Your contact for new licenses
On the US financial markets, the scales tipped towards Kamala Harris yesterday, but even investors can only speculate. On the morning of the ballot, the US presidential election is still too close to call.
The EU Commission and member states have tried to prepare as far as possible for the scenarios: a Harris victory, the return of Donald Trump or a prolonged adjourned game, possibly combined with violent unrest. In the Commission, a core group of officials has been working confidentially on responses to the possible scenarios and discussed them in small groups with EU ambassadors.
The immediate biggest concern is that an election winner Trump will stop military support for Ukraine and lift sanctions against Russia – the Europeans would hardly be able to compensate for either. In the medium term, the Putin-friendly ex-president could call the US security guarantees within NATO into question and force the Europeans to find billions and billions for their own military. In economic terms, Trump’s threat to increase tariffs on all imports poses a threat, in some cases a massive one.
The EU has gained experience in dealing with Trump’s disruptive and unpredictable style during his first term in office. But the Union’s defenses are significantly weakened, both politically and economically. Germany and France are preoccupied with themselves. Ursula von der Leyen or Donald Tusk cannot fill the gap completely. Trump’s triumph would inspire nationalist forces in Europe, starting with Viktor Orbán, Robert Fico and Giorgia Meloni.
Some optimists are hoping that the Trump shock will send a political jolt through the EU. It could just as easily trigger panic and conflict. If Kamala Harris becomes the new president, reactions are likely to be more relaxed. But Europe’s problems will not disappear even with a democrat. The challenges are well known, they just need to be tackled with more force.
Stay confident.
Maroš Šefčovič has been an EU Commissioner since 2009, and now the Slovakian has once again won over the MEPs of the relevant parliamentary committees in a hearing. The Commissioner-designate for Trade and Economic Security and for Interinstitutional Relations and Transparency visited the Trade Committee (INTA) and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO). The hearing at a glance:
Šefčovič handled most of the three-and-a-half-hour hearing with sovereignity. His many years of experience allowed the former Slovakian diplomat to pepper his answers with details and anecdotes while remaining vague on politically sensitive topics. He emphasized his support for Ukraine several times, probably to dispel any doubts about his relationship with the EU-critical Slovakian Fico government. In a short press statement after the hearing, Šefčovič said that he had “always been guided by general European interests” in his work in the Commission.
INTA Chairman Bernd Lange (SPD) had words of praise for Šefčovič after the hearing. He had clearly demonstrated where the EU’s priorities should lie in a globalized world and that he would defend the EU’s interests.
During the hearings, Šefčovič spoke about a number of topics:
The parliamentarians also used the opportunity of the hearing to express their criticism of EU trade policy:
The confirmation hearing for Christophe Hansen in the European Parliament did not result in an overly heated exchange of blows. With a broad majority from the EPP, S&D, Greens, Renew and ECR, the coordinators of the political groups confirmed him as EU Commissioner for Agriculture and Food in the responsible Agriculture Committee (AGRI), according to well-informed circles.
The Luxembourger had previously answered the MEPs’ rather tame questions with aplomb. The former trade and environmental politician was particularly in his element when it came to questions on international trade. But he also appeared well prepared when it came to purely agricultural topics – also because he stuck closely to his previous written answers and to statements by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. For example, the promise to support small farms in the Common Agricultural Policy in the future.
However, Hansen became clear when it came to the future EU budget. “I will work very hard for a specific agricultural budget,” he promised. In recently leaked reform ideas from the EU Commission, there were considerations to dissolve the CAP as a separate budget item and instead pay it out via the national budgets. This was criticized by the German Farmers’ Association (DBV), among others. Many MEPs expressed concerns about the size of the future EU agricultural budget.
Hansen promised that he would fight for a strong agricultural budget, but would not decide this alone: “I would be glad if we could maintain the current budget at the same level.” The budget must be flanked by other sources of income for farmers: from the bioeconomy, through carbon farming, better access to credit and better producer prices. He promised two initiatives already announced in the spring to strengthen cooperatives and to implement the Unfair Trading Practices (UTP) Directive across borders in his first days in office.
