Your contact for new licenses
The majority for the confirmation of the new Commission in Parliament is in place. It is expected that more MEPs will vote for Von der Leyen II than voted for Von der Leyen I five years ago. Back then, the College was confirmed with 401 votes. An absolute majority of the MEPs present is sufficient. Not all of the 719 elected MEPs are likely to be present. It could therefore be that 340 votes in favor are enough to confirm the Commission. It is estimated that the College could receive up to 430 votes this time.
Before the roll-call vote, Ursula von der Leyen will present her new Commission. Of the 188 MEPs in the EPP Group, 22 Spaniards and four Slovenians are unlikely to vote yes. The second largest group, S&D, with 136 seats, intends to vote in favor of the College, a spokesperson said on Tuesday evening. Up to 40 no votes and abstentions had previously been expected, including from the 14 German SPD MEPs. The Liberals are likely to be around ten votes short of 77.
Among the Greens, at least 30 out of 53 MEPs could vote yes. Of the 78 conservatives in the ECR Group, the 24 Italian Fratelli MEPs are likely to vote yes – hardly surprising, as they themselves have a Commissioner. The three Latvians and the three Belgians are also likely to vote in favor. Of the radical right-wing 86 “Patriots”, at least the eleven Hungarian Fidesz MEPs will vote in favor of the College because they support the Hungarian Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi. The new Commission cannot count on any votes from the ranks of the left and the radical right-wing sovereignists. If everything goes as planned, the Commission will be able to start work on Dec. 1st.
Get through the day safely!
The prosecution’s demand hit like a bombshell in France. A fine of €300,000, five years in prison – two of which are suspended and can be served with an electronic ankle bracelet. And above all: a five-year ban on eligibility. This is the sentence Marine Le Pen, the leader of the far-right Rassemblement National in the National Assembly, is currently facing from the French judiciary. The charge: misappropriation of public EU funds.
Above all, the ban on eligibility would be particularly problematic for Le Pen, as the demand for this is linked to so-called “immediate enforcement” in France. This means that this ban will be applied immediately – if the judges follow the prosecution’s demand in their decision – even if Marine Le Pen appeals. The judges’ decision is expected in the first quarter of 2025; the public prosecutor’s office will make its final pleas in the trial today, Wednesday.
In other words, the risk of the 56-year-old former lawyer being prevented from standing in the French presidential elections for the fourth time in 2027 is very real – now, of all times, when Le Pen’s chances of winning the Élysée Palace are better than ever.
The trial against Le Pen and 24 other defendants has been underway at the criminal court in Paris since Sept. 30. They are suspected of having set up a “system of embezzlement” of funds provided by the European Union for the employment of parliamentary staff between 2004 and 2016 in order to finance the political activities of the far-right party. The European Parliament estimates the damage at almost seven million euros.
In the European Parliament, Marine Le Pen was at the “center” of an “organized system” of embezzlement of public funds, the public prosecutor declared in her sharply worded plea on Nov. 13. The defendants “have made the European Parliament, to put it prosaically, their cash cow”, emphasized prosecutor Louise Neyton. “We have seen a veritable war machine to systematically embezzle every last crumb of the budget.”
The prosecution went on to say that the whole thing had been a “partisan enrichment” that had enabled the Rassemblement National to “finance its growth, influence and propaganda over the years“. However, it also served the “personal ambitions” of its leaders “to advance their political careers at the expense of taxpayers”, the accusation continued. The prosecutor emphasized that the defendants had not shown “the slightest hint of remorse” during the trial. “They don’t see it, they don’t want to see it, they don’t care in the slightest about the illegality of their actions.”
Marine Le Pen reacted immediately after the plea. “The public prosecutor’s office is extremely excessive in its demands, especially concerning the immediate execution it wants to impose on all those prosecuted.” This immediate execution “obviously has extremely serious consequences”, Le Pen continued. It would mean that she “cannot stand as a presidential candidate”.
