Your contact for new licenses
A glance at the calendar shows that it is summer recess in Brussels. There are no official appointments scheduled until early September. Of course, this does not mean that important decisions for Europe and the Union are not being made elsewhere. Although Ursula von der Leyen has been elected as Commission President, it remains undecided which Commissioners will join her team.
Each member state proposes a Commissioner from its own country. It is then the task of the Commission President to assign them a portfolio. There could also be new configurations of these portfolios. The designated Commission members must then appear before the parliamentary committee responsible for their portfolio to answer questions and provide explanations.
This is not a mere formality. To recall: In 2019, for example, the Legal Affairs Committee decided that nominees László Trócsányi (Hungary) and Rovana Plumb (Romania) were unfit to take up their posts under Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The French nominee Sylvie Goulard also failed.
Once all 26 designated Commissioners have passed their examinations, the European Parliament must confirm them, along with the elected President and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, in a single approval vote. Only then can the new von der Leyen Commission begin its work. Until then, there is plenty of speculation about who will be part of this Commission.
The EPP, S&D, Renew, Greens and Left have succeeded in excluding the radical right-wing and anti-EU MEPs when the European Parliament and its committees were constituted. The firewall has held. The radical right-wing Patriots for Europe group, into which the ID Group has merged and which is led by Jordan Bardella from the Rassemblement National, would have had a mathematical claim. However, it came away empty-handed when it came to filling the posts in the parliamentary bureau and the committee chairs.
As agreed, the pro-European parties did not vote for the candidates put forward by the patriots. The Europe of Sovereign Nations Group, led by AfD MEP René Aust, was only formed after the cut-off date. It was, therefore, unable to claim any posts. This allowed the pro-Europeans to successfully erect a firewall against the Euro-haters. The cordon sanitaire to the forces that want to destroy the EU is working.
What is new is that the right-wing extremists are resisting exclusion. For example, Bardella protested at the Conference of Presidents (COP) on the eve of Ursula von der Leyen’s election as Commission President. It was unacceptable for democratically elected MEPs to be labeled with a term from medical disease control by the other political groups: cordon sanitaire.
Bardella received support from both René Aust (AfD) and Nicola Procaccini, co-leader of the ECR parliamentary group. For Procaccini’s ECR, the other groups apply the cordon sanitaire selectively. MEPs from the Polish PiS, which has 20 seats, are excluded. The other ECR MPs are generally integrated. Aust politely demanded a place for his group in the front row of parliament, where the other group leaders sit. The parliamentary administration placed his group with the backbenchers.
It should be noted that the European elections have increased the number of MEPs who are behind the cordon sanitaire and are being kept out of power by the pro-Europeans. In the last parliamentary term, there were two groups to the right of the EPP: the ECR and ID with a total of 127 seats. Now, there are three groups to the right of the EPP: ECR, Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations. They have a total of 187 seats.
There is no firewall in the Conference of Presidents (COP). The radical right-wing groups have voting rights there – unlike the representative of the non-attached groups, who only has observer status. So far, the coordinators who coordinate the legislative work in the committees have hardly ever given reports to ID MPs. According to reports, the right-wing extremist MPs have also had no interest in participating in the legislative work and participating in trilogues, for example. The pro-European parliamentary groups say that this should not change.
Nicolai von Ondarza from the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP ) told Table.Briefings: “The parties in the center have enough cohesion to maintain the cordon sanitaire in the European Parliament.” The Patriots have achieved great success by becoming the third-largest parliamentary group. This gives them money and speaking time. “But they will hardly be able to translate this into political co-determination.” They would also not be given a say in rapporteur posts in future.
Political scientist Manuel Müller explains: “The ECR Group is also acceptable to the EPP as a partner in the European Parliament because its parties have been co-governing in some member states for some time.” He does not rule out that the Patriots will also become more hopeful: “If the parties in the Patriots for Europe Group are involved in further governments, there could be a gradual normalization here too.”
Ondarza also believes: “Exclusion becomes more difficult with every national election in which parties critical of the EU come into government.” A tipping point would be reached if Marine Le Pen were elected president in France in 2027. Müller points out: Le Pen and Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán could also point out that even more radical parties, such as the AfD, are no longer part of their parliamentary group. He expects that it will be more difficult in practice to maintain the cordon sanitaire. “Especially as the EU-critical parties are also gaining weight in the Council.”
There has never been a firewall in the Council against governments with the participation of right-wing extremists. For example, there has been no debate to date as to whether ministers from Fidesz, a member party of the radical right-wing Patriots, should be allowed to participate in trilogues.
