Your contact for new licenses
The appointment of board members to the committees will keep Parliament busy for a while yet. As reported, deputy posts are still vacant in the committees for budgetary control and economic affairs, for example, because the political groups were unable to agree on candidates who would comply with the principle of equality. On Wednesday, the EPP responded to accusations from the Social Democrats.
“According to Rule 27 of the Rules of Procedure, the Conference of Presidents is responsible for implementing the provisions”, said CDU MEP Sven Simon, who chairs the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. According to the S&D, the AFCO is ultimately responsible for the interpretation of the Rules of Procedure and thus also for deviations from Rule 219, which actually stipulates that women and men must be equally represented among the deputies. The EPP had had exceptions to this nodded off by the Conference of Presidents – against the votes of the Social Democrats, who declared that the COP was not responsible.
However, the conference was authorized to make this decision under Rule 216 of the same Rules of Procedure, Simon said yesterday in defense of the Christian Democrats’ stance: “The AFCO can be instructed to interpret the Rules of Procedure in case of doubt. There is no such case of doubt here.” Whether the battle of words over the summer turns into a substantial legal dispute now depends above all on the “Patriots” parliamentary group. They had put forward a candidate for the Foreign Affairs Committee, but they fell through because of the cordon sanitaire.
I wish you a good day!
The rule of law in the EU is in better shape than it was just a few years ago. This is the conclusion reached by the EU Commission in its fifth Rule of Law Report, which it presented in Brussels on Wednesday. Two-thirds of the recommendations from the previous year have been fully or partially implemented. The rule of law check introduced in 2020 under German pressure has proven its worth, explained Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders.
However, the detailed results are not nearly as positive. Hungary and Slovakia have been reprimanded by the Commission, Italy and Greece are under scrutiny and Germany still has some catching up to do.
According to the report, there is a “systemic problem” with fundamental rights in Hungary. Violations had been identified in all four pillars of the rule of law: in the judicial system, in measures against corruption, in freedom of the press and in the separation of powers. The country must provide “solid evidence” of action against nepotism and corruption, the commission said. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in particular is repeatedly accused of lining his own pockets.
In addition, the government in Budapest must strengthen the “editorial independence of public media” and repeal laws that restrict the work of civil society organizations.
A year ago, Reynders had already certified that the country, which currently holds the Council Presidency, had “very serious deviations in the rule of law”. As a result, the EU Commission initiated several proceedings against Hungary and put billions in funding on hold.
However, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen paid out ten billion euros to Hungary in December – despite the problems. When asked by journalists, Reynders explained that this was not a contradiction. Budapest had fulfilled “milestones” agreed with Brussels.
The Commission threatened Slovakia with legal proceedings due to rule of law deficiencies. Commission Vice-President Věra Jourová referred to the “duty” to act if national laws do not comply with EU rules.
Specifically, it is about the ongoing criminal law reform. According to the country report, it gives “cause for concern in the fight against corruption, especially high-level corruption”. As in the case of Hungary, Brussels fears that EU funds could seep into dark channels.
Brussels is also concerned about the restructuring of public broadcasting in Slovakia. However, according to Jourová, it is still too early to make a final judgment. Discussions were being held with Prime Minister Robert Fico and the results would have to be awaited.
In the case of Italy, the EU Commission itself is under pressure because it is said to have withheld a critical report on restrictions on media freedom. Jourová rejected this. The timing shortly before the summer break was deliberate and not objectionable.
The commission presented recommendations on the independence of public broadcasting and the protection of journalists from defamation. However, it did not go into detail about the controversial constitutional reform, which critics describe as an attack on democracy.
Jourová also acknowledged problems with press freedom in Greece. However, Brussels had reacted swiftly to the so-called “Predatorgate” – a surveillance scandal. Furthermore, it is not up to the Commission to criticize the work of the authorities.
The Commission presented comparatively non-binding recommendations for Germany. For example, the German lobbying rules are not strict enough. Federal ministers and parliamentary state secretaries could switch sides too quickly after leaving office and work for corporations.
The press’s right to information from the authorities must also be strengthened. The federal government must create a separate legal basis for this. The coalition government in Berlin has promised an amendment to the Federal Transparency Act, but has not yet delivered.
The European Parliament welcomed the rule of law report. “The measures presented today will make a significant contribution to further strengthening European democracy and making it more resilient”, said Lena Düpont (CDU), spokesperson on home affairs for the EPP Group. The Commission must now focus on implementation and bring it into line with the new plans for a “Democracy Shield”.
