Starting Monday, negotiations in Bonn will focus on the legacy of the UN Climate Conference COP28 and the “move away from fossil fuels” decided there. Although no heads of state or relevant ministers will be present at the UN interim conference (SB60), these two weeks of negotiations are the most important preparatory meeting for delegations on the road to COP29 in Baku.
Ultimately, it’s all about the money. The current international climate financing – 100 billion dollars per year from industrialized countries to developing countries – is running out. The amount of the next financial target will be decided in Baku. However, Bonn could already indicate who will be the donor and who will be the recipient countries. The big question: Can the Europeans and industrialized countries convince major emitters like China and Saudi Arabia to participate in climate financing in the future?
For Europe, Bonn will also be about preparing for the worst-case scenario: What happens if Donald Trump returns to the White House next year and possibly exits the Paris Agreement again? Losing the most important partner in the fight for more climate action once more could set back European efforts by years.
And here, too, money is likely to be the decisive factor. Trump is unlikely to become a partner for increased international climate financing. Many tasks lie ahead for a conference that receives less public attention.
A major issue overshadows the informal meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Prague, which is meant to prepare for the summit in early July in Washington. Should Ukraine be allowed to use Western weapons to strike military targets within Russia?
“I believe the time has come to reconsider these restrictions,” said Jens Stoltenberg upon arrival, referencing the policies of most allies. The NATO Secretary General argued that the nature of the war has changed. Russia has moved most of its logistics to the Russian side of the border and is attacking Ukraine from relative safety. Stoltenberg emphasized that lifting these restrictions is a matter for member states to decide, as it is a national decision.
Czech Foreign Minister and host Jan Lipavský emphasized that his country has no problem with Ukraine defending itself against an aggressor, including through attacks on Russian territory: “If a plane is en route with missiles, it is better to shoot it down.”
Alongside French President Emmanuel Macron, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen also expressed similar views this week. According to media reports, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is also pushing for a policy change in Washington. The US news portal Politico reported on Thursday that US President Joe Biden is said to have “secretly” given Ukraine permission to deploy American weapons from Kharkiv against armed forces on Russian soil. However, a US spokesperson said that nothing had changed with regard to the position of allowing long-range missiles within Russia. NATO Ambassador Julianne Smith had also said at a briefing in the run-up to the meeting in Prague that the US position had not changed so far.
After a reception on Thursday evening with Czech President Petr Pavel, Friday’s focus is on how NATO member states can sustainably organize their support for Ukraine both financially and logistically. To ensure the success of the NATO summit from July 9-11 in Washington, significant differences between allies need to be resolved.
In early April, Jens Stoltenberg first presented his plan to support Ukraine with common funds totaling 100 billion euros over the next five years. This military aid should also be put on a stable footing in view of a possible comeback by Donald Trump.
However, the response to this proposal has been rather critical. Diplomats have warned against juggling figures that are not backed up. There is talk of new money that is not actually available. Several member states also fear duplication with the EU, which co-finances arms through the Peace Facility. NATO has had a budget for non-lethal support for Ukraine since 2022 and has already struggled to spend this money.
In Washington, a “Ukraine package” is likely to be presented, mainly adding up bilateral contributions. Allies have supported Ukraine with a total of 80 billion euros over the past two years, Stoltenberg wrote in his invitation letter for Prague. This support needs to be continued at a similar level.
Jens Stoltenberg’s proposal to reorganize military aid is less controversial. Until now, it has been done ad hoc in the US-led Ramstein format. In the future, the aid should be coordinated within NATO structures. To make this work by Washington, however, allies need to get Hungary on board. Hungary’s foreign minister has publicly stated that his country will not participate in the “crazy NATO mission” that would drag the alliance further into the war.
Reportedly, Stoltenberg has negotiated an opt-out with Budapest to clear the way for stronger NATO engagement, including a civilian liaison office in Kyiv.
Stoltenberg argued in Prague that it is necessary to discuss NATO’s new role to avoid gaps and delays in future support for Ukraine, pointing to problems with ammunition procurement and air defense. The challenges allies face in following through on their announcements are also evident in the Czech ammunition initiative to purchase 800,000 artillery shells outside Europe.
Fifteen states had announced their participation in funding, but only five had actually paid so far, it was said in Prague. The first shells are expected to be delivered to Ukraine by June, according to Czech Foreign Minister Lipavský.