The hearings of the candidates for the commissioner posts in the European Parliament committees are scheduled for the fall. Ondarza assumes that it will then become clear how the cordon sanitaire will continue: “Will MEPs then allow the candidates of right-wing governments to pass or not?”
Mr. De Masi, after your election to the European Parliament for the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW), you tried to form your own faction. This did not succeed. Why?
We were very close, which is an achievement given how new we are to the Parliament. We had around 20 MEPs from six countries – 23 from seven countries would have been enough. Some parties from the Left and Social Democratic factions were unhappy and considered joining us. However, they couldn’t decide, and we realized we needed more time to prepare this process.
You were previously a member of the Left. Why didn’t you rejoin the Left faction?
Some in the Left faction wanted that. However, we always said it wouldn’t make sense to split from the Left Party in Germany only to form a faction with them in Brussels. The Left is largely irrelevant in Germany. There are substantive differences. It wouldn’t be productive for either side. We are not Left 2.0, but a party for reason and justice.
Where are the differences – in Ukraine policy?
Yes. Parts of the Left faction supported Commission President von der Leyen’s Ukraine policy. They were highly praised by the European People’s Party and practically embraced von der Leyen in congratulations. The German Left leader Martin Schirdewan criticized in the Strasbourg Ukraine debate that weapons deliveries were reaching Russia and that the sanctions weren’t strict enough. I heard no diplomatic impulses to end the dying.
If you don’t want to leave the concerns of large parts of the population who desire a negotiated peace solely to Le Pen and others, you must offer a democratic alternative – and that’s what we’ll strive for. We criticize Viktor Orbán for many things, but not for talks to end the war. That’s supposed to be the EU’s job.
Without your own faction, you can’t achieve much in the European Parliament. What’s next?
In the first week in Strasbourg, we received more attention than many other parties, even though we didn’t get a second to speak in the plenary. We initiated the postponement of von der Leyen’s election because a European court confirmed that she unjustly withheld documents in the Pfizer vaccine affair – even from the European Parliament.
We will form a shadow faction with other non-attached members. I believe we can gather almost 40 percent of these so-called Non-Inscrits and continue working on the faction project.
When might that happen?
Whether we succeed in this legislative period is not entirely in our hands. But we will calmly prepare everything with other parties and start joint political initiatives. This is urgently needed, as the first week in Parliament showed that there are no dissenting opinions on Ukraine policy in the Brussels bubble, apart from the far right. And von der Leyen was supported by the far right in Italy up to the Greens.
A shadow faction, what does that mean? Informal cooperation?
Not just informal, we also aim for regular meetings, like normal faction sessions. We will try to develop joint political initiatives and coordinate votes on a technical level. We haven’t detailed this yet, but there is a strong will to work together and make our voices heard.
What issues are you thinking of?
This naturally includes peace. But we also have significant economic and social problems in the EU and need more public investment to stop the decay of our infrastructure. Yet, the European Parliament first put a resolution on the Ukraine situation on the table, which isolates us geopolitically, promises a fantasy victory over Russia, and sinks more resources into the arms industry. And the non-attached members don’t even get a minute to speak! This needs to change.
Back to the Non-Inscrits. Are people like Martin Sonneborn and Sybille Berg included? Who else plays a role?
I get along very well with Martin Sonneborn and Sybille Berg personally. We are close on many issues. However, I doubt their party wants close cooperation or faction membership. But I have no problem with political exchange and mutual support.
What about SMER and other parties?
We are the largest individual group of the Non-Inscrits. The Slovak SMER, together with HLAS, also has six MEPs. SMER, like Sonneborn and Berg and other parties, supported our motion to postpone von der Leyen’s election. The Five Star Movement from Italy would have surely liked to do the same. But the Left faction leadership copied our motion and submitted an identical one. That was rather embarrassing.
Next are the state elections in Germany. Is the European Parliament a springboard for the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance in the autumn elections?
The European election was a test election. Never before has a party been founded so successfully in such a short time in Germany. We would have immediately entered the Bundestag with the European election result. We are likely to achieve double-digit results in the East.
But you also struggle to find partners in Germany?
We are the new kid on the block. It’s not surprising if there are attempts to exclude us. But even the CDU keeps coalitions with us open in the East. Clearly, strong election results for us are a lever to secure policies that make people’s lives safer. And on almost every political issue I’ve tackled – whether it’s Cum-Ex, Wirecard, the investment backlog, wealth taxation, or now the mask scandal involving Mr. Spahn – other politicians follow my political work a bit later. So, we will certainly achieve and initiate meaningful things here in Europe as well.