Criticism came from Green MEP Daniel Freund. The Commission had failed to react to negative developments such as those in Italy or Slovakia at an early stage. “We need a rethink from Ursula von der Leyen here”, said Freund. Brussels must take timely countermeasures with financial sanctions.
FDP parliamentarian Moritz Körner was even harsher. “As long as von der Leyen uses criticism of violations of the rule of law as a political weapon to influence voting results in her favor, respect for European values will not improve.”
It was significant that the presentation of the rule of law report was postponed until after the election, said Körner. This was done “so as not to jeopardize her re-election by criticizing the member states”.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has traveled to China to determine if China could play a constructive role in achieving a just peace. On Wednesday, he met with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou. They engaged in over three hours of talks on the first day of a four-day visit.
This is noteworthy and indicates that this trip is of significant importance to both Ukraine and China.
This is Kuleba’s first trip to China and the first visit by a Ukrainian Foreign Minister since 2012. After the three hours with Wang, he spoke on Wednesday of thorough and substantive discussions about bilateral relations, particularly on the path to peace. “I am convinced that a just peace in Ukraine is in China’s strategic interest, and China’s role as a global force for peace is crucial,” Kuleba said, attempting to appeal to China’s own interests.
China’s interests are clearly outlined in Wednesday’s agreements:
In return, Kuleba assured that Ukraine is ready for talks with Russia if Moscow engages in serious negotiations. This undermines one of Beijing’s main arguments for its previous passivity. The Kremlin also stated on Wednesday that Ukraine’s willingness for talks aligns with Russia’s position, and further details need to be worked out.
One thing is clear: both sides could benefit enormously from this trip. For Ukraine, it’s about survival. For 28 months, they have resolutely resisted Russian attacks. However, signs of exhaustion are growing – not only in Ukraine but internationally:
China also has much at stake:
A comprehensive peace conference led by China would be a tremendous success for Beijing. At least theoretically, the chances are not too bad. Given its dependence on the PRC, Russia could hardly refuse a Chinese conference. Through Kuleba’s visit, Ukraine has reaffirmed its willingness and highlighted that China should play a leading role.
In line with this, China and Brazil published a joint six-point peace proposal in May, supporting a peace conference recognized by both warring parties. A first attempt in June in Switzerland did not impact the fighting because neither Russia nor China attended. With the potential election of Donald Trump in the US, Kyiv is pushing for a second international summit this year, ideally in a “Global South” country with China playing a leading role.
Recent events show China’s capability in mediating conflicts. This week, Beijing brought together the rival groups Hamas and Fatah. Last year, China mediated an agreement between the arch-enemies Iran and Saudi Arabia.
However, there are two significant differences with the Ukraine conflict:
China’s unique interpretation of neutrality is likely the biggest obstacle to peace. But in times of war and suffering, hope persists. Perhaps Kuleba and Wang will lay the foundation in the coming days for China to establish itself as a global peace power with success in the Ukraine conflict. This would be in the interest of the entire world – and notably for China and Ukraine.
The German government today approved the cabinet draft for the implementation of the NIS2 Directive and for strengthening cyber security. The aim is to improve cyber security in Germany and better protect companies against cyber attacks. The draft must now go through the parliamentary process.
The European Union’s Network and Information Security Directive 2.0 (NIS2 Directive) must be transposed into national law by October 2024. It aims to increase the level of cyber security in the EU. The directive extends the scope of application to more companies and requires comprehensive risk management measures and reporting obligations in the event of IT security incidents. Germany is under pressure to implement the requirements on time in order to avoid financial penalties and ensure the protection of critical infrastructures.
The cabinet draft stipulates that around 29,500 companies will have to take comprehensive IT security measures in the future. These companies must report IT security incidents within 24 hours and submit detailed reports. The Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) is to act as the central supervisory authority and will be given extensive control and enforcement powers. A three-stage reporting procedure should enable efficient handling of security incidents. Public administration is explicitly excluded from the German implementation of NIS2.
It is questionable whether the BSI is in a position to fulfill this far-reaching expansion of its duties. The previous IT Security Act 2.0, which only covers 1,000 operators of critical infrastructure, already demanded a lot from the authorities. “They were quite busy”, says Manuel Atug, spokesperson for AG Kritis, which sees itself as an independent group for improving the security of supply. “We can write laws all we want, but if they are not enforced, it doesn’t help anyone”, says Atug in an interview with Table.Briefings, pointing to examples such as hate speech on the internet, where law enforcement is “inadequate”.