Hansen clearly rejected any substantial new EU initiatives in the food sector – despite the fact that “food” is now in the title of the Commissioner for Agriculture. It is “very difficult to dictate from above who should eat what.” Moreover, much of the work in this area is done at the national, regional or local level, not at the European level. Hansen also spoke out against extending emissions trading (ETS) to the agricultural sector.
This is “not the way forward” – the bureaucratic burden is too high and consumer prices would rise as a result. Nonetheless, Hansen is committed to the goals of the Green Deal. In view of extreme weather events such as the recent one in the Valencia region, “nobody can seriously question them.”
The former trade politician spoke out in favor of the Mercosur agreement: It was in the interests of European agriculture, which benefited greatly from exports, he said. However, Hansen also conceded that parts of the sector, especially meat producers, feel unprotected against competition from South America. It must be ensured that imports from these countries meet EU standards. Hansen also sees potential for greater reliance on so-called mirror clauses in international trade – i.e. the application of own production standards to imports.
The EU regulation for deforestation-free supply chains (EUDR) is a good example of how this can work – even though he is aware of the criticism of the project. Hansen helped negotiate the law as the parliament’s rapporteur.
After the hearings of the individual Commissioners, which will run until November 12, Parliament still has to approve the entire new Commission. This is currently scheduled for the plenary session from November 25 to 28.
Apostolos Tzitzikostas was governor of the Greek province of Macedonia for ten years. Now the politician, who belongs to the Christian Democratic party Nea Dimokratia, plans to become Commissioner for Transport and Tourism. The hearing was led by the Transport Committee. TRAN Chairwoman Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (EPP) moderated the three-hour event. The coordinators nominated him after the hearing. Coordinators representing at least two thirds of MEPs voted for him in a secret ballot. There was one no vote and one abstention.
Tzitzikostas made a convincing appearance. The 46-year-old had already mastered the various dossiers in the portfolio quite confidently and was able to present his positions eloquently in both English and French. In his presentation, he drew on his knowledge of which EU funds are used to pay for measures in the areas of transport and tourism.
Whether in air, water, road or rail transport – the candidate promised to work towards greater competitiveness. However, the principle of sustainability must be upheld and climate targets must be maintained. He announced that he would remove barriers in the internal market. For example, he wants to ensure that barriers to the Single European Sky are removed.
Tzitzikostas promises to present comprehensive strategies in the following areas within his first few months in office:
A proposal to connect the EU capitals with high-speed trains is due in 2025. He has also announced a proposal for a standardized booking system for train tickets for 2025. “Just like in air travel, it will then be possible to book a train journey across national borders with a single click.” He also wants to further strengthen passenger rights.
In response to questions from MEPs, he acknowledged the principle of technological neutrality in the area of road transport. He could guarantee the inclusion of e-fuels in the CO2 fleet limits. He made very clear that he does not want to shake the targets that have been set. “We are sticking to the plans for reducing CO2 emissions.” The rules were laid down years ago, he said, giving suppliers investment security.
At the same time, the manufacturers have enough time, namely eleven years, to complete the end of the combustion engine in passenger cars. “We can’t let up here.” However, the industry should receive help with the transformation by supporting the market for battery EVs. He will work to expand the charging and refueling infrastructure.
Tzitzikostas announced a proposal for the decarbonization of company car fleets. This makes sense, he said, because half of new cars are company cars and have a high average mileage. Rules for green company cars would also help to create a used car market for e-cars and reduce prices. He did not specify whether it would be a legislative proposal.
In the field of aviation, he plans to lobby the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for new decarbonization targets. 2025 will be a key year for this. He promised the Environment Committee, which was able to ask questions as an invited committee, that he would coordinate closely with the Climate Commissioner.