What are your political goals for the EU?
Our political goals are diplomatic solutions in the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts. We also support policies ensuring necessary public investments in Europe and protecting the purchasing power of the working and middle classes. We need sensible economic and energy policies. The sanctions harm us more than Russia, as leading economists highlight.
In climate action, we want more investment in railways rather than burdening people’s lives with higher CO2 prices, as those in rural areas cannot easily forgo their cars. The wealthiest households have the highest CO2 consumption, and higher prices don’t affect them.
Does the BSW also aim to reduce the strength of the right?
That’s a side effect of reasonable policies. The right derives its strength from established parties completely ignoring people’s realities.
Would you support von der Leyen?
No. Von der Leyen embodies cronyism – whether in defense or the Pfizer deal. She didn’t run for the European election herself. Her record is disastrous. Europe is increasingly becoming an economic and geopolitical dwarf.
And if you had to choose between von der Leyen and the right?
That’s a false choice. We are motivated by better policies for Germany and the EU. That’s not possible with von der Leyen. And she’s already cooperating with Ms. Meloni.
Fabio De Masi, full name Fabio Valeriano Lanfranco De Masi, is a member of the European Parliament. He previously served from 2014 to 2017 for the Left Party. He then sat in the German Bundestag from 2017. In 2021, he did not run again and left the Left Party in 2022. In 2024, he joined the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance.
Europe’s particle physicists are faced with a dilemma. They plan a giant accelerator at the CERN nuclear research center, which could be operational by the mid-2040s. However, the machine called FCC (Future Circular Collider) will cost at least 15 billion euros. Funding has not yet been secured. There are also growing indications that China is planning to build a similar facility in the near future and will beat the FCC to the punch. The Circular Electron Positron Collider (CEPC) could be ready for use as early as the mid-2030s and, above all, open to European researchers, at least as things stand at present. Should they seize the opportunity and save the money for the FCC?
The LHC (Large Hadron Collider) accelerator is currently in operation at CERN, which was used to discover the long-sought Higgs particle for the first time in 2012. With each test, the researchers learn more about its properties and refine their theories about the forces that keep the universe running. In the long term, they hope to have a more powerful machine. It will provide more data and possibly hints at “new physics.”
Stronger means bigger. Instead of 28 kilometers, which is the circumference of the ring-shaped LHC, the equally ring-shaped FCC requires 91 kilometers. The technical feasibility has been examined since 2021, as has the geological feasibility, given that the FCC would also be built in underground tubes. The cost estimate so far is only ballpark and stands at 15.5 billion euros. This cannot be funded from the current CERN budget, as the LHC’s research operations will continue from 2029 at a higher performance level, for which preparations are already underway.
The FCC needs additional sources of funding. There is talk of involving Switzerland and France more, as these countries benefit more from the construction – through contracts with regional companies. Another option would be for countries without CERN membership to share in the costs if they conduct research with the FCC. The USA and Japan in particular are being considered here.
“The CERN management must now clarify how the funding can be solidly secured,” says Lutz Feld from RWTH Aachen University and Chairman of the Committee for Elementary Particle Physics, which represents the German research community. It has been aware of the reluctance of the German Ministry of Education and Research and is understandable from its point of view: “As a taxpayer, I expect that investments are only made in projects whose funding has been clarified.” Feld adds that Cern has shown several times that it “is capable of such huge projects.” During the construction of the previous accelerators, “time and cost plans were adhered to.”
China has been accelerating its scientific advancement for years. This includes ideas for a large accelerator, which is also being designed as a “Higgs machine.” Now, it looks like things are getting serious. According to a Nature report, the 100-kilometer-long CEPC could be included in the next five-year plan in 2025. If the government agrees, construction could commence in 2027 and research could begin in 2035.
Such research facilities are high-tech devices at the limits of what is feasible and correspondingly attractive. After all, they produce important innovations “on the side,” such as superconductor technology, which conducts electricity almost without loss. Doubts about whether China could build such a top machine are fading. “I believe they can,” says Karl Jakobs from the University of Freiburg, who is a member of the CEPC’s International Advisory Committee and is very familiar with the concept.
The development in China and the results of the FCC feasibility study require an update to the European Strategy for Particle Physics. In 2020, relevant experts recommended building a “Higgs machine” as a successor to the LHC. Based on the new information, the experts will now consult again. “It will be very exciting,” says Jakobs, who chairs the committee. It could be that they stick with the FCC. “But it could also be that – if China builds the CEPC – CERN will be advised to shift its focus.” There are various concepts for alternative devices, including a linear accelerator called CLIC. The vote is expected to be available in two years.