Overall, reactions to the draft are mixed. The Federation of German Industries (BDI) complains that numerous proposals from industry have not been taken into account in the cabinet draft. The industry association is calling for clear regulations on the delegation of cyber security measures within companies. It is also calling for the directive to be implemented uniformly across Europe in order to minimize bureaucracy. The BDI also criticizes the fact that only federal authorities are defined as “particularly important institutions” and calls for state and local authorities to also be included.
The eco Association of the Internet Industry has similar concerns. “The German government would be well advised to adhere more closely to the European requirements when implementing the NIS2 Directive at national level”, says eco CEO Klaus Landefeld. The risk of the regulatory framework falling apart is high. Above all, the classification as an “operator of critical facilities” creates uncertainty for internationally active companies that have to comply with different rules in the individual member states.
eco also warns that German companies are insufficiently prepared for the new cyber security requirements. “Many companies are not yet aware that they are within the scope of the directive and the resulting legislation in Germany,” says Landefeld. The association is therefore calling for an extension of the implementation deadlines to give companies more time to adapt.
“It is already clear that the planned implementation deadline in October can no longer be met”, notes Ralf Wintergerst, President of the digital association Bitkom. “This makes it all the more important to implement the law quickly and ensure that it comes into force at least by the beginning of 2025.”
Bitkom is also calling for greater support for small and medium-sized enterprises and harmonization with the Kritis umbrella law. The implementation process for Kritis is also currently stalling. “Physical security and cyber security must be considered and tackled together,” Bitkom warns. Companies should be able to use standardized definitions of terms and reporting channels as a guide.
Critics also complain that the draft does not contain detailed provisions on the coordinated disclosure of vulnerabilities and that it does not sufficiently emphasize the role of the European Cyber Security Agency (ENISA) and the need for close cooperation with other EU member states. They also believe that sanctions and enforcement measures for non-compliance with the requirements should be more clearly defined.
Konstantin von Notz, deputy parliamentary group leader of the Greens, criticizes the German government’s hesitant approach. “The protection of our critical infrastructures must finally be understood as an original component of a modern IT security policy“, says von Notz. Germany is “still a long way from achieving this.”
Von Notz announced that he would ensure that the draft was supplemented by matters currently being negotiated in the BSI working group. An information security officer (Chief Information Security Officer, CISO) of the federal government should be appointed to coordinate the implementation of the measures and the BSI should be made more independent as the central supervisory authority in this area. “We will also examine very intensively whether the budget funds estimated by the BMI to date are sufficient for the high additional personnel requirements associated with the legislation.” If necessary, Parliament will have to make adjustments here.
Maximilian Funke-Kaiser, digital policy spokesperson for the FDP parliamentary group, does not expect any problems with the financing or implementation of the NIS2 directive. “The Federal Minister of Finance has made it clear that we will not draw up an austerity budget in 2025 either,” said Funke-Kaiser. He is therefore certain that the budget holders will provide the more independent BSI and the national implementation of the NIS 2 Directive “with appropriate funding“. He is also convinced: “In the parliamentary process, we will further improve the cabinet draft for the implementation of the NIS2 Directive.”
In 2016, former European Commission President Jacques Delors said that if EU policies “jeopardize cohesion and sacrifice social standards,” then “the European project has no chance of winning the support of European citizens.” In the wake of this month’s European Parliament election, Delors’s observation seems more pertinent than ever.
Following the far right’s sizable gains, the new European Parliament is expected to prioritize issues like immigration, security, and the ongoing cost-of-living crisis over climate change. Given the number of incoming MEPs opposing the bloc’s green agenda, the European Union may also be forced to slow its net-zero transition.
But instead of changing course, the EU should double down on its climate goals and take a page from the playbooks of China and the United States. In particular, it should emulate US President Joe Biden‘s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) by creating a “buy green and European” program and a European Industrial Development Fund (EIDF) to support its clean-energy transition.
One of the far right’s most popular arguments against the energy transition is that the European Green Deal relies heavily on inputs from China and the US. EU imports of clean-tech products from China have skyrocketed in recent years, totaling 23.3 billion for lithium-ion batteries, 19.1 billion for solar panels, and 14.5 billion US dollars for electric vehicles (EVs) in 2023 alone.
By contrast, the IRA dramatically increased America’s investment in renewable energy. In the second quarter of 2023, for example, the US invested nearly 10 billion US dollars in battery-manufacturing technology, more than double its total investment in batteries, solar and wind power, critical materials, and EVs in the second quarter of 2022.
In the face of greater global competition, the EU economy finds itself in a double bind. On one hand, its most dynamic companies are investing in the US rather than in Europe. On the other hand, exports from China to the EU are increasing, especially following Biden’s latest tariffs on Chinese goods.
