In Strasbourg today, the European Parliament is voting on the new Commission President, while in Milwaukee the Republicans are choosing the candidate for the US presidential election at their convention. Ever since Donald Trump chose Senator J.D. Vance as his running mate, it has been clear that a second Trump term would be uncomfortable for Europeans, both in terms of security and trade policy.
Trump’s antipathy towards the European Union has clearly not diminished; he still sees US companies as being at a disadvantage. He not only wants to hit exporters from China with high tariffs of 60 to 100 percent, but also European companies with a standard rate of ten percent. If J.D. Vance has his way, the tariffs could be even higher.
Vance is pursuing a “classic mercantilist trade policy”, warns Bernd