Lutz Feld warns against relying solely on the Chinese accelerator. “What do we do if the Chinese government suddenly decides that no more data will be released?” he asks. “Or if China invades Taiwan and none of us can access the detectors because of the political consequences?” He says that as a scientist, he needs to be able to check the CEPC’s measurements to trust them.
Skepticism about China is widespread in the European community. According to one physicist, hardly any scientists move to the country to build a career there. You have to be very careful, they tell you that almost every day at university, says another. The international and open cooperation cultivated at CERN can hardly be imagined in China.
However, the researchers must ask themselves whether this is enough of an argument to insist on the FCC. After all, it comes with a staggering price tag, which will probably be revised upwards. Particle physicists and other basic researchers could do a lot with the money.
However, one thing to note about the decision is Europe’s leading role at CERN, both scientifically and regarding technology development. “It would be wise to retain it,” says Hans Peter Beck, a particle physicist at the University of Bern and CERN. Especially as he sees the geopolitical risk of a new ice age – regarding Russia and China; even in the USA, researchers from certain countries find it difficult to enter the country. “We physicists can only make suggestions; it’s up to politicians and society to decide what to do.”
Moving from Cairo to Brussels sounds like a big contrast, but Elke Kaschl Mohni knew what to expect in the EU capital when she took over as Director of the Goethe-Institut in 2019. Her brother has worked at the European Commission for 19 years. “All the positive expectations have been fulfilled,” she says about the city and her role in the EU environment.
At the Brussels branch, the 52-year-old is not only responsible for the language and cultural work of the German institute, but also acts as the EU representative of the Goethe-Institut and coordinates the work of a total of 13 Goethe-Instituts in Western Europe, in Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Italy, Spain and Portugal.
Like all Goethe-Instituts, the Brussels branch has to make do with less and less money because the German government has been cutting funding for foreign cultural policy for years. “We felt the cuts in 2022 and 2023 very strongly,” says Elke Kaschl Mohni, head of around 70 employees. She regrets the cuts at a time when there is a lot of talk about the resilience of democracy: “In an increasingly polarized world, cultural exchange is necessary to open up spaces for dialogue.”
In Cairo, she experienced how valuable it is to create space for exchange. Her work in Brussels is very different. For instance, here she is in charge of the “Europanetzwerk Deutsch,” which is funded by the German Foreign Office and aims to promote German as a working language in the EU institutions and celebrates its 30th anniversary this year.
EU officials and ministry officials from EU member states and candidate countries are regularly invited to events in Brussels. In March, for example, the author Lucy Fricke read from her novel “The Diplomat” in the Goethe-Institut building on rue Belliard.
The “Europanetzwerk Deutschland” also awards German scholarships for language courses and invites participants to events in Germany, where they not only learn grammar and vocabulary, but also meet experts. In late May, a course was held on the 75th anniversary of the German Basic Law.
Alumni of the program include EU Research Commissioner Iliana Ivanova and Pia Ahrenkilde, Director-General for Education, Youth, Sport, and Culture. Alumni work is important, as one of the Goethe-Institut’s official tasks is conveying a positive image of Germany abroad.
The Goethe-Institut implements the EU Commission’s “Culture Moves Europe” program, which brings artists from architecture, design, fashion, literature, drama and the visual arts to other countries and follows the idea of Erasmus exchanges. The 21 million euro program runs until July 2025. “It sets a lot in motion,” says Elke Kaschl Mohni.
She was born in Trier and spent many years abroad. She obtained her Master’s degree in Middle Eastern Studies at Georgetown University, followed by a PhD in Bern, which examined the role of dance in the Middle East conflict. The 52-year-old has been working for the Goethe-Institut since 2004. She initially built up the Institute in Abu Dhabi, followed by a stint in Addis Ababa as Director of the Institute. After four years at the headquarters in Munich, she then moved to Cairo, where she was responsible for the region Middle East and North Africa. The contact between Europe and this region is a matter close to her heart.
In her private life, Elke Kaschl Mohni enjoys discovering culture that has not been organized by the Goethe-Institut. She enjoys the scene in Brussels and likes the opera and the Cinema Galeries with its arthouse program. But she also appreciates more intimate venues such as the small Full Circle cultural center in Ixelles.