One might expect that a more nationalist European Parliament would improve the outlook for the EU’s industrial sector. But share prices for leading European renewable-energy companies like Vestas, Nordex, and Orsted declined the day after the election, owing to fears that the far right’s gains could delay the green transition.
To shore up the EU’s competitive position, policymakers must act decisively to support critical industries. More than 1,200 organizations, including 840 leading manufacturing companies, recently signed the Antwerp Declaration – which calls for a “European Industrial Deal” as a key part of the EU’s strategic agenda for 2024-29. Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo put it best, “How do we continue to grow our European industry? The answer is: with a European Industrial Deal at the same level as a European Green Deal.”
Four steps in particular are necessary. First, European policymakers must recognize that slowing the net-zero transition will erode the EU’s global competitiveness. Adopting zero-emission technologies is the best way to reduce fossil-fuel imports and achieve energy self-sufficiency. By contrast, maintaining the status quo undermines the bloc’s energy security strategy and plays into Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hands.
Second, establishing the EIDF is crucial to achieving energy independence and technological sovereignty. As the implementation of pan-European financial aid during the COVID-19 crisis showed, EU institutions can make critical decisions and act on them within months when necessary.
Third, the EIDF should be financed through common debt issuances. To boost the production of green technologies such as electric vehicles, heat pumps, and photovoltaic panels, this funding mechanism should be easily accessible to entrepreneurs without excessive eligibility requirements. Crucially, the EIDF cannot succeed without adequate financing tools for renewable-energy companies in the EU – a benefit that US companies already enjoy under the IRA. But policymakers should make such funding conditional on investments in production capacity and job creation in specific industries.
Lastly, the issuance of common debt should be accompanied by a concerted effort to identify new revenue sources. One option is to impose additional import tariffs on Chinese EVs. Another approach is to tax digital platforms and plastic imports.
Historically, EU funds were allocated according to the bloc’s cohesion policies and member states’ GDP per capita. But the NextGenerationEU fund, established in 2020 to help European countries recover from the pandemic, set a new precedent by allocating 800 billion euros (858 billion US dollars) in grants and loans according to the impact of COVID-19 on individual economies.
Similarly, EIDF funds should be allocated based on the needs of domestic industries and the contribution of each sector to its respective member state’s GDP. Consequently, most funds should go to countries with relatively large industrial sectors, such as Germany, Italy, Spain, France, Poland, the Netherlands, Ireland, and Belgium.
Although this approach may face resistance from other member states, it is crucial to facilitating Europe’s industrial revival. To remain competitive in today’s global economy, the EU must accelerate its net-zero transition. The EIDF is a necessary step in that direction.
Marcin Korolec, Poland’s former environment minister, is Director of the Warsaw-based Green Economy Institute and Chairman of the Foundation for the Promotion of Electric Vehicles. He is a member of the European Investment Bank’s Advisory Committee on the Environment and Climate and a board member of the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), MevaEnergy, InnoEnergy, and Transport & Environment.
After personnel planning is before personnel planning: Once EU Commission President von der Leyen has distributed the commissioner posts in the coming weeks, she will have to think about the rotation of her top officials. After all, managers in the EU Commission are supposed to change jobs every five years. A major shake-up is on the cards.
The German Sabine Weyand, currently Director-General of the Directorate-General for Trade, reached the half-decade mark in June. This comes in handy for von der Leyen, because in her second term of office and following the election of Keir Starmer as British Prime Minister, she would like to explore new forms of cooperation with the UK. Weyand is in favor of tough Brexit negotiations, and a change of personnel at the head of DG Trade would send a signal to London.
Weyand is said to have ambitions for the General Secretariat. However, von der Leyen probably wants to stick with Ilze Juhansone from Latvia, who has proven to be very loyal. Political scientist Weyand is also said to be interested in the DG Competition. The incumbent Olivier Guersent apparently wants to leave at the end of the year. However, his compatriot Céline Gauer, Director General for the Recovery and Resilience Task Force since 2020, is also interested in succeeding the Frenchman. She is said to want to change posts before the Court of Auditors has reviewed the Recovery and Resilience Facility.
Irishman John Berrigan will reach five years as the head of the DG for Financial Services next March. However, a suitable candidate, the Italian Mario Nava, has only just started at the DG for Employment. Von der Leyen has an interest in tackling the personnel issues quickly. After she took office in 2019, there was a lot of internal criticism because personnel decisions sometimes took a long time. Silke Wettach
The appointment of board members to the committees will keep Parliament busy for a while yet. As reported, deputy posts are still vacant in the committees for budgetary control and economic affairs, for example, because the political groups were unable to agree on candidates who would comply with the principle of equality. On Wednesday, the EPP responded to accusations from the Social Democrats.