In a television interview, Jean-Marie Le Pen’s daughter then declared without hesitation that this was the “political death blow” in a case in which the RN was “innocent of the acts of which it was accused”. According to the former MEP, the RN had “neither violated French laws nor the rules of the European Parliament”. “We have only made policy in the interests of the French and our country. The political target is condemned,” attested Le Pen, referring to herself.
She also sees a campaign at work that was launched by “Mr. Schulz” during his time in the European Parliament. The case was launched in March 2015 when Social Democrat Martin Schulz, then President of the European Parliament, reported a possible misappropriation of funds to the French authorities. A few days earlier, the far-right party had published an organizational chart of its leadership, which listed several assistants allegedly working in Strasbourg.
The party with the flame logo is united in its support for its parliamentary group leader. The RN has launched the “Support Marine!” petition, which is said to have already been signed by more than 100,000 supporters. And in a letter to members, RN President Jordan Bardella did not hesitate to criticize a justice system that “persecutes” and seeks to “silence a woman of integrity”. “We are not experiencing justice, but stubbornness and revenge (…). I therefore call on you to mobilize everywhere in France, on the ground as well as on social networks,” Jordan Bardella continues.
However, even a verdict would primarily be one thing: a problem for Marine Le Pen, not for the RN. The RN could still present a candidate. In this case, RN leader Jordan Bardella, who is already preparing for this possibility – without explicitly mentioning it. He has just published his autobiography, a 316-page work in which he describes his youth under the title “What I’m Looking For“. By the end of December, Jordan Bardella has planned around fifteen signing sessions, while Marine Le Pen must remain in the dock.
In Strasbourg yesterday, the European Commission presented its assessment of the member states’ medium-term budgets and their draft budgets for 2025. Of the 21 multi-annual budget plans that the Commission had received in good time for examination, it gave a positive assessment for 20. Member states that had argued for tough EU debt rules – such as the Netherlands, Austria and Germany – are currently having problems complying with the rules.
Economic Affairs Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, who will leave office in a few days, emphasized that the Commission must insist on compliance with the rules. “Yes, there are some tough rules, but to be honest, I’m not the one who wanted that,” he said. He did not want to embarrass anyone, “but someone demanded these strict rules and the Commission must now implement them”.
As one of five member states, Germany has not yet submitted its multi-annual fiscal plan, for which the Commission shows understanding. According to Dombrovskis, it is important that the plan has political backing in Germany. That is why they are now waiting for the federal elections.
However, there was criticism of the German draft budget for 2025, as its expenditure was slightly above the spending path recommended by the Commission and therefore “not quite in line”. The overshoot of around 0.1 percent of GDP for 2024 and 2025 is attributed to a control account. If the control account exceeds 0.6 percent of GDP, the Commission will examine whether an excessive deficit procedure needs to be initiated.
The forecasts for Austria have worsened. The Commission now expects a deficit of 3.7 percent of GDP in 2025 and 3.5 percent in 2026. The Commission is therefore now considering the launch of an excessive deficit procedure. According to Dombrovskis, the Austrian government has announced its intention to bring the deficit below the three percent limit as early as 2025.
However, if no concrete and substantial reform proposals come from Austria by mid-January, the Commission is targeting the ECOFIN meeting on Jan. 20 and 21 to launch a possible excessive deficit procedure.
The French plan, which was highly controversial in Paris, was also approved by the Commission. The French deficit shot up to 6.1 percent of GDP in 2024. Michel Barnier’s government now wants to gradually reduce the deficit in a seven-year plan. From 2029, the deficit should be back below the 3 percent limit.
French Economy Minister Antoine Armand welcomed the Commission’s assessment and announced a finance law for 2025 with an “ambitious correction target” to implement the plan. However, it is unclear whether the French government will get this law through the National Assembly given the majority situation. In an interview with Le Parisien, government spokeswoman Maud Bregeon warned of a “Greek scenario” if political support for the government fails to materialize.