This summer the five years after which Goethe-Institut employees normally have to rotate are over. Because her eldest daughter will graduate from high school next year, Elke Kaschl Mohni is able to spend a sixth year in Brussels. Silke Wettach
A glance at the calendar shows that it is summer recess in Brussels. There are no official appointments scheduled until early September. Of course, this does not mean that important decisions for Europe and the Union are not being made elsewhere. Although Ursula von der Leyen has been elected as Commission President, it remains undecided which Commissioners will join her team.
Each member state proposes a Commissioner from its own country. It is then the task of the Commission President to assign them a portfolio. There could also be new configurations of these portfolios. The designated Commission members must then appear before the parliamentary committee responsible for their portfolio to answer questions and provide explanations.
This is not a mere formality. To recall: In 2019, for example, the Legal Affairs Committee decided that nominees László Trócsányi (Hungary) and Rovana Plumb (Romania) were unfit to take up their posts under Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The French nominee Sylvie Goulard also failed.
Once all 26 designated Commissioners have passed their examinations, the European Parliament must confirm them, along with the elected President and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, in a single approval vote. Only then can the new von der Leyen Commission begin its work. Until then, there is plenty of speculation about who will be part of this Commission.
The EPP, S&D, Renew, Greens and Left have succeeded in excluding the radical right-wing and anti-EU MEPs when the European Parliament and its committees were constituted. The firewall has held. The radical right-wing Patriots for Europe group, into which the ID Group has merged and which is led by Jordan Bardella from the Rassemblement National, would have had a mathematical claim. However, it came away empty-handed when it came to filling the posts in the parliamentary bureau and the committee chairs.
As agreed, the pro-European parties did not vote for the candidates put forward by the patriots. The Europe of Sovereign Nations Group, led by AfD MEP René Aust, was only formed after the cut-off date. It was, therefore, unable to claim any posts. This allowed the pro-Europeans to successfully erect a firewall against the Euro-haters. The cordon sanitaire to the forces that want to destroy the EU is working.
What is new is that the right-wing extremists are resisting exclusion. For example, Bardella protested at the Conference of Presidents (COP) on the eve of Ursula von der Leyen’s election as Commission President. It was unacceptable for democratically elected MEPs to be labeled with a term from medical disease control by the other political groups: cordon sanitaire.
Bardella received support from both René Aust (AfD) and Nicola Procaccini, co-leader of the ECR parliamentary group. For Procaccini’s ECR, the other groups apply the cordon sanitaire selectively. MEPs from the Polish PiS, which has 20 seats, are excluded. The other ECR MPs are generally integrated. Aust politely demanded a place for his group in the front row of parliament, where the other group leaders sit. The parliamentary administration placed his group with the backbenchers.
It should be noted that the European elections have increased the number of MEPs who are behind the cordon sanitaire and are being kept out of power by the pro-Europeans. In the last parliamentary term, there were two groups to the right of the EPP: the ECR and ID with a total of 127 seats. Now, there are three groups to the right of the EPP: ECR, Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations. They have a total of 187 seats.
There is no firewall in the Conference of Presidents (COP). The radical right-wing groups have voting rights there – unlike the representative of the non-attached groups, who only has observer status. So far, the coordinators who coordinate the legislative work in the committees have hardly ever given reports to ID MPs. According to reports, the right-wing extremist MPs have also had no interest in participating in the legislative work and participating in trilogues, for example. The pro-European parliamentary groups say that this should not change.
Nicolai von Ondarza from the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP ) told Table.Briefings: “The parties in the center have enough cohesion to maintain the cordon sanitaire in the European Parliament.” The Patriots have achieved great success by becoming the third-largest parliamentary group. This gives them money and speaking time. “But they will hardly be able to translate this into political co-determination.” They would also not be given a say in rapporteur posts in future.
Political scientist Manuel Müller explains: “The ECR Group is also acceptable to the EPP as a partner in the European Parliament because its parties have been co-governing in some member states for some time.” He does not rule out that the Patriots will also become more hopeful: “If the parties in the Patriots for Europe Group are involved in further governments, there could be a gradual normalization here too.”
Ondarza also believes: “Exclusion becomes more difficult with every national election in which parties critical of the EU come into government.” A tipping point would be reached if Marine Le Pen were elected president in France in 2027. Müller points out: Le Pen and Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán could also point out that even more radical parties, such as the AfD, are no longer part of their parliamentary group. He expects that it will be more difficult in practice to maintain the cordon sanitaire. “Especially as the EU-critical parties are also gaining weight in the Council.”
There has never been a firewall in the Council against governments with the participation of right-wing extremists. For example, there has been no debate to date as to whether ministers from Fidesz, a member party of the radical right-wing Patriots, should be allowed to participate in trilogues.