“According to Rule 27 of the Rules of Procedure, the Conference of Presidents is responsible for implementing the provisions”, said CDU MEP Sven Simon, who chairs the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. According to the S&D, the AFCO is ultimately responsible for the interpretation of the Rules of Procedure and thus also for deviations from Rule 219, which actually stipulates that women and men must be equally represented among the deputies. The EPP had had exceptions to this nodded off by the Conference of Presidents – against the votes of the Social Democrats, who declared that the COP was not responsible.
However, the conference was authorized to make this decision under Rule 216 of the same Rules of Procedure, Simon said yesterday in defense of the Christian Democrats’ stance: “The AFCO can be instructed to interpret the Rules of Procedure in case of doubt. There is no such case of doubt here.” Whether the battle of words over the summer turns into a substantial legal dispute now depends above all on the “Patriots” parliamentary group. They had put forward a candidate for the Foreign Affairs Committee, but they fell through because of the cordon sanitaire.
I wish you a good day!
The rule of law in the EU is in better shape than it was just a few years ago. This is the conclusion reached by the EU Commission in its fifth Rule of Law Report, which it presented in Brussels on Wednesday. Two-thirds of the recommendations from the previous year have been fully or partially implemented. The rule of law check introduced in 2020 under German pressure has proven its worth, explained Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders.
However, the detailed results are not nearly as positive. Hungary and Slovakia have been reprimanded by the Commission, Italy and Greece are under scrutiny and Germany still has some catching up to do.
According to the report, there is a “systemic problem” with fundamental rights in Hungary. Violations had been identified in all four pillars of the rule of law: in the judicial system, in measures against corruption, in freedom of the press and in the separation of powers. The country must provide “solid evidence” of action against nepotism and corruption, the commission said. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in particular is repeatedly accused of lining his own pockets.
In addition, the government in Budapest must strengthen the “editorial independence of public media” and repeal laws that restrict the work of civil society organizations.
A year ago, Reynders had already certified that the country, which currently holds the Council Presidency, had “very serious deviations in the rule of law”. As a result, the EU Commission initiated several proceedings against Hungary and put billions in funding on hold.
However, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen paid out ten billion euros to Hungary in December – despite the problems. When asked by journalists, Reynders explained that this was not a contradiction. Budapest had fulfilled “milestones” agreed with Brussels.
The Commission threatened Slovakia with legal proceedings due to rule of law deficiencies. Commission Vice-President Věra Jourová referred to the “duty” to act if national laws do not comply with EU rules.
Specifically, it is about the ongoing criminal law reform. According to the country report, it gives “cause for concern in the fight against corruption, especially high-level corruption”. As in the case of Hungary, Brussels fears that EU funds could seep into dark channels.
Brussels is also concerned about the restructuring of public broadcasting in Slovakia. However, according to Jourová, it is still too early to make a final judgment. Discussions were being held with Prime Minister Robert Fico and the results would have to be awaited.
In the case of Italy, the EU Commission itself is under pressure because it is said to have withheld a critical report on restrictions on media freedom. Jourová rejected this. The timing shortly before the summer break was deliberate and not objectionable.
The commission presented recommendations on the independence of public broadcasting and the protection of journalists from defamation. However, it did not go into detail about the controversial constitutional reform, which critics describe as an attack on democracy.
Jourová also acknowledged problems with press freedom in Greece. However, Brussels had reacted swiftly to the so-called “Predatorgate” – a surveillance scandal. Furthermore, it is not up to the Commission to criticize the work of the authorities.
The Commission presented comparatively non-binding recommendations for Germany. For example, the German lobbying rules are not strict enough. Federal ministers and parliamentary state secretaries could switch sides too quickly after leaving office and work for corporations.
The press’s right to information from the authorities must also be strengthened. The federal government must create a separate legal basis for this. The coalition government in Berlin has promised an amendment to the Federal Transparency Act, but has not yet delivered.
The European Parliament welcomed the rule of law report. “The measures presented today will make a significant contribution to further strengthening European democracy and making it more resilient”, said Lena Düpont (CDU), spokesperson on home affairs for the EPP Group. The Commission must now focus on implementation and bring it into line with the new plans for a “Democracy Shield”.
