm and also in the Senate. It will have no choice but to give way. The mood in Poland is so euphoric about the opposition’s victory that PiS would destabilize the country if it hesitated too long now.
Is the Alliance prepared to take over the government?
The parties have been working together for a long time. Their experts have been working for quite some time on the bills that are now necessary, for example, to restore the independence of the judiciary. The four heads of the parties involved, Civic Coalition (KO), Third Way and the Left, know each other very well. Apart from Tusk, who is already 66 years old, the other three are young, in their early 40s. They have been cooperating for years. During the election campaign, they supported each other rather than played politics against each other.
Does that mean the future coalition partners will be able to quickly agree on a government program?
It’s clear to everyone involved that we have no other choice. If such a large country as Poland is governed by populists and anti-Europeans, then that is a threat to the entire EU. The heads of the parties involved are all pro-European. They are doomed to work well together. They agree on the essential issues: independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press, separation of church and state, turning to Europe.
Tusk promised to unleash the withheld funds from the Covid Reconstruction Fund (ARF) in Brussels. At stake are €23 billion in grants and €11 billion in loans. The prerequisite is the restoration of the independence of the judiciary.
There is not much left do to now. PiS has already been forced to introduce reforms by the EU Commission. I say: For me, the reforms demanded by the Commission are not far-reaching enough. But the final steps are no longer difficult. Poland’s solicitors – lawyers, judges and prosecutors – have already been active and have the due draft laws in the drawer. The Commission will also be happy when it can finally get rid of the money.
How is press freedom to be restored?
The local newspapers used to belong to Passauer Neue Presse. Then, with Orlen, they were bought by a large state-controlled group that owns gas stations and refineries. The editors of the newspapers were kicked out and brought into line. It would be enough to put Orlen in other hands and ensure the papers become politically independent. It must be ensured that the public broadcasters no longer continue to stir up hatred but instead satisfy people’s need for information again.
In EU agricultural policy, Poland has opposed Brussels on imports from Ukraine. Will it stick to that?
A course correction is needed here. The government must ensure that products from Ukraine are not sold on local markets. Poland should be a transit country. Romania has managed this well. I understand that Poland’s farmers are angry about cheap imports. Polish EU Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski, who was sent by the PiS, is also a nuisance.
The PiS has recently announced it will not supply any more weapons to Ukraine.
They said something like that. But this government is not to be taken seriously.
The two highest-ranking Polish soldiers resigned a few days before the election.
Ten other officers also resigned. No one knows what is behind this. They remain silent. What is clear is that the defense minister is a very bad minister. For example, he tried to instrumentalize the military in the election campaign. It was the same with the police. The PiS’s influence on the police and military must be eliminated. Poland must find its way back to Europe in security policy.
Poland is taking legal action against the Green Deal before the ECJ. Will climate policy also be corrected?
I think that the lawsuits will be withdrawn. Nevertheless, it has to be said that climate policy will not be easy for the future government. My party, Poland 2050, is the greenest party in the Alliance. However, the Tusk party, which belongs to the Christian Democratic family of parties, believes that the Green Deal from Brussels is too ambitious.
Róża Maria Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein has been a member of the European Parliament since 2009. Initially, she was a member of the Christian Democratic EPP group in the European Parliament and Civic Platform in Poland. In 2021, she resigned from Civic Platform and switched to the Polska 2050 party, which belongs to the Third Way with the Peasants’ Party. In the European Parliament, she now belongs to the liberal Renew parliamentary group. She was heavily involved in the election campaign but has ruled out joining the future government. She has not yet decided whether she will run again for the European Parliament.
The success of Lutz Güllner and his team can also be measured in numbers. On the home page of EU vs Disinfo it says: 15,972 cases of disinformation collected and refuted (as of October 17, 5 p.m.). For Güllner, this is a small proof of his team’s successful work. But the nearly 16,000 cases reflect only a portion of his work. Lutz Güllner is head of the Strategic Communications, Task Forces and Information Analysis department. In other words, he is the European Union’s foremost fighter against disinformation.
Güllner does not really like the word disinformation. Too much is associated with it, he says, and too often it is also used to discredit what is actually valid information and arguments from the political opposing side. “We are not concerned with checking opinions for their truth content,” says Güllner. “Rather, it’s about exposing and preventing state-coordinated and supported manipulation and interference in European discourse and educating people about it.”
If, for example, someone thinks Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine is a good thing, Güllner believes a society should be able to endure that. He and his team only get involved when it comes to particularly sophisticated tactics, technical aids and the use of state intelligence services to achieve a desired political goal. “We are most concerned when these campaigns are state-organized and supported and use technical and intelligence tools. Some of these campaigns aim to destabilize societies and erode trust. This is a danger to our democracy,” says Güllner.
Systematic work against disinformation first began in 2015, when EU leaders initiated the East Stratcom Taskforce. Today, this communications team is part of the department that Güllner has headed since 2017.
Güllner had already developed a keen interest in international relations as a teenager and later studied it in Paris and Berlin. He then worked, among other things, for the French Ministry of the Environment and at a political affairs consultancy. In 2013, he moved to the European Union as a civil servant, where he fits in perfectly.
As a child, he already spent a lot of time traveling abroad in the EU and later married a Dutch woman whom he met while studying in Paris. “My anchor point has always been Europe,” says the Munich native.
Since 2013, the 52-year-old has worked continuously in the service of the EU – including as head of communications for trade policy in the Commission. He became known to the public when, as an EU official, he campaigned for the ratification of the TTIP free trade agreement before the election of Donald Trump in the United States scuttled the trade deal. “In the discussion surrounding TTIP, I learned how much our media behavior and communication have changed,” Güllner says.
That is why professional political communication that can also respond to concerns and reservations is more important than ever for political projects, he says. “And we see the danger of manipulated and twisted facts in a debate,” says Güllner. “There is then a strong emotionalization, which can definitely harm the debate. We see this in many other policy areas today,” he recalls.
His team includes data analysts and teams of political experts who uncover techniques of manipulation, debunk misinformation, drive regulation in the field, and even do the groundwork for sanctions. “The team is big enough to be able to make a difference here. But it’s comparatively small at the same time, especially given the immense challenge.” A little reinforcement wouldn’t hurt. Nils Wischmeyer