EPP Coordinator Jens Gieseke (CDU) praised Tzitzikostas’ commitment to digitalization in transport: “I was very pleased to hear that you are vehemently committed to digital tickets and technological neutrality. You have Parliament on your side here.”
For the Greens, former Environment Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius from Lithuania called on the Commissioner to submit a legislative proposal with mandatory requirements for the decarbonization of company car fleets if possible.
Jan-Christoph Oetjen (FDP), coordinator of Renew, called on Tzitzikostas to also adapt the aviation strategy and ensure that sustainable aviation fuels can be traded.
“We both agree that we must strengthen the European pillar in NATO,” said Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Monday at his press conference with the new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who was on his inaugural visit to Berlin.
His assumption of office could be the beginning of a new era: barely a month in office, Mark Rutte has already convened a new “high-level task force” with Ursula von der Leyen to “strengthen” cooperation between NATO and the EU. In an increasingly dangerous world, this partnership is vital to defending peace, freedom and prosperity, said the new NATO Secretary General and the Commission President last week.
The contrast could hardly be any stronger: at the end of his term of office, his predecessor Jens Stoltenberg had quite openly criticized the EU’s defense policy ambitions and urgently warned against duplicating structures. The EU had always remained alien to the Norwegian, who also lacked personal contacts. According to NATO headquarters, Stoltenberg did not have the “European reflex” that the Dutchman brings with him as a long-standing head of government and expert on the workings of the European quarter in Brussels. Rutte and von der Leyen could become a dream team in Brussels. They know and appreciate each other from long nights at EU summits and countless bilateral meetings.
After the growing rivalry at the end of the Stoltenberg era, the signs are now pointing towards closer ties, also in view of a possible comeback of Donald Trump as US president. It is a balancing act that the jovial Rutte could achieve. In his role as head of government, he has proven that he can also deal with Trump. He is also demonstrating this now when, after taking office as head of NATO, he speaks diplomatically with regard to a comeback by the former US president and possible consequences for the alliance. This is under the motto of not giving Trump an excuse to slam the door shut.
At the same time, Rutte was somewhere in the middle of the circle of EU heads of state and government, between an Olaf Scholz and an Emmanuel Macron. He is a transatlanticist and a European. For the Dutchman, the partnership with the EU has priority, while for Stoltenberg, cooperation with the Asia-Pacific 4 has always been a priority, also with regard to US interests, according to reports in Brussels. It helps that a new team will also be taking up office in the European Quarter at the beginning of December or January at the latest, one that pulls together. It is said that there is a great deal of agreement between the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kaja Kallas, the future EU Council President Antonio Costa, von der Leyen and Rutte.
“I think it is very important that both organizations are led by people who want to promote a spirit of cooperation rather than a spirit of mistrust,” emphasizes Camille Grand, former Deputy Secretary General of NATO and Distinguished Policy Fellow at ECFR. Grand sees very concrete opportunities to expand cooperation between the two organizations and to place it on a more trusting basis.
“It is important,” says Grand, “to move from a natural distrust and competitiveness to a new standard of cooperation that ensures smooth cooperation.” Rutte could contribute to this.
Germany is again controlling its borders, as are founding states such as France and most recently the Netherlands. The Schengen area, the guarantor of European freedom of movement and, next to the euro, probably the most tangible European success story, is facing a breaking point: One of our greatest historical achievements in the Union, the internal opening of national borders for the benefit of all, is currently being blatantly curtailed and violated. If we do not take decisive action against this now, it will leave deep wounds in our Union as we know and value it today.
The EU is under massive pressure, but let us not accept national reflexes; they are pseudo solutions that overshadow the real problems and prevent action. Free movement is vital for our union. In order to maintain Schengen, we urgently need to do a better job at our external borders.
A plea for full Schengen is not naive sentimentality. If we sell away Schengen, we not only threaten our freedom, but we also weaken Europe’s greatest asset in the world, the European internal market. Around three and a half million people cross internal borders every day. In addition to studying and visiting family, the main focus is on working across borders, as a commuter or as an entrepreneur in order to conduct trade or maintain supply chains across Europe.