Criticism came from Green MEP Daniel Freund. The Commission had failed to react to negative developments such as those in Italy or Slovakia at an early stage. “We need a rethink from Ursula von der Leyen here”, said Freund. Brussels must take timely countermeasures with financial sanctions.
FDP parliamentarian Moritz Körner was even harsher. “As long as von der Leyen uses criticism of violations of the rule of law as a political weapon to influence voting results in her favor, respect for European values will not improve.”
It was significant that the presentation of the rule of law report was postponed until after the election, said Körner. This was done “so as not to jeopardize her re-election by criticizing the member states”.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has traveled to China to determine if China could play a constructive role in achieving a just peace. On Wednesday, he met with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou. They engaged in over three hours of talks on the first day of a four-day visit.
This is noteworthy and indicates that this trip is of significant importance to both Ukraine and China.
This is Kuleba’s first trip to China and the first visit by a Ukrainian Foreign Minister since 2012. After the three hours with Wang, he spoke on Wednesday of thorough and substantive discussions about bilateral relations, particularly on the path to peace. “I am convinced that a just peace in Ukraine is in China’s strategic interest, and China’s role as a global force for peace is crucial,” Kuleba said, attempting to appeal to China’s own interests.
China’s interests are clearly outlined in Wednesday’s agreements:
In return, Kuleba assured that Ukraine is ready for talks with Russia if Moscow engages in serious negotiations. This undermines one of Beijing’s main arguments for its previous passivity. The Kremlin also stated on Wednesday that Ukraine’s willingness for talks aligns with Russia’s position, and further details need to be worked out.
One thing is clear: both sides could benefit enormously from this trip. For Ukraine, it’s about survival. For 28 months, they have resolutely resisted Russian attacks. However, signs of exhaustion are growing – not only in Ukraine but internationally:
China also has much at stake:
A comprehensive peace conference led by China would be a tremendous success for Beijing. At least theoretically, the chances are not too bad. Given its dependence on the PRC, Russia could hardly refuse a Chinese conference. Through Kuleba’s visit, Ukraine has reaffirmed its willingness and highlighted that China should play a leading role.
In line with this, China and Brazil published a joint six-point peace proposal in May, supporting a peace conference recognized by both warring parties. A first attempt in June in Switzerland did not impact the fighting because neither Russia nor China attended. With the potential election of Donald Trump in the US, Kyiv is pushing for a second international summit this year, ideally in a “Global South” country with China playing a leading role.
Recent events show China’s capability in mediating conflicts. This week, Beijing brought together the rival groups Hamas and Fatah. Last year, China mediated an agreement between the arch-enemies Iran and Saudi Arabia.
However, there are two significant differences with the Ukraine conflict:
China’s unique interpretation of neutrality is likely the biggest obstacle to peace. But in times of war and suffering, hope persists. Perhaps Kuleba and Wang will lay the foundation in the coming days for China to establish itself as a global peace power with success in the Ukraine conflict. This would be in the interest of the entire world – and notably for China and Ukraine.
The German government today approved the cabinet draft for the implementation of the NIS2 Directive and for strengthening cyber security. The aim is to improve cyber security in Germany and better protect companies against cyber attacks. The draft must now go through the parliamentary process.
The European Union’s Network and Information Security Directive 2.0 (NIS2 Directive) must be transposed into national law by October 2024. It aims to increase the level of cyber security in the EU. The directive extends the scope of application to more companies and requires comprehensive risk management measures and reporting obligations in the event of IT security incidents. Germany is under pressure to implement the requirements on time in order to avoid financial penalties and ensure the protection of critical infrastructures.
The cabinet draft stipulates that around 29,500 companies will have to take comprehensive IT security measures in the future. These companies must report IT security incidents within 24 hours and submit detailed reports. The Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) is to act as the central supervisory authority and will be given extensive control and enforcement powers. A three-stage reporting procedure should enable efficient handling of security incidents. Public administration is explicitly excluded from the German implementation of NIS2.
It is questionable whether the BSI is in a position to fulfill this far-reaching expansion of its duties. The previous IT Security Act 2.0, which only covers 1,000 operators of critical infrastructure, already demanded a lot from the authorities. “They were quite busy”, says Manuel Atug, spokesperson for AG Kritis, which sees itself as an independent group for improving the security of supply. “We can write laws all we want, but if they are not enforced, it doesn’t help anyone”, says Atug in an interview with Table.Briefings, pointing to examples such as hate speech on the internet, where law enforcement is “inadequate”.