The Commission’s only negative assessment is the Dutch government’s plan, which does not comply with the EU debt rules. According to the Commission, the plan would lead to a deficit of over three percent of GDP in the medium term and, in the longer term, to exceeding the 60 percent debt limit.
The Dutch government has refused to adapt its plan, said Commission Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis. The Commission therefore recommends that the EU Council define the “Technical Trajectory” proposed by the Commission as the spending path for the Netherlands. However, as the Netherlands is not yet in breach of the EU treaty limits, no sanctions against the country are to be expected for the time being.
In Germany, the debate about the EU debt rules is starting up again, fueled by the upcoming elections. On Tuesday, Minister for Economic Affairs Robert Habeck criticized the rules negotiated by former Federal Finance Minister Christian Lindner. “They don’t fit the times,” said Habeck, referring to the increase in defense spending. According to Reuters, Lindner replied that there was a risk of a “dam breaking” if Germany questioned or broke the newly negotiated EU fiscal rules.
In the summer, the EU announced the start of accession negotiations with Moldova and Ukraine, a step that Bosnia-Herzegovina and other Western Balkan states had to wait decades for. Did the EU make a mistake?
The EU did what it should not have done: At the Thessaloniki summit in 2003, it made the promise of accession for the Western Balkan countries and then, with two exceptions, Croatia and Slovenia, failed to show any real political commitment. With hindsight, it must be clearly stated that this was a missed opportunity and we are now running all the more behind these failures.
Does Bosnia have any chance of becoming an EU member in the foreseeable future?
I hope that in 2030 we will perhaps be able to admit one country to the EU among the Western Balkan states, namely Montenegro, which is trying the hardest. But I don’t think much of raising expectations that we ourselves then subsequently cash in on. It would be better for us to think about gradual membership, for example via the Central European Free Trade Area SEFTA. This is not second-class membership, as some people claim, but the gateway to first-class membership.
The EU is not particularly attractive in Bosnia, while at the same time other players are slipping into the vacuum, Saudi Arabia for example. Aren’t the investments from Riyadh mainly going into religious structures, some of which are close to Islamist networks?
Saudi Arabia’s commitment is indeed there, especially in the religious sphere. However, I do not relate this commitment to the promotion of violent extremist structures such as Al Qaeda. It is certainly worth looking at the role Iran plays in this area. The investments by Saudi Arabia, but also by Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, do not stand out for me at the moment.
Another important destabilizing factor is Russia. The President of the Bosnian-Serbian Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik, only met Vladimir Putin in October at the meeting of the BRICS states in Kazan.
Yes, Russian influence is growing. However, Putin is not committed to the development of Bosnia-Herzegovina, but is rather pursuing a destructive interest. They want to have the opportunity to bring problems to this country if it is politically promising from Moscow’s point of view in order to cause trouble.
To what extent do you think Dodik’s threats of secession from the Bosnian state are realistic?
As a result, I think they are highly dangerous, even if I don’t know whether he has a real strategy. As I understand it, it’s more a case of opportunity-making secessionists. The Bosnian proverb that hard words come easily from the mouth sometimes applies to political positions as well. However, I can say that I am very hopeful that the new EU Commission, particularly as far as the External Action Service with the current Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas is concerned, will take a very close look at what Russian influence must be prevented for such secessionist efforts.
In Bosnia’s neighboring states Croatia and Serbia, compulsory military service is being reintroduced and both Zagreb and Belgrade are arming themselves. How great is the danger of new violent conflicts in the Balkans?
As far as arms spending is concerned, we are still in a gray area because the Republika Srpska’s involvement and contractual cooperation with the Serbian arms industry are not really transparent. It should not be underestimated that these are structures that date back to the common state of Yugoslavia. That’s why I don’t know exactly how many weapons are supplied, bought, sold and produced in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the other countries. But I think I can say that, on balance, there is no danger of a major military conflict. The potential is simply not there.