A collapse of what is currently the world’s largest area of free movement of people with a population of almost 420 million people could mean significant losses for the European economy and also increase the risk of recession. Additional waiting times are likely to increase transport and goods costs for imports, and retailers would have to switch to costly storage instead of just-in-time production.
Schengen is our vital European engine room. However, the significant economic advantages of the Schengen area only takes effect if things run smoothly and there is equal respect. If we damage Schengen, we will directly damage the foundation of the European Union and the internal market as a whole. In the global context, the EU cannot afford to fall behind, especially now. Our goal must be a strong internal market that creates competitive advantages and makes Europe’s economy resilient to crises and ensures prosperity and jobs.
A strong Europe therefore needs freedom of movement. This inevitably goes hand in hand with strong protection of our external borders. Here we were too lax and uncoordinated in the past. The recently passed Asylum and Migration Pact addresses that weakness: the pact ensures, among others, rapid and efficient assessment of asylum requests, allows for faster reactions in crisis situations and thereby significantly reduces secondary migration.
There is also a need for optimized mutual operational assistance, for better cross-border surveillance of suspicious people and European law enforcement. In addition, the Schengen information system should finally be used adequately by all Schengen member states. 30 countries can access over 86 million search data around the clock. It plays a crucial role in ensuring the necessary high level of security within the Schengen zone.
Internal border controls not only harm trade, they also don’t deliver answers to illegal migration. In order not to further endanger Schengen with mistrust, the member states must not waste any time now. The faster they implement the pact, the sooner all measures can mesh and create the decisive power in combating terrorism and organized crime, including human trafficking and illegal migration. Schengen makes us not weaker but stronger, let’s protect it.
Lovers of absurd humor can rejoice: the fourth season of the satirical series “Parliament” is here. The main character Samy, whose career in Brussels is the subject of the series, has arrived in the Commission. He takes over – not entirely voluntarily – the chairmanship of a committee with delegates from all 27 member states. Unfortunately, not everyone sticks to the theme.
“It’s really not very far-fetched. It’s close, but it misses the point.” That is how it is in many committees, admits Barbara Gessler at the premiere of the series in Berlin. And yet not everything the series claims is true, said the representative of the European Commission in Germany. She is convinced that “people in Brussels are inspired to carry the topic of European integration forward.”
“It’s all very over the top,” said Minister of State for Europe Anna Lührmann. “But there is a kernel of truth in a lot of it.” For example, in the beautiful sentence from the French representative in the series: “The most important thing is that the Germans love us.”
Whoever comments on the series usually says: “I’ve learned a lot about Brussels.” “Parliament” is very close, almost right in the middle of the EU bubble. After all, the French authors are former or current employees of the Commission and Parliament. And this time the film team is even present at a summit.
Filming also takes place at the original locations. Producer Jan Diepers, Managing Director of production company Studio Hamburg Serienwerft, enthuses: “I’ve never had such a big studio, such a big set.” The team mostly filmed in the Parliament in Strasbourg, which is empty for three weeks a month.
Again and again, the actors and crew got lost in the maze of corridors. For every production, there are runners, team members equipped with walkie-talkies, who ensure that all the actors are on set on time. “We had a few more on this production,” says Diepers.
Martina Eitner-Acheampong, who plays the conservative MEP Gesine Brettschneider, thought it was great to be allowed to walk the red carpet, which is normally only used by heads of state to enter the Europa building. It was also remarkable that no one in Brussels was afraid of being satirized. “Sovereign,” she thinks. And she learned something else: “I now know what lobbyists are.”
Sadly for fans of the series, this will be the last season of Parliament. Producer Diepers explains that the series is set in an arc. It shows how Samy continues to grow. “At some point, this will be finished.” Eitner-Acheampong, on the other hand, would like to see at least one more 90-minute feature film. In any case, the Brussels epic is far from finished.