Overall, reactions to the draft are mixed. The Federation of German Industries (BDI) complains that numerous proposals from industry have not been taken into account in the cabinet draft. The industry association is calling for clear regulations on the delegation of cyber security measures within companies. It is also calling for the directive to be implemented uniformly across Europe in order to minimize bureaucracy. The BDI also criticizes the fact that only federal authorities are defined as “particularly important institutions” and calls for state and local authorities to also be included.
The eco Association of the Internet Industry has similar concerns. “The German government would be well advised to adhere more closely to the European requirements when implementing the NIS2 Directive at national level”, says eco CEO Klaus Landefeld. The risk of the regulatory framework falling apart is high. Above all, the classification as an “operator of critical facilities” creates uncertainty for internationally active companies that have to comply with different rules in the individual member states.
eco also warns that German companies are insufficiently prepared for the new cyber security requirements. “Many companies are not yet aware that they are within the scope of the directive and the resulting legislation in Germany,” says Landefeld. The association is therefore calling for an extension of the implementation deadlines to give companies more time to adapt.
“It is already clear that the planned implementation deadline in October can no longer be met”, notes Ralf Wintergerst, President of the digital association Bitkom. “This makes it all the more important to implement the law quickly and ensure that it comes into force at least by the beginning of 2025.”
Bitkom is also calling for greater support for small and medium-sized enterprises and harmonization with the Kritis umbrella law. The implementation process for Kritis is also currently stalling. “Physical security and cyber security must be considered and tackled together,” Bitkom warns. Companies should be able to use standardized definitions of terms and reporting channels as a guide.
Critics also complain that the draft does not contain detailed provisions on the coordinated disclosure of vulnerabilities and that it does not sufficiently emphasize the role of the European Cyber Security Agency (ENISA) and the need for close cooperation with other EU member states. They also believe that sanctions and enforcement measures for non-compliance with the requirements should be more clearly defined.
Konstantin von Notz, deputy parliamentary group leader of the Greens, criticizes the German government’s hesitant approach. “The protection of our critical infrastructures must finally be understood as an original component of a modern IT security policy“, says von Notz. Germany is “still a long way from achieving this.”
Von Notz announced that he would ensure that the draft was supplemented by matters currently being negotiated in the BSI working group. An information security officer (Chief Information Security Officer, CISO) of the federal government should be appointed to coordinate the implementation of the measures and the BSI should be made more independent as the central supervisory authority in this area. “We will also examine very intensively whether the budget funds estimated by the BMI to date are sufficient for the high additional personnel requirements associated with the legislation.” If necessary, Parliament will have to make adjustments here.
Maximilian Funke-Kaiser, digital policy spokesperson for the FDP parliamentary group, does not expect any problems with the financing or implementation of the NIS2 directive. “The Federal Minister of Finance has made it clear that we will not draw up an austerity budget in 2025 either,” said Funke-Kaiser. He is therefore certain that the budget holders will provide the more independent BSI and the national implementation of the NIS 2 Directive “with appropriate funding“. He is also convinced: “In the parliamentary process, we will further improve the cabinet draft for the implementation of the NIS2 Directive.”
In 2016, former European Commission President Jacques Delors said that if EU policies “jeopardize cohesion and sacrifice social standards,” then “the European project has no chance of winning the support of European citizens.” In the wake of this month’s European Parliament election, Delors’s observation seems more pertinent than ever.
Following the far right’s sizable gains, the new European Parliament is expected to prioritize issues like immigration, security, and the ongoing cost-of-living crisis over climate change. Given the number of incoming MEPs opposing the bloc’s green agenda, the European Union may also be forced to slow its net-zero transition.
But instead of changing course, the EU should double down on its climate goals and take a page from the playbooks of China and the United States. In particular, it should emulate US President Joe Biden‘s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) by creating a “buy green and European” program and a European Industrial Development Fund (EIDF) to support its clean-energy transition.
One of the far right’s most popular arguments against the energy transition is that the European Green Deal relies heavily on inputs from China and the US. EU imports of clean-tech products from China have skyrocketed in recent years, totaling 23.3 billion for lithium-ion batteries, 19.1 billion for solar panels, and 14.5 billion US dollars for electric vehicles (EVs) in 2023 alone.
By contrast, the IRA dramatically increased America’s investment in renewable energy. In the second quarter of 2023, for example, the US invested nearly 10 billion US dollars in battery-manufacturing technology, more than double its total investment in batteries, solar and wind power, critical materials, and EVs in the second quarter of 2022.
In the face of greater global competition, the EU economy finds itself in a double bind. On one hand, its most dynamic companies are investing in the US rather than in Europe. On the other hand, exports from China to the EU are increasing, especially following Biden’s latest tariffs on Chinese goods.