2025 will mark the 30th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, and the Dayton Peace Agreement and the creation of your office also were in 1995. Is the office of the High Representative really still needed a generation after the end of the war?
If there is still a High Representative on the 40th anniversary of the Dayton Treaty, something has gone wrong. We cannot maintain such a system for two generations. I see emigration as a major problem. 50,000 mostly young people leave the country every year, which is an enormous drain in a country with an estimated 2.8 million inhabitants. Bosnia-Herzegovina is a country where reconciliation and reflection have largely not taken place. This was not politically achievable during the ceasefire in 1995. A Bosnian Desmond Tutu with a truth commission like in South Africa would have done this country a lot of good. It is more difficult today.
Donald Trump saved one of his most important appointments for last. On Sunday, the future POTUS announced that Brooke Rollins would head the Department of Agriculture in his second term of office. This means that the 52-year-old will head one of the most powerful departments in Washington. The Department of Agriculture is not only responsible for America’s farms and ranches, but also for food safety and nutrition programs. Last year, its annual budget amounted to more than USD 430 billion.
It is a complex structure that Rollins is supposed to overlook. Unlike other candidates for Trump’s future cabinet, however, she is a professional. Rollins grew up on a farm in Texas and studied agriculture at the prestigious Texas A&M University. However, she is not considered an expert. Trump is said to have considered other, more experienced names for the job. But in the end, he opted for Rollins. No wonder, as the two have known each other for a long time. During Trump’s first term in office, she served in the White House, including as head of the Domestic Policy Department. Loyalty is traditionally more important to Trump than expertise.
Rollins proved her devotion. After Trump’s election defeat against Joe Biden, she worked as President and CEO of the think tank America First Policy Institute. The lobbying organization prepared the substantive basis for a second term in office for the Republican. Trump has already recruited several high-ranking employees for his administration from the ranks of the think tank. At times, Rollins was even considered a candidate for the position of White House Chief of Staff. However, this job went to co-election campaign manager Susie Wiles.
Nevertheless, the Department of Agriculture is not a consolation prize. During Trump’s first term in office, the department was a key player in the trade war that the Republican launched with China. At the time, American farmers lost billions in revenue after Beijing imposed punitive tariffs on soy grown in the USA. Hundreds of farmers slipped into bankruptcy at the time – despite the Trump administration mobilizing billions of dollars via the ministry to support the farmers. A similar scenario could soon repeat itself. After all, Trump already announced during the election campaign that he would impose high tariffs on imports from China – a move that would likely result in renewed retaliatory measures.
However, Rollins is not only likely to be busy with trade issues. After all, the Department of Agriculture is also responsible for social programs, such as helping poor families buy food – colloquially known as food stamps – or providing free school lunches for children from socially disadvantaged families. According to Project 2025, a guide for the next Republican administration drawn up by conservative think tanks, these and similar programs could be significantly cut in the future. However, it is not yet possible to predict exactly what the agenda of the next Trump administration will look like. The issue only played a minor role in the election campaign.
This uncertainty harbors potential for conflict. It is already becoming apparent that Rollins may have to deal with competition from within his own ranks. After all, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Trump’s candidate for the Department of Health and Human Services, has announced that he also wants to play a major role in agricultural and food policy. However, this is unlikely to be easy for the nephew of the assassinated US President Kennedy.
Because Rollins not only has good connections to the former and future POTUS from her many years of closeness to Trump, but also to his closest circle of advisors. During her first term in office, Rollins was considered a close confidante of Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and most important advisor at the time. This close connection protected her from the distrust of the hardcore MAGA wing of the party, which saw Rollins as a classic conservative in the tradition of George W. Bush and not a supporter of Trump populism. The president, in turn, obviously trusts Rollins. And in the Senate, which still has to approve her appointment, the key members of the Grand Old Party (GOP) are also sending positive signals. Rollins’ rise to become one of the most powerful women in Washington is therefore rather certain. Julian Heissler
The majority for the confirmation of the new Commission in Parliament is in place. It is expected that more MEPs will vote for Von der Leyen II than voted for Von der Leyen I five years ago. Back then, the College was confirmed with 401 votes. An absolute majority of the MEPs present is sufficient. Not all of the 719 elected MEPs are likely to be present. It could therefore be that 340 votes in favor are enough to confirm the Commission. It is estimated that the College could receive up to 430 votes this time.