The hearings of the candidates for the commissioner posts in the European Parliament committees are scheduled for the fall. Ondarza assumes that it will then become clear how the cordon sanitaire will continue: “Will MEPs then allow the candidates of right-wing governments to pass or not?”
Mr. De Masi, after your election to the European Parliament for the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW), you tried to form your own faction. This did not succeed. Why?
We were very close, which is an achievement given how new we are to the Parliament. We had around 20 MEPs from six countries – 23 from seven countries would have been enough. Some parties from the Left and Social Democratic factions were unhappy and considered joining us. However, they couldn’t decide, and we realized we needed more time to prepare this process.
You were previously a member of the Left. Why didn’t you rejoin the Left faction?
Some in the Left faction wanted that. However, we always said it wouldn’t make sense to split from the Left Party in Germany only to form a faction with them in Brussels. The Left is largely irrelevant in Germany. There are substantive differences. It wouldn’t be productive for either side. We are not Left 2.0, but a party for reason and justice.
Where are the differences – in Ukraine policy?
Yes. Parts of the Left faction supported Commission President von der Leyen’s Ukraine policy. They were highly praised by the European People’s Party and practically embraced von der Leyen in congratulations. The German Left leader Martin Schirdewan criticized in the Strasbourg Ukraine debate that weapons deliveries were reaching Russia and that the sanctions weren’t strict enough. I heard no diplomatic impulses to end the dying.
If you don’t want to leave the concerns of large parts of the population who desire a negotiated peace solely to Le Pen and others, you must offer a democratic alternative – and that’s what we’ll strive for. We criticize Viktor Orbán for many things, but not for talks to end the war. That’s supposed to be the EU’s job.
Without your own faction, you can’t achieve much in the European Parliament. What’s next?
In the first week in Strasbourg, we received more attention than many other parties, even though we didn’t get a second to speak in the plenary. We initiated the postponement of von der Leyen’s election because a European court confirmed that she unjustly withheld documents in the Pfizer vaccine affair – even from the European Parliament.
We will form a shadow faction with other non-attached members. I believe we can gather almost 40 percent of these so-called Non-Inscrits and continue working on the faction project.
When might that happen?
Whether we succeed in this legislative period is not entirely in our hands. But we will calmly prepare everything with other parties and start joint political initiatives. This is urgently needed, as the first week in Parliament showed that there are no dissenting opinions on Ukraine policy in the Brussels bubble, apart from the far right. And von der Leyen was supported by the far right in Italy up to the Greens.
A shadow faction, what does that mean? Informal cooperation?
Not just informal, we also aim for regular meetings, like normal faction sessions. We will try to develop joint political initiatives and coordinate votes on a technical level. We haven’t detailed this yet, but there is a strong will to work together and make our voices heard.
What issues are you thinking of?
This naturally includes peace. But we also have significant economic and social problems in the EU and need more public investment to stop the decay of our infrastructure. Yet, the European Parliament first put a resolution on the Ukraine situation on the table, which isolates us geopolitically, promises a fantasy victory over Russia, and sinks more resources into the arms industry. And the non-attached members don’t even get a minute to speak! This needs to change.
Back to the Non-Inscrits. Are people like Martin Sonneborn and Sybille Berg included? Who else plays a role?
I get along very well with Martin Sonneborn and Sybille Berg personally. We are close on many issues. However, I doubt their party wants close cooperation or faction membership. But I have no problem with political exchange and mutual support.
What about SMER and other parties?
We are the largest individual group of the Non-Inscrits. The Slovak SMER, together with HLAS, also has six MEPs. SMER, like Sonneborn and Berg and other parties, supported our motion to postpone von der Leyen’s election. The Five Star Movement from Italy would have surely liked to do the same. But the Left faction leadership copied our motion and submitted an identical one. That was rather embarrassing.
Next are the state elections in Germany. Is the European Parliament a springboard for the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance in the autumn elections?
The European election was a test election. Never before has a party been founded so successfully in such a short time in Germany. We would have immediately entered the Bundestag with the European election result. We are likely to achieve double-digit results in the East.
But you also struggle to find partners in Germany?
We are the new kid on the block. It’s not surprising if there are attempts to exclude us. But even the CDU keeps coalitions with us open in the East. Clearly, strong election results for us are a lever to secure policies that make people’s lives safer. And on almost every political issue I’ve tackled – whether it’s Cum-Ex, Wirecard, the investment backlog, wealth taxation, or now the mask scandal involving Mr. Spahn – other politicians follow my political work a bit later. So, we will certainly achieve and initiate meaningful things here in Europe as well.