One might expect that a more nationalist European Parliament would improve the outlook for the EU’s industrial sector. But share prices for leading European renewable-energy companies like Vestas, Nordex, and Orsted declined the day after the election, owing to fears that the far right’s gains could delay the green transition.
To shore up the EU’s competitive position, policymakers must act decisively to support critical industries. More than 1,200 organizations, including 840 leading manufacturing companies, recently signed the Antwerp Declaration – which calls for a “European Industrial Deal” as a key part of the EU’s strategic agenda for 2024-29. Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo put it best, “How do we continue to grow our European industry? The answer is: with a European Industrial Deal at the same level as a European Green Deal.”
Four steps in particular are necessary. First, European policymakers must recognize that slowing the net-zero transition will erode the EU’s global competitiveness. Adopting zero-emission technologies is the best way to reduce fossil-fuel imports and achieve energy self-sufficiency. By contrast, maintaining the status quo undermines the bloc’s energy security strategy and plays into Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hands.
Second, establishing the EIDF is crucial to achieving energy independence and technological sovereignty. As the implementation of pan-European financial aid during the COVID-19 crisis showed, EU institutions can make critical decisions and act on them within months when necessary.
Third, the EIDF should be financed through common debt issuances. To boost the production of green technologies such as electric vehicles, heat pumps, and photovoltaic panels, this funding mechanism should be easily accessible to entrepreneurs without excessive eligibility requirements. Crucially, the EIDF cannot succeed without adequate financing tools for renewable-energy companies in the EU – a benefit that US companies already enjoy under the IRA. But policymakers should make such funding conditional on investments in production capacity and job creation in specific industries.
Lastly, the issuance of common debt should be accompanied by a concerted effort to identify new revenue sources. One option is to impose additional import tariffs on Chinese EVs. Another approach is to tax digital platforms and plastic imports.
Historically, EU funds were allocated according to the bloc’s cohesion policies and member states’ GDP per capita. But the NextGenerationEU fund, established in 2020 to help European countries recover from the pandemic, set a new precedent by allocating 800 billion euros (858 billion US dollars) in grants and loans according to the impact of COVID-19 on individual economies.
Similarly, EIDF funds should be allocated based on the needs of domestic industries and the contribution of each sector to its respective member state’s GDP. Consequently, most funds should go to countries with relatively large industrial sectors, such as Germany, Italy, Spain, France, Poland, the Netherlands, Ireland, and Belgium.
Although this approach may face resistance from other member states, it is crucial to facilitating Europe’s industrial revival. To remain competitive in today’s global economy, the EU must accelerate its net-zero transition. The EIDF is a necessary step in that direction.
Marcin Korolec, Poland’s former environment minister, is Director of the Warsaw-based Green Economy Institute and Chairman of the Foundation for the Promotion of Electric Vehicles. He is a member of the European Investment Bank’s Advisory Committee on the Environment and Climate and a board member of the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), MevaEnergy, InnoEnergy, and Transport & Environment.
After personnel planning is before personnel planning: Once EU Commission President von der Leyen has distributed the commissioner posts in the coming weeks, she will have to think about the rotation of her top officials. After all, managers in the EU Commission are supposed to change jobs every five years. A major shake-up is on the cards.
The German Sabine Weyand, currently Director-General of the Directorate-General for Trade, reached the half-decade mark in June. This comes in handy for von der Leyen, because in her second term of office and following the election of Keir Starmer as British Prime Minister, she would like to explore new forms of cooperation with the UK. Weyand is in favor of tough Brexit negotiations, and a change of personnel at the head of DG Trade would send a signal to London.
Weyand is said to have ambitions for the General Secretariat. However, von der Leyen probably wants to stick with Ilze Juhansone from Latvia, who has proven to be very loyal. Political scientist Weyand is also said to be interested in the DG Competition. The incumbent Olivier Guersent apparently wants to leave at the end of the year. However, his compatriot Céline Gauer, Director General for the Recovery and Resilience Task Force since 2020, is also interested in succeeding the Frenchman. She is said to want to change posts before the Court of Auditors has reviewed the Recovery and Resilience Facility.
Irishman John Berrigan will reach five years as the head of the DG for Financial Services next March. However, a suitable candidate, the Italian Mario Nava, has only just started at the DG for Employment. Von der Leyen has an interest in tackling the personnel issues quickly. After she took office in 2019, there was a lot of internal criticism because personnel decisions sometimes took a long time. Silke Wettach