Another sensitive topic and part of the Ukraine package at the summit is the question of future NATO membership. The wording is still under discussion, but there will be no invitation to Ukraine in Washington, it was said. Finding a diplomatic formulation is not easy. To ensure the summit in Washington is successful, managing expectations on both sides is crucial.
At the previous summit in Vilnius, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy expressed his disappointment on social media over the lack of an invitation. NATO wants to avoid similar negative headlines for Washington at all costs.
To avoid negative headlines, it is also urgent to reach an agreement on Jens Stoltenberg’s successor. His term definitively ends in late September. Initially, favorite Mark Rutte was supposed to be announced as the future Secretary General in Prague. He has the support of 29 out of 32 member states. However, besides Hungary, Slovakia and Romania are also blocking an agreement. Romanian President Klaus Iohannis has put himself forward as a candidate.
At least, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has recently supported Rutte. NATO circles are optimistic that the personnel issue will be resolved before Washington, avoiding an open dispute over Stoltenberg’s successor at the summit.
Eighty years ago, on June 6, 1944, one of the largest naval operations in history took place. Under the codename “Operation Neptune”, the military operation now known as “D-Day” initiated the liberation of Europe from the yoke of Nazism. On that day and in the days that followed, about 156,000 Allied soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy, where many met a brutal death.
I emphasize this intentionally: My grandfather landed in Normandy. As a US student in San Francisco, he joined the army after the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor. He never spoke about the Allied landings. When his grandchildren asked him about it, he always said he couldn’t remember. His silence spoke volumes. The weight of this particular memory became even clearer when he searched for familiar names on the imposing American cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer.
This cemetery, with its 9,388 white marble headstones, overlooks “Omaha Beach”, one of the five beaches in Normandy where the Allied soldiers landed. It is also known as “Bloody Omaha” because it was the scene of fierce fighting. In the village of Saint-Laurent-sur-Mer, the highlight of the 80th-anniversary celebrations of the Allied landings will take place on June 6. French President Emmanuel Macron will welcome 25 heads of state, including US President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will be notably absent from the commemorations. Mission Libération, a public interest association responsible for organizing the commemorations, announced that “Russia will be invited to the 80th-anniversary celebrations, but not its president.”
Macron will also honor 250 veterans aged between 96 and 104 who fought in World War II. But not only that. Three days before the European elections in France, this will also be an opportunity for the French president to remind people of the values associated with the fight against Nazism and fascism. This will be directed against the Rassemblement National, the far-right party of Marine Le Pen.
The Rassemblement National is polling at 30 percent – well ahead of Macron’s coalition, now called Besoin d’Europe, led by MEP Valerie Hayer, which stands at 15 percent.
The defense of democratic values and fundamental rights, solidarity in the face of new challenges, strong alliances, and maintaining peace on the continent will likely be the focus of Macron’s speech.
And here, I allow myself a personal note. Because there are words, there is silence and there is life that goes on: A few weeks after the landing, my American grandfather fell in love with a beautiful Parisian, my grandmother, at one of the village balls celebrating the liberation. The US Army then sent them both to Germany, to Frankfurt. And it was my grandmother who eventually talked about the ruins and the hunger she saw there after the war.
Years later, two weeks after my grandfather’s death, the woman who had endured the German occupation in Paris during the war and witnessed her friend being deported to the Ravensbrück concentration camp, welcomed the birth of her Franco-German great-granddaughter – my daughter – with all the love that characterized her.
Power is gained through words. Some may seem abstract and distant. This personal story joins many others that have been told or are worth telling and can give shape to the abstract words peace and reconciliation.
Christiane Kesper will have been part of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES ) for 36 years when she hands over her position as head of the FES Brussels office to her successor Tobias Mörschel at the beginning of June. Few people know the role of the foundation in everyday political life – both in Berlin and Brussels – as well as the 64-year-old does.
Kesper’s childhood and youth were shaped by a European sensibility. She was born in Luxembourg in 1959. Her parents, “very young and adventurous,” had ventured out of Germany eight years after the end of World War II to take a professional opportunity in the western neighboring country.
Later, Kesper attended school in Belgium. “As a German child abroad, Europe was always close to me,” she recalls. She also felt an early connection to politics, with a particular focus on development policy shaping her career. She chose this focus for her studies in economics and political science in Heidelberg. A postgraduate course at the German Institute for Development Policy paved the way for her to join the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung – as one of the first women in the project assistance field.