What are your political goals for the EU?
Our political goals are diplomatic solutions in the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts. We also support policies ensuring necessary public investments in Europe and protecting the purchasing power of the working and middle classes. We need sensible economic and energy policies. The sanctions harm us more than Russia, as leading economists highlight.
In climate action, we want more investment in railways rather than burdening people’s lives with higher CO2 prices, as those in rural areas cannot easily forgo their cars. The wealthiest households have the highest CO2 consumption, and higher prices don’t affect them.
Does the BSW also aim to reduce the strength of the right?
That’s a side effect of reasonable policies. The right derives its strength from established parties completely ignoring people’s realities.
Would you support von der Leyen?
No. Von der Leyen embodies cronyism – whether in defense or the Pfizer deal. She didn’t run for the European election herself. Her record is disastrous. Europe is increasingly becoming an economic and geopolitical dwarf.
And if you had to choose between von der Leyen and the right?
That’s a false choice. We are motivated by better policies for Germany and the EU. That’s not possible with von der Leyen. And she’s already cooperating with Ms. Meloni.
Fabio De Masi, full name Fabio Valeriano Lanfranco De Masi, is a member of the European Parliament. He previously served from 2014 to 2017 for the Left Party. He then sat in the German Bundestag from 2017. In 2021, he did not run again and left the Left Party in 2022. In 2024, he joined the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance.
Europe’s particle physicists are faced with a dilemma. They plan a giant accelerator at the CERN nuclear research center, which could be operational by the mid-2040s. However, the machine called FCC (Future Circular Collider) will cost at least 15 billion euros. Funding has not yet been secured. There are also growing indications that China is planning to build a similar facility in the near future and will beat the FCC to the punch. The Circular Electron Positron Collider (CEPC) could be ready for use as early as the mid-2030s and, above all, open to European researchers, at least as things stand at present. Should they seize the opportunity and save the money for the FCC?
The LHC (Large Hadron Collider) accelerator is currently in operation at CERN, which was used to discover the long-sought Higgs particle for the first time in 2012. With each test, the researchers learn more about its properties and refine their theories about the forces that keep the universe running. In the long term, they hope to have a more powerful machine. It will provide more data and possibly hints at “new physics.”
Stronger means bigger. Instead of 28 kilometers, which is the circumference of the ring-shaped LHC, the equally ring-shaped FCC requires 91 kilometers. The technical feasibility has been examined since 2021, as has the geological feasibility, given that the FCC would also be built in underground tubes. The cost estimate so far is only ballpark and stands at 15.5 billion euros. This cannot be funded from the current CERN budget, as the LHC’s research operations will continue from 2029 at a higher performance level, for which preparations are already underway.
The FCC needs additional sources of funding. There is talk of involving Switzerland and France more, as these countries benefit more from the construction – through contracts with regional companies. Another option would be for countries without CERN membership to share in the costs if they conduct research with the FCC. The USA and Japan in particular are being considered here.
“The CERN management must now clarify how the funding can be solidly secured,” says Lutz Feld from RWTH Aachen University and Chairman of the Committee for Elementary Particle Physics, which represents the German research community. It has been aware of the reluctance of the German Ministry of Education and Research and is understandable from its point of view: “As a taxpayer, I expect that investments are only made in projects whose funding has been clarified.” Feld adds that Cern has shown several times that it “is capable of such huge projects.” During the construction of the previous accelerators, “time and cost plans were adhered to.”
China has been accelerating its scientific advancement for years. This includes ideas for a large accelerator, which is also being designed as a “Higgs machine.” Now, it looks like things are getting serious. According to a Nature report, the 100-kilometer-long CEPC could be included in the next five-year plan in 2025. If the government agrees, construction could commence in 2027 and research could begin in 2035.
Such research facilities are high-tech devices at the limits of what is feasible and correspondingly attractive. After all, they produce important innovations “on the side,” such as superconductor technology, which conducts electricity almost without loss. Doubts about whether China could build such a top machine are fading. “I believe they can,” says Karl Jakobs from the University of Freiburg, who is a member of the CEPC’s International Advisory Committee and is very familiar with the concept.
The development in China and the results of the FCC feasibility study require an update to the European Strategy for Particle Physics. In 2020, relevant experts recommended building a “Higgs machine” as a successor to the LHC. Based on the new information, the experts will now consult again. “It will be very exciting,” says Jakobs, who chairs the committee. It could be that they stick with the FCC. “But it could also be that – if China builds the CEPC – CERN will be advised to shift its focus.” There are various concepts for alternative devices, including a linear accelerator called CLIC. The vote is expected to be available in two years.