The fourth season of “Parliament” is now available in the ARD media library. Corinna Visser
On the US financial markets, the scales tipped towards Kamala Harris yesterday, but even investors can only speculate. On the morning of the ballot, the US presidential election is still too close to call.
The EU Commission and member states have tried to prepare as far as possible for the scenarios: a Harris victory, the return of Donald Trump or a prolonged adjourned game, possibly combined with violent unrest. In the Commission, a core group of officials has been working confidentially on responses to the possible scenarios and discussed them in small groups with EU ambassadors.
The immediate biggest concern is that an election winner Trump will stop military support for Ukraine and lift sanctions against Russia – the Europeans would hardly be able to compensate for either. In the medium term, the Putin-friendly ex-president could call the US security guarantees within NATO into question and force the Europeans to find billions and billions for their own military. In economic terms, Trump’s threat to increase tariffs on all imports poses a threat, in some cases a massive one.
The EU has gained experience in dealing with Trump’s disruptive and unpredictable style during his first term in office. But the Union’s defenses are significantly weakened, both politically and economically. Germany and France are preoccupied with themselves. Ursula von der Leyen or Donald Tusk cannot fill the gap completely. Trump’s triumph would inspire nationalist forces in Europe, starting with Viktor Orbán, Robert Fico and Giorgia Meloni.
Some optimists are hoping that the Trump shock will send a political jolt through the EU. It could just as easily trigger panic and conflict. If Kamala Harris becomes the new president, reactions are likely to be more relaxed. But Europe’s problems will not disappear even with a democrat. The challenges are well known, they just need to be tackled with more force.
Stay confident.
Maroš Šefčovič has been an EU Commissioner since 2009, and now the Slovakian has once again won over the MEPs of the relevant parliamentary committees in a hearing. The Commissioner-designate for Trade and Economic Security and for Interinstitutional Relations and Transparency visited the Trade Committee (INTA) and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO). The hearing at a glance:
Šefčovič handled most of the three-and-a-half-hour hearing with sovereignity. His many years of experience allowed the former Slovakian diplomat to pepper his answers with details and anecdotes while remaining vague on politically sensitive topics. He emphasized his support for Ukraine several times, probably to dispel any doubts about his relationship with the EU-critical Slovakian Fico government. In a short press statement after the hearing, Šefčovič said that he had “always been guided by general European interests” in his work in the Commission.
INTA Chairman Bernd Lange (SPD) had words of praise for Šefčovič after the hearing. He had clearly demonstrated where the EU’s priorities should lie in a globalized world and that he would defend the EU’s interests.
During the hearings, Šefčovič spoke about a number of topics:
The parliamentarians also used the opportunity of the hearing to express their criticism of EU trade policy:
The confirmation hearing for Christophe Hansen in the European Parliament did not result in an overly heated exchange of blows. With a broad majority from the EPP, S&D, Greens, Renew and ECR, the coordinators of the political groups confirmed him as EU Commissioner for Agriculture and Food in the responsible Agriculture Committee (AGRI), according to well-informed circles.
The Luxembourger had previously answered the MEPs’ rather tame questions with aplomb. The former trade and environmental politician was particularly in his element when it came to questions on international trade. But he also appeared well prepared when it came to purely agricultural topics – also because he stuck closely to his previous written answers and to statements by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. For example, the promise to support small farms in the Common Agricultural Policy in the future.
However, Hansen became clear when it came to the future EU budget. “I will work very hard for a specific agricultural budget,” he promised. In recently leaked reform ideas from the EU Commission, there were considerations to dissolve the CAP as a separate budget item and instead pay it out via the national budgets. This was criticized by the German Farmers’ Association (DBV), among others. Many MEPs expressed concerns about the size of the future EU agricultural budget.
Hansen promised that he would fight for a strong agricultural budget, but would not decide this alone: “I would be glad if we could maintain the current budget at the same level.” The budget must be flanked by other sources of income for farmers: from the bioeconomy, through carbon farming, better access to credit and better producer prices. He promised two initiatives already announced in the spring to strengthen cooperatives and to implement the Unfair Trading Practices (UTP) Directive across borders in his first days in office.