Kesper’s career began in 1988 in Guatemala, where she worked as a junior expert in social policy for two years. “That was very surprising to me at the time because I didn’t speak a word of Spanish,” Kesper comments on this first step. After that, a position in Libya and other parts of the world was possible. Instead, she first joined the Brussels office from 1992 to 1995 before spending most of her career in Berlin.
Until 2022, she remained active in development policy in Berlin, leading the international development cooperation department from 2008. There, she was responsible for about 80 projects in countries of the Global South, overseeing 180 employees and about 580 local staff. Kesper reflects, “Given the numerous project locations, we often had to manage one crisis after another in the world, most recently the dangerous evacuation of our local staff from Afghanistan.”
Why then, in 2022, did she decide to return to Brussels, with less responsibility and fewer employees? It was the fascination with Europe that drove this decision, Kesper explains. “To improve European policy, you have to go where decisions are made. That was what attracted me to the job,” she says.
In Brussels, she organizes various events with the FES, which is funded by the German Foreign Office, to help people interested in the EU understand political processes and raise awareness of European policy issues. Although the foundation has no decision-making power, Kesper finds it very appealing to process current issues of the time for the public.
On issues ranging from migration to security policy to equality and social affairs, Kesper and her team, along with other organizations such as the Foundation for European Progressive Studies, constantly seek strategies for maximum impact. “We analyze where there are gaps in the Brussels debate and try to fill them with a progressive and international advisory offering. This is done in the hope that the actors will accept it,” she explains. Therefore, she places particular emphasis on ensuring that “decision-makers from all European institutions are present” at the events.
A potential reform of the EU is also high on Kesper’s list. Especially in light of a potentially significantly altered parliament, she has clear ideas for the future. She demands, “If the EU is to have a geopolitical chance, it must ensure it acts more unified.” The recent lack of unity among German coalition partners, known as the “German Vote“, is a negative example. “In the future, progressive forces in the EU must absolutely act united and not let themselves be divided or fragmented,” Kesper adds.
Overall, the outgoing head of the Brussels office believes that a possible change in the European Parliament could even unleash more energy among her colleagues. “A resurgent right-wing populism would make our work for a progressive democratic Europe even more important and provide many in our working environment with extra motivation,” she says. This is also one reason why she will remain connected to the foundation even after her departure in a few weeks. Jasper Bennink
Starting Monday, negotiations in Bonn will focus on the legacy of the UN Climate Conference COP28 and the “move away from fossil fuels” decided there. Although no heads of state or relevant ministers will be present at the UN interim conference (SB60), these two weeks of negotiations are the most important preparatory meeting for delegations on the road to COP29 in Baku.
Ultimately, it’s all about the money. The current international climate financing – 100 billion dollars per year from industrialized countries to developing countries – is running out. The amount of the next financial target will be decided in Baku. However, Bonn could already indicate who will be the donor and who will be the recipient countries. The big question: Can the Europeans and industrialized countries convince major emitters like China and Saudi Arabia to participate in climate financing in the future?
For Europe, Bonn will also be about preparing for the worst-case scenario: What happens if Donald Trump returns to the White House next year and possibly exits the Paris Agreement again? Losing the most important partner in the fight for more climate action once more could set back European efforts by years.
And here, too, money is likely to be the decisive factor. Trump is unlikely to become a partner for increased international climate financing. Many tasks lie ahead for a conference that receives less public attention.
A major issue overshadows the informal meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Prague, which is meant to prepare for the summit in early July in Washington. Should Ukraine be allowed to use Western weapons to strike military targets within Russia?
“I believe the time has come to reconsider these restrictions,” said Jens Stoltenberg upon arrival, referencing the policies of most allies. The NATO Secretary General argued that the nature of the war has changed. Russia has moved most of its logistics to the Russian side of the border and is attacking Ukraine from relative safety. Stoltenberg emphasized that lifting these restrictions is a matter for member states to decide, as it is a national decision.
Czech Foreign Minister and host Jan Lipavský emphasized that his country has no problem with Ukraine defending itself against an aggressor, including through attacks on Russian territory: “If a plane is en route with missiles, it is better to shoot it down.”
Alongside French President Emmanuel Macron, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen also expressed similar views this week. According to media reports, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is also pushing for a policy change in Washington. The US news portal Politico reported on Thursday that US President Joe Biden is said to have “secretly” given Ukraine permission to deploy American weapons from Kharkiv against armed forces on Russian soil. However, a US spokesperson said that nothing had changed with regard to the position of allowing long-range missiles within Russia. NATO Ambassador Julianne Smith had also said at a briefing in the run-up to the meeting in Prague that the US position had not changed so far.