Lutz Feld warns against relying solely on the Chinese accelerator. “What do we do if the Chinese government suddenly decides that no more data will be released?” he asks. “Or if China invades Taiwan and none of us can access the detectors because of the political consequences?” He says that as a scientist, he needs to be able to check the CEPC’s measurements to trust them.
Skepticism about China is widespread in the European community. According to one physicist, hardly any scientists move to the country to build a career there. You have to be very careful, they tell you that almost every day at university, says another. The international and open cooperation cultivated at CERN can hardly be imagined in China.
However, the researchers must ask themselves whether this is enough of an argument to insist on the FCC. After all, it comes with a staggering price tag, which will probably be revised upwards. Particle physicists and other basic researchers could do a lot with the money.
However, one thing to note about the decision is Europe’s leading role at CERN, both scientifically and regarding technology development. “It would be wise to retain it,” says Hans Peter Beck, a particle physicist at the University of Bern and CERN. Especially as he sees the geopolitical risk of a new ice age – regarding Russia and China; even in the USA, researchers from certain countries find it difficult to enter the country. “We physicists can only make suggestions; it’s up to politicians and society to decide what to do.”
Moving from Cairo to Brussels sounds like a big contrast, but Elke Kaschl Mohni knew what to expect in the EU capital when she took over as Director of the Goethe-Institut in 2019. Her brother has worked at the European Commission for 19 years. “All the positive expectations have been fulfilled,” she says about the city and her role in the EU environment.
At the Brussels branch, the 52-year-old is not only responsible for the language and cultural work of the German institute, but also acts as the EU representative of the Goethe-Institut and coordinates the work of a total of 13 Goethe-Instituts in Western Europe, in Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Italy, Spain and Portugal.
Like all Goethe-Instituts, the Brussels branch has to make do with less and less money because the German government has been cutting funding for foreign cultural policy for years. “We felt the cuts in 2022 and 2023 very strongly,” says Elke Kaschl Mohni, head of around 70 employees. She regrets the cuts at a time when there is a lot of talk about the resilience of democracy: “In an increasingly polarized world, cultural exchange is necessary to open up spaces for dialogue.”
In Cairo, she experienced how valuable it is to create space for exchange. Her work in Brussels is very different. For instance, here she is in charge of the “Europanetzwerk Deutsch,” which is funded by the German Foreign Office and aims to promote German as a working language in the EU institutions and celebrates its 30th anniversary this year.
EU officials and ministry officials from EU member states and candidate countries are regularly invited to events in Brussels. In March, for example, the author Lucy Fricke read from her novel “The Diplomat” in the Goethe-Institut building on rue Belliard.
The “Europanetzwerk Deutschland” also awards German scholarships for language courses and invites participants to events in Germany, where they not only learn grammar and vocabulary, but also meet experts. In late May, a course was held on the 75th anniversary of the German Basic Law.
Alumni of the program include EU Research Commissioner Iliana Ivanova and Pia Ahrenkilde, Director-General for Education, Youth, Sport, and Culture. Alumni work is important, as one of the Goethe-Institut’s official tasks is conveying a positive image of Germany abroad.
The Goethe-Institut implements the EU Commission’s “Culture Moves Europe” program, which brings artists from architecture, design, fashion, literature, drama and the visual arts to other countries and follows the idea of Erasmus exchanges. The 21 million euro program runs until July 2025. “It sets a lot in motion,” says Elke Kaschl Mohni.
She was born in Trier and spent many years abroad. She obtained her Master’s degree in Middle Eastern Studies at Georgetown University, followed by a PhD in Bern, which examined the role of dance in the Middle East conflict. The 52-year-old has been working for the Goethe-Institut since 2004. She initially built up the Institute in Abu Dhabi, followed by a stint in Addis Ababa as Director of the Institute. After four years at the headquarters in Munich, she then moved to Cairo, where she was responsible for the region Middle East and North Africa. The contact between Europe and this region is a matter close to her heart.
In her private life, Elke Kaschl Mohni enjoys discovering culture that has not been organized by the Goethe-Institut. She enjoys the scene in Brussels and likes the opera and the Cinema Galeries with its arthouse program. But she also appreciates more intimate venues such as the small Full Circle cultural center in Ixelles.
This summer the five years after which Goethe-Institut employees normally have to rotate are over. Because her eldest daughter will graduate from high school next year, Elke Kaschl Mohni is able to spend a sixth year in Brussels. Silke Wettach