Hansen clearly rejected any substantial new EU initiatives in the food sector – despite the fact that “food” is now in the title of the Commissioner for Agriculture. It is “very difficult to dictate from above who should eat what.” Moreover, much of the work in this area is done at the national, regional or local level, not at the European level. Hansen also spoke out against extending emissions trading (ETS) to the agricultural sector.
This is “not the way forward” – the bureaucratic burden is too high and consumer prices would rise as a result. Nonetheless, Hansen is committed to the goals of the Green Deal. In view of extreme weather events such as the recent one in the Valencia region, “nobody can seriously question them.”
The former trade politician spoke out in favor of the Mercosur agreement: It was in the interests of European agriculture, which benefited greatly from exports, he said. However, Hansen also conceded that parts of the sector, especially meat producers, feel unprotected against competition from South America. It must be ensured that imports from these countries meet EU standards. Hansen also sees potential for greater reliance on so-called mirror clauses in international trade – i.e. the application of own production standards to imports.
The EU regulation for deforestation-free supply chains (EUDR) is a good example of how this can work – even though he is aware of the criticism of the project. Hansen helped negotiate the law as the parliament’s rapporteur.
After the hearings of the individual Commissioners, which will run until November 12, Parliament still has to approve the entire new Commission. This is currently scheduled for the plenary session from November 25 to 28.
Apostolos Tzitzikostas was governor of the Greek province of Macedonia for ten years. Now the politician, who belongs to the Christian Democratic party Nea Dimokratia, plans to become Commissioner for Transport and Tourism. The hearing was led by the Transport Committee. TRAN Chairwoman Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi (EPP) moderated the three-hour event. The coordinators nominated him after the hearing. Coordinators representing at least two thirds of MEPs voted for him in a secret ballot. There was one no vote and one abstention.
Tzitzikostas made a convincing appearance. The 46-year-old had already mastered the various dossiers in the portfolio quite confidently and was able to present his positions eloquently in both English and French. In his presentation, he drew on his knowledge of which EU funds are used to pay for measures in the areas of transport and tourism.
Whether in air, water, road or rail transport – the candidate promised to work towards greater competitiveness. However, the principle of sustainability must be upheld and climate targets must be maintained. He announced that he would remove barriers in the internal market. For example, he wants to ensure that barriers to the Single European Sky are removed.
Tzitzikostas promises to present comprehensive strategies in the following areas within his first few months in office:
A proposal to connect the EU capitals with high-speed trains is due in 2025. He has also announced a proposal for a standardized booking system for train tickets for 2025. “Just like in air travel, it will then be possible to book a train journey across national borders with a single click.” He also wants to further strengthen passenger rights.
In response to questions from MEPs, he acknowledged the principle of technological neutrality in the area of road transport. He could guarantee the inclusion of e-fuels in the CO2 fleet limits. He made very clear that he does not want to shake the targets that have been set. “We are sticking to the plans for reducing CO2 emissions.” The rules were laid down years ago, he said, giving suppliers investment security.
At the same time, the manufacturers have enough time, namely eleven years, to complete the end of the combustion engine in passenger cars. “We can’t let up here.” However, the industry should receive help with the transformation by supporting the market for battery EVs. He will work to expand the charging and refueling infrastructure.
Tzitzikostas announced a proposal for the decarbonization of company car fleets. This makes sense, he said, because half of new cars are company cars and have a high average mileage. Rules for green company cars would also help to create a used car market for e-cars and reduce prices. He did not specify whether it would be a legislative proposal.
In the field of aviation, he plans to lobby the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for new decarbonization targets. 2025 will be a key year for this. He promised the Environment Committee, which was able to ask questions as an invited committee, that he would coordinate closely with the Climate Commissioner.