After a reception on Thursday evening with Czech President Petr Pavel, Friday’s focus is on how NATO member states can sustainably organize their support for Ukraine both financially and logistically. To ensure the success of the NATO summit from July 9-11 in Washington, significant differences between allies need to be resolved.
In early April, Jens Stoltenberg first presented his plan to support Ukraine with common funds totaling 100 billion euros over the next five years. This military aid should also be put on a stable footing in view of a possible comeback by Donald Trump.
However, the response to this proposal has been rather critical. Diplomats have warned against juggling figures that are not backed up. There is talk of new money that is not actually available. Several member states also fear duplication with the EU, which co-finances arms through the Peace Facility. NATO has had a budget for non-lethal support for Ukraine since 2022 and has already struggled to spend this money.
In Washington, a “Ukraine package” is likely to be presented, mainly adding up bilateral contributions. Allies have supported Ukraine with a total of 80 billion euros over the past two years, Stoltenberg wrote in his invitation letter for Prague. This support needs to be continued at a similar level.
Jens Stoltenberg’s proposal to reorganize military aid is less controversial. Until now, it has been done ad hoc in the US-led Ramstein format. In the future, the aid should be coordinated within NATO structures. To make this work by Washington, however, allies need to get Hungary on board. Hungary’s foreign minister has publicly stated that his country will not participate in the “crazy NATO mission” that would drag the alliance further into the war.
Reportedly, Stoltenberg has negotiated an opt-out with Budapest to clear the way for stronger NATO engagement, including a civilian liaison office in Kyiv.
Stoltenberg argued in Prague that it is necessary to discuss NATO’s new role to avoid gaps and delays in future support for Ukraine, pointing to problems with ammunition procurement and air defense. The challenges allies face in following through on their announcements are also evident in the Czech ammunition initiative to purchase 800,000 artillery shells outside Europe.
Fifteen states had announced their participation in funding, but only five had actually paid so far, it was said in Prague. The first shells are expected to be delivered to Ukraine by June, according to Czech Foreign Minister Lipavský.
Another sensitive topic and part of the Ukraine package at the summit is the question of future NATO membership. The wording is still under discussion, but there will be no invitation to Ukraine in Washington, it was said. Finding a diplomatic formulation is not easy. To ensure the summit in Washington is successful, managing expectations on both sides is crucial.
At the previous summit in Vilnius, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy expressed his disappointment on social media over the lack of an invitation. NATO wants to avoid similar negative headlines for Washington at all costs.
To avoid negative headlines, it is also urgent to reach an agreement on Jens Stoltenberg’s successor. His term definitively ends in late September. Initially, favorite Mark Rutte was supposed to be announced as the future Secretary General in Prague. He has the support of 29 out of 32 member states. However, besides Hungary, Slovakia and Romania are also blocking an agreement. Romanian President Klaus Iohannis has put himself forward as a candidate.
At least, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has recently supported Rutte. NATO circles are optimistic that the personnel issue will be resolved before Washington, avoiding an open dispute over Stoltenberg’s successor at the summit.
Eighty years ago, on June 6, 1944, one of the largest naval operations in history took place. Under the codename “Operation Neptune”, the military operation now known as “D-Day” initiated the liberation of Europe from the yoke of Nazism. On that day and in the days that followed, about 156,000 Allied soldiers landed on the beaches of Normandy, where many met a brutal death.
I emphasize this intentionally: My grandfather landed in Normandy. As a US student in San Francisco, he joined the army after the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor. He never spoke about the Allied landings. When his grandchildren asked him about it, he always said he couldn’t remember. His silence spoke volumes. The weight of this particular memory became even clearer when he searched for familiar names on the imposing American cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer.
This cemetery, with its 9,388 white marble headstones, overlooks “Omaha Beach”, one of the five beaches in Normandy where the Allied soldiers landed. It is also known as “Bloody Omaha” because it was the scene of fierce fighting. In the village of Saint-Laurent-sur-Mer, the highlight of the 80th-anniversary celebrations of the Allied landings will take place on June 6. French President Emmanuel Macron will welcome 25 heads of state, including US President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
Russian President Vladimir Putin will be notably absent from the commemorations. Mission Libération, a public interest association responsible for organizing the commemorations, announced that “Russia will be invited to the 80th-anniversary celebrations, but not its president.”
Macron will also honor 250 veterans aged between 96 and 104 who fought in World War II. But not only that. Three days before the European elections in France, this will also be an opportunity for the French president to remind people of the values associated with the fight against Nazism and fascism. This will be directed against the Rassemblement National, the far-right party of Marine Le Pen.
The Rassemblement National is polling at 30 percent – well ahead of Macron’s coalition, now called Besoin d’Europe, led by MEP Valerie Hayer, which stands at 15 percent.
The defense of democratic values and fundamental rights, solidarity in the face of new challenges, strong alliances, and maintaining peace on the continent will likely be the focus of Macron’s speech.
And here, I allow myself a personal note. Because there are words, there is silence and there is life that goes on: A few weeks after the landing, my American grandfather fell in love with a beautiful Parisian, my grandmother, at one of the village balls celebrating the liberation. The US Army then sent them both to Germany, to Frankfurt. And it was my grandmother who eventually talked about the ruins and the hunger she saw there after the war.
Years later, two weeks after my grandfather’s death, the woman who had endured the German occupation in Paris during the war and witnessed her friend being deported to the Ravensbrück concentration camp, welcomed the birth of her Franco-German great-granddaughter – my daughter – with all the love that characterized her.
Power is gained through words. Some may seem abstract and distant. This personal story joins many others that have been told or are worth telling and can give shape to the abstract words peace and reconciliation.
Christiane Kesper will have been part of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES ) for 36 years when she hands over her position as head of the FES Brussels office to her successor Tobias Mörschel at the beginning of June. Few people know the role of the foundation in everyday political life – both in Berlin and Brussels – as well as the 64-year-old does.
Kesper’s childhood and youth were shaped by a European sensibility. She was born in Luxembourg in 1959. Her parents, “very young and adventurous,” had ventured out of Germany eight years after the end of World War II to take a professional opportunity in the western neighboring country.
Later, Kesper attended school in Belgium. “As a German child abroad, Europe was always close to me,” she recalls. She also felt an early connection to politics, with a particular focus on development policy shaping her career. She chose this focus for her studies in economics and political science in Heidelberg. A postgraduate course at the German Institute for Development Policy paved the way for her to join the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung – as one of the first women in the project assistance field.
Kesper’s career began in 1988 in Guatemala, where she worked as a junior expert in social policy for two years. “That was very surprising to me at the time because I didn’t speak a word of Spanish,” Kesper comments on this first step. After that, a position in Libya and other parts of the world was possible. Instead, she first joined the Brussels office from 1992 to 1995 before spending most of her career in Berlin.
Until 2022, she remained active in development policy in Berlin, leading the international development cooperation department from 2008. There, she was responsible for about 80 projects in countries of the Global South, overseeing 180 employees and about 580 local staff. Kesper reflects, “Given the numerous project locations, we often had to manage one crisis after another in the world, most recently the dangerous evacuation of our local staff from Afghanistan.”
Why then, in 2022, did she decide to return to Brussels, with less responsibility and fewer employees? It was the fascination with Europe that drove this decision, Kesper explains. “To improve European policy, you have to go where decisions are made. That was what attracted me to the job,” she says.
In Brussels, she organizes various events with the FES, which is funded by the German Foreign Office, to help people interested in the EU understand political processes and raise awareness of European policy issues. Although the foundation has no decision-making power, Kesper finds it very appealing to process current issues of the time for the public.
On issues ranging from migration to security policy to equality and social affairs, Kesper and her team, along with other organizations such as the Foundation for European Progressive Studies, constantly seek strategies for maximum impact. “We analyze where there are gaps in the Brussels debate and try to fill them with a progressive and international advisory offering. This is done in the hope that the actors will accept it,” she explains. Therefore, she places particular emphasis on ensuring that “decision-makers from all European institutions are present” at the events.
A potential reform of the EU is also high on Kesper’s list. Especially in light of a potentially significantly altered parliament, she has clear ideas for the future. She demands, “If the EU is to have a geopolitical chance, it must ensure it acts more unified.” The recent lack of unity among German coalition partners, known as the “German Vote“, is a negative example. “In the future, progressive forces in the EU must absolutely act united and not let themselves be divided or fragmented,” Kesper adds.
Overall, the outgoing head of the Brussels office believes that a possible change in the European Parliament could even unleash more energy among her colleagues. “A resurgent right-wing populism would make our work for a progressive democratic Europe even more important and provide many in our working environment with extra motivation,” she says. This is also one reason why she will remain connected to the foundation even after her departure in a few weeks. Jasper Bennink