Before the roll-call vote, Ursula von der Leyen will present her new Commission. Of the 188 MEPs in the EPP Group, 22 Spaniards and four Slovenians are unlikely to vote yes. The second largest group, S&D, with 136 seats, intends to vote in favor of the College, a spokesperson said on Tuesday evening. Up to 40 no votes and abstentions had previously been expected, including from the 14 German SPD MEPs. The Liberals are likely to be around ten votes short of 77.
Among the Greens, at least 30 out of 53 MEPs could vote yes. Of the 78 conservatives in the ECR Group, the 24 Italian Fratelli MEPs are likely to vote yes – hardly surprising, as they themselves have a Commissioner. The three Latvians and the three Belgians are also likely to vote in favor. Of the radical right-wing 86 “Patriots”, at least the eleven Hungarian Fidesz MEPs will vote in favor of the College because they support the Hungarian Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi. The new Commission cannot count on any votes from the ranks of the left and the radical right-wing sovereignists. If everything goes as planned, the Commission will be able to start work on Dec. 1st.
Get through the day safely!
The prosecution’s demand hit like a bombshell in France. A fine of €300,000, five years in prison – two of which are suspended and can be served with an electronic ankle bracelet. And above all: a five-year ban on eligibility. This is the sentence Marine Le Pen, the leader of the far-right Rassemblement National in the National Assembly, is currently facing from the French judiciary. The charge: misappropriation of public EU funds.
Above all, the ban on eligibility would be particularly problematic for Le Pen, as the demand for this is linked to so-called “immediate enforcement” in France. This means that this ban will be applied immediately – if the judges follow the prosecution’s demand in their decision – even if Marine Le Pen appeals. The judges’ decision is expected in the first quarter of 2025; the public prosecutor’s office will make its final pleas in the trial today, Wednesday.
In other words, the risk of the 56-year-old former lawyer being prevented from standing in the French presidential elections for the fourth time in 2027 is very real – now, of all times, when Le Pen’s chances of winning the Élysée Palace are better than ever.
The trial against Le Pen and 24 other defendants has been underway at the criminal court in Paris since Sept. 30. They are suspected of having set up a “system of embezzlement” of funds provided by the European Union for the employment of parliamentary staff between 2004 and 2016 in order to finance the political activities of the far-right party. The European Parliament estimates the damage at almost seven million euros.
In the European Parliament, Marine Le Pen was at the “center” of an “organized system” of embezzlement of public funds, the public prosecutor declared in her sharply worded plea on Nov. 13. The defendants “have made the European Parliament, to put it prosaically, their cash cow”, emphasized prosecutor Louise Neyton. “We have seen a veritable war machine to systematically embezzle every last crumb of the budget.”
The prosecution went on to say that the whole thing had been a “partisan enrichment” that had enabled the Rassemblement National to “finance its growth, influence and propaganda over the years“. However, it also served the “personal ambitions” of its leaders “to advance their political careers at the expense of taxpayers”, the accusation continued. The prosecutor emphasized that the defendants had not shown “the slightest hint of remorse” during the trial. “They don’t see it, they don’t want to see it, they don’t care in the slightest about the illegality of their actions.”
Marine Le Pen reacted immediately after the plea. “The public prosecutor’s office is extremely excessive in its demands, especially concerning the immediate execution it wants to impose on all those prosecuted.” This immediate execution “obviously has extremely serious consequences”, Le Pen continued. It would mean that she “cannot stand as a presidential candidate”.
In a television interview, Jean-Marie Le Pen’s daughter then declared without hesitation that this was the “political death blow” in a case in which the RN was “innocent of the acts of which it was accused”. According to the former MEP, the RN had “neither violated French laws nor the rules of the European Parliament”. “We have only made policy in the interests of the French and our country. The political target is condemned,” attested Le Pen, referring to herself.
She also sees a campaign at work that was launched by “Mr. Schulz” during his time in the European Parliament. The case was launched in March 2015 when Social Democrat Martin Schulz, then President of the European Parliament, reported a possible misappropriation of funds to the French authorities. A few days earlier, the far-right party had published an organizational chart of its leadership, which listed several assistants allegedly working in Strasbourg.
The party with the flame logo is united in its support for its parliamentary group leader. The RN has launched the “Support Marine!” petition, which is said to have already been signed by more than 100,000 supporters. And in a letter to members, RN President Jordan Bardella did not hesitate to criticize a justice system that “persecutes” and seeks to “silence a woman of integrity”. “We are not experiencing justice, but stubbornness and revenge (…). I therefore call on you to mobilize everywhere in France, on the ground as well as on social networks,” Jordan Bardella continues.
However, even a verdict would primarily be one thing: a problem for Marine Le Pen, not for the RN. The RN could still present a candidate. In this case, RN leader Jordan Bardella, who is already preparing for this possibility – without explicitly mentioning it. He has just published his autobiography, a 316-page work in which he describes his youth under the title “What I’m Looking For“. By the end of December, Jordan Bardella has planned around fifteen signing sessions, while Marine Le Pen must remain in the dock.
In Strasbourg yesterday, the European Commission presented its assessment of the member states’ medium-term budgets and their draft budgets for 2025. Of the 21 multi-annual budget plans that the Commission had received in good time for examination, it gave a positive assessment for 20. Member states that had argued for tough EU debt rules – such as the Netherlands, Austria and Germany – are currently having problems complying with the rules.
Economic Affairs Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, who will leave office in a few days, emphasized that the Commission must insist on compliance with the rules. “Yes, there are some tough rules, but to be honest, I’m not the one who wanted that,” he said. He did not want to embarrass anyone, “but someone demanded these strict rules and the Commission must now implement them”.
As one of five member states, Germany has not yet submitted its multi-annual fiscal plan, for which the Commission shows understanding. According to Dombrovskis, it is important that the plan has political backing in Germany. That is why they are now waiting for the federal elections.
However, there was criticism of the German draft budget for 2025, as its expenditure was slightly above the spending path recommended by the Commission and therefore “not quite in line”. The overshoot of around 0.1 percent of GDP for 2024 and 2025 is attributed to a control account. If the control account exceeds 0.6 percent of GDP, the Commission will examine whether an excessive deficit procedure needs to be initiated.
The forecasts for Austria have worsened. The Commission now expects a deficit of 3.7 percent of GDP in 2025 and 3.5 percent in 2026. The Commission is therefore now considering the launch of an excessive deficit procedure. According to Dombrovskis, the Austrian government has announced its intention to bring the deficit below the three percent limit as early as 2025.
However, if no concrete and substantial reform proposals come from Austria by mid-January, the Commission is targeting the ECOFIN meeting on Jan. 20 and 21 to launch a possible excessive deficit procedure.
The French plan, which was highly controversial in Paris, was also approved by the Commission. The French deficit shot up to 6.1 percent of GDP in 2024. Michel Barnier’s government now wants to gradually reduce the deficit in a seven-year plan. From 2029, the deficit should be back below the 3 percent limit.
French Economy Minister Antoine Armand welcomed the Commission’s assessment and announced a finance law for 2025 with an “ambitious correction target” to implement the plan. However, it is unclear whether the French government will get this law through the National Assembly given the majority situation. In an interview with Le Parisien, government spokeswoman Maud Bregeon warned of a “Greek scenario” if political support for the government fails to materialize.
The Commission’s only negative assessment is the Dutch government’s plan, which does not comply with the EU debt rules. According to the Commission, the plan would lead to a deficit of over three percent of GDP in the medium term and, in the longer term, to exceeding the 60 percent debt limit.
The Dutch government has refused to adapt its plan, said Commission Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis. The Commission therefore recommends that the EU Council define the “Technical Trajectory” proposed by the Commission as the spending path for the Netherlands. However, as the Netherlands is not yet in breach of the EU treaty limits, no sanctions against the country are to be expected for the time being.
In Germany, the debate about the EU debt rules is starting up again, fueled by the upcoming elections. On Tuesday, Minister for Economic Affairs Robert Habeck criticized the rules negotiated by former Federal Finance Minister Christian Lindner. “They don’t fit the times,” said Habeck, referring to the increase in defense spending. According to Reuters, Lindner replied that there was a risk of a “dam breaking” if Germany questioned or broke the newly negotiated EU fiscal rules.
In the summer, the EU announced the start of accession negotiations with Moldova and Ukraine, a step that Bosnia-Herzegovina and other Western Balkan states had to wait decades for. Did the EU make a mistake?
The EU did what it should not have done: At the Thessaloniki summit in 2003, it made the promise of accession for the Western Balkan countries and then, with two exceptions, Croatia and Slovenia, failed to show any real political commitment. With hindsight, it must be clearly stated that this was a missed opportunity and we are now running all the more behind these failures.
Does Bosnia have any chance of becoming an EU member in the foreseeable future?
I hope that in 2030 we will perhaps be able to admit one country to the EU among the Western Balkan states, namely Montenegro, which is trying the hardest. But I don’t think much of raising expectations that we ourselves then subsequently cash in on. It would be better for us to think about gradual membership, for example via the Central European Free Trade Area SEFTA. This is not second-class membership, as some people claim, but the gateway to first-class membership.
The EU is not particularly attractive in Bosnia, while at the same time other players are slipping into the vacuum, Saudi Arabia for example. Aren’t the investments from Riyadh mainly going into religious structures, some of which are close to Islamist networks?
Saudi Arabia’s commitment is indeed there, especially in the religious sphere. However, I do not relate this commitment to the promotion of violent extremist structures such as Al Qaeda. It is certainly worth looking at the role Iran plays in this area. The investments by Saudi Arabia, but also by Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, do not stand out for me at the moment.
Another important destabilizing factor is Russia. The President of the Bosnian-Serbian Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik, only met Vladimir Putin in October at the meeting of the BRICS states in Kazan.
Yes, Russian influence is growing. However, Putin is not committed to the development of Bosnia-Herzegovina, but is rather pursuing a destructive interest. They want to have the opportunity to bring problems to this country if it is politically promising from Moscow’s point of view in order to cause trouble.
To what extent do you think Dodik’s threats of secession from the Bosnian state are realistic?
As a result, I think they are highly dangerous, even if I don’t know whether he has a real strategy. As I understand it, it’s more a case of opportunity-making secessionists. The Bosnian proverb that hard words come easily from the mouth sometimes applies to political positions as well. However, I can say that I am very hopeful that the new EU Commission, particularly as far as the External Action Service with the current Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas is concerned, will take a very close look at what Russian influence must be prevented for such secessionist efforts.
In Bosnia’s neighboring states Croatia and Serbia, compulsory military service is being reintroduced and both Zagreb and Belgrade are arming themselves. How great is the danger of new violent conflicts in the Balkans?
As far as arms spending is concerned, we are still in a gray area because the Republika Srpska’s involvement and contractual cooperation with the Serbian arms industry are not really transparent. It should not be underestimated that these are structures that date back to the common state of Yugoslavia. That’s why I don’t know exactly how many weapons are supplied, bought, sold and produced in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the other countries. But I think I can say that, on balance, there is no danger of a major military conflict. The potential is simply not there.
2025 will mark the 30th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, and the Dayton Peace Agreement and the creation of your office also were in 1995. Is the office of the High Representative really still needed a generation after the end of the war?
If there is still a High Representative on the 40th anniversary of the Dayton Treaty, something has gone wrong. We cannot maintain such a system for two generations. I see emigration as a major problem. 50,000 mostly young people leave the country every year, which is an enormous drain in a country with an estimated 2.8 million inhabitants. Bosnia-Herzegovina is a country where reconciliation and reflection have largely not taken place. This was not politically achievable during the ceasefire in 1995. A Bosnian Desmond Tutu with a truth commission like in South Africa would have done this country a lot of good. It is more difficult today.
Donald Trump saved one of his most important appointments for last. On Sunday, the future POTUS announced that Brooke Rollins would head the Department of Agriculture in his second term of office. This means that the 52-year-old will head one of the most powerful departments in Washington. The Department of Agriculture is not only responsible for America’s farms and ranches, but also for food safety and nutrition programs. Last year, its annual budget amounted to more than USD 430 billion.
It is a complex structure that Rollins is supposed to overlook. Unlike other candidates for Trump’s future cabinet, however, she is a professional. Rollins grew up on a farm in Texas and studied agriculture at the prestigious Texas A&M University. However, she is not considered an expert. Trump is said to have considered other, more experienced names for the job. But in the end, he opted for Rollins. No wonder, as the two have known each other for a long time. During Trump’s first term in office, she served in the White House, including as head of the Domestic Policy Department. Loyalty is traditionally more important to Trump than expertise.
Rollins proved her devotion. After Trump’s election defeat against Joe Biden, she worked as President and CEO of the think tank America First Policy Institute. The lobbying organization prepared the substantive basis for a second term in office for the Republican. Trump has already recruited several high-ranking employees for his administration from the ranks of the think tank. At times, Rollins was even considered a candidate for the position of White House Chief of Staff. However, this job went to co-election campaign manager Susie Wiles.
Nevertheless, the Department of Agriculture is not a consolation prize. During Trump’s first term in office, the department was a key player in the trade war that the Republican launched with China. At the time, American farmers lost billions in revenue after Beijing imposed punitive tariffs on soy grown in the USA. Hundreds of farmers slipped into bankruptcy at the time – despite the Trump administration mobilizing billions of dollars via the ministry to support the farmers. A similar scenario could soon repeat itself. After all, Trump already announced during the election campaign that he would impose high tariffs on imports from China – a move that would likely result in renewed retaliatory measures.
However, Rollins is not only likely to be busy with trade issues. After all, the Department of Agriculture is also responsible for social programs, such as helping poor families buy food – colloquially known as food stamps – or providing free school lunches for children from socially disadvantaged families. According to Project 2025, a guide for the next Republican administration drawn up by conservative think tanks, these and similar programs could be significantly cut in the future. However, it is not yet possible to predict exactly what the agenda of the next Trump administration will look like. The issue only played a minor role in the election campaign.
This uncertainty harbors potential for conflict. It is already becoming apparent that Rollins may have to deal with competition from within his own ranks. After all, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Trump’s candidate for the Department of Health and Human Services, has announced that he also wants to play a major role in agricultural and food policy. However, this is unlikely to be easy for the nephew of the assassinated US President Kennedy.
Because Rollins not only has good connections to the former and future POTUS from her many years of closeness to Trump, but also to his closest circle of advisors. During her first term in office, Rollins was considered a close confidante of Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and most important advisor at the time. This close connection protected her from the distrust of the hardcore MAGA wing of the party, which saw Rollins as a classic conservative in the tradition of George W. Bush and not a supporter of Trump populism. The president, in turn, obviously trusts Rollins. And in the Senate, which still has to approve her appointment, the key members of the Grand Old Party (GOP) are also sending positive signals. Rollins’ rise to become one of the most powerful women in Washington is therefore rather certain. Julian Heissler