EPP Coordinator Jens Gieseke (CDU) praised Tzitzikostas’ commitment to digitalization in transport: “I was very pleased to hear that you are vehemently committed to digital tickets and technological neutrality. You have Parliament on your side here.”
For the Greens, former Environment Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius from Lithuania called on the Commissioner to submit a legislative proposal with mandatory requirements for the decarbonization of company car fleets if possible.
Jan-Christoph Oetjen (FDP), coordinator of Renew, called on Tzitzikostas to also adapt the aviation strategy and ensure that sustainable aviation fuels can be traded.
“We both agree that we must strengthen the European pillar in NATO,” said Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Monday at his press conference with the new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who was on his inaugural visit to Berlin.
His assumption of office could be the beginning of a new era: barely a month in office, Mark Rutte has already convened a new “high-level task force” with Ursula von der Leyen to “strengthen” cooperation between NATO and the EU. In an increasingly dangerous world, this partnership is vital to defending peace, freedom and prosperity, said the new NATO Secretary General and the Commission President last week.
The contrast could hardly be any stronger: at the end of his term of office, his predecessor Jens Stoltenberg had quite openly criticized the EU’s defense policy ambitions and urgently warned against duplicating structures. The EU had always remained alien to the Norwegian, who also lacked personal contacts. According to NATO headquarters, Stoltenberg did not have the “European reflex” that the Dutchman brings with him as a long-standing head of government and expert on the workings of the European quarter in Brussels. Rutte and von der Leyen could become a dream team in Brussels. They know and appreciate each other from long nights at EU summits and countless bilateral meetings.
After the growing rivalry at the end of the Stoltenberg era, the signs are now pointing towards closer ties, also in view of a possible comeback of Donald Trump as US president. It is a balancing act that the jovial Rutte could achieve. In his role as head of government, he has proven that he can also deal with Trump. He is also demonstrating this now when, after taking office as head of NATO, he speaks diplomatically with regard to a comeback by the former US president and possible consequences for the alliance. This is under the motto of not giving Trump an excuse to slam the door shut.
At the same time, Rutte was somewhere in the middle of the circle of EU heads of state and government, between an Olaf Scholz and an Emmanuel Macron. He is a transatlanticist and a European. For the Dutchman, the partnership with the EU has priority, while for Stoltenberg, cooperation with the Asia-Pacific 4 has always been a priority, also with regard to US interests, according to reports in Brussels. It helps that a new team will also be taking up office in the European Quarter at the beginning of December or January at the latest, one that pulls together. It is said that there is a great deal of agreement between the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kaja Kallas, the future EU Council President Antonio Costa, von der Leyen and Rutte.
“I think it is very important that both organizations are led by people who want to promote a spirit of cooperation rather than a spirit of mistrust,” emphasizes Camille Grand, former Deputy Secretary General of NATO and Distinguished Policy Fellow at ECFR. Grand sees very concrete opportunities to expand cooperation between the two organizations and to place it on a more trusting basis.
“It is important,” says Grand, “to move from a natural distrust and competitiveness to a new standard of cooperation that ensures smooth cooperation.” Rutte could contribute to this.
Germany is again controlling its borders, as are founding states such as France and most recently the Netherlands. The Schengen area, the guarantor of European freedom of movement and, next to the euro, probably the most tangible European success story, is facing a breaking point: One of our greatest historical achievements in the Union, the internal opening of national borders for the benefit of all, is currently being blatantly curtailed and violated. If we do not take decisive action against this now, it will leave deep wounds in our Union as we know and value it today.
The EU is under massive pressure, but let us not accept national reflexes; they are pseudo solutions that overshadow the real problems and prevent action. Free movement is vital for our union. In order to maintain Schengen, we urgently need to do a better job at our external borders.
A plea for full Schengen is not naive sentimentality. If we sell away Schengen, we not only threaten our freedom, but we also weaken Europe’s greatest asset in the world, the European internal market. Around three and a half million people cross internal borders every day. In addition to studying and visiting family, the main focus is on working across borders, as a commuter or as an entrepreneur in order to conduct trade or maintain supply chains across Europe.
A collapse of what is currently the world’s largest area of free movement of people with a population of almost 420 million people could mean significant losses for the European economy and also increase the risk of recession. Additional waiting times are likely to increase transport and goods costs for imports, and retailers would have to switch to costly storage instead of just-in-time production.
Schengen is our vital European engine room. However, the significant economic advantages of the Schengen area only takes effect if things run smoothly and there is equal respect. If we damage Schengen, we will directly damage the foundation of the European Union and the internal market as a whole. In the global context, the EU cannot afford to fall behind, especially now. Our goal must be a strong internal market that creates competitive advantages and makes Europe’s economy resilient to crises and ensures prosperity and jobs.
A strong Europe therefore needs freedom of movement. This inevitably goes hand in hand with strong protection of our external borders. Here we were too lax and uncoordinated in the past. The recently passed Asylum and Migration Pact addresses that weakness: the pact ensures, among others, rapid and efficient assessment of asylum requests, allows for faster reactions in crisis situations and thereby significantly reduces secondary migration.
There is also a need for optimized mutual operational assistance, for better cross-border surveillance of suspicious people and European law enforcement. In addition, the Schengen information system should finally be used adequately by all Schengen member states. 30 countries can access over 86 million search data around the clock. It plays a crucial role in ensuring the necessary high level of security within the Schengen zone.
Internal border controls not only harm trade, they also don’t deliver answers to illegal migration. In order not to further endanger Schengen with mistrust, the member states must not waste any time now. The faster they implement the pact, the sooner all measures can mesh and create the decisive power in combating terrorism and organized crime, including human trafficking and illegal migration. Schengen makes us not weaker but stronger, let’s protect it.
Lovers of absurd humor can rejoice: the fourth season of the satirical series “Parliament” is here. The main character Samy, whose career in Brussels is the subject of the series, has arrived in the Commission. He takes over – not entirely voluntarily – the chairmanship of a committee with delegates from all 27 member states. Unfortunately, not everyone sticks to the theme.
“It’s really not very far-fetched. It’s close, but it misses the point.” That is how it is in many committees, admits Barbara Gessler at the premiere of the series in Berlin. And yet not everything the series claims is true, said the representative of the European Commission in Germany. She is convinced that “people in Brussels are inspired to carry the topic of European integration forward.”
“It’s all very over the top,” said Minister of State for Europe Anna Lührmann. “But there is a kernel of truth in a lot of it.” For example, in the beautiful sentence from the French representative in the series: “The most important thing is that the Germans love us.”
Whoever comments on the series usually says: “I’ve learned a lot about Brussels.” “Parliament” is very close, almost right in the middle of the EU bubble. After all, the French authors are former or current employees of the Commission and Parliament. And this time the film team is even present at a summit.
Filming also takes place at the original locations. Producer Jan Diepers, Managing Director of production company Studio Hamburg Serienwerft, enthuses: “I’ve never had such a big studio, such a big set.” The team mostly filmed in the Parliament in Strasbourg, which is empty for three weeks a month.
Again and again, the actors and crew got lost in the maze of corridors. For every production, there are runners, team members equipped with walkie-talkies, who ensure that all the actors are on set on time. “We had a few more on this production,” says Diepers.
Martina Eitner-Acheampong, who plays the conservative MEP Gesine Brettschneider, thought it was great to be allowed to walk the red carpet, which is normally only used by heads of state to enter the Europa building. It was also remarkable that no one in Brussels was afraid of being satirized. “Sovereign,” she thinks. And she learned something else: “I now know what lobbyists are.”
Sadly for fans of the series, this will be the last season of Parliament. Producer Diepers explains that the series is set in an arc. It shows how Samy continues to grow. “At some point, this will be finished.” Eitner-Acheampong, on the other hand, would like to see at least one more 90-minute feature film. In any case, the Brussels epic is far from finished.
The fourth season of “Parliament” is now available in the ARD media library. Corinna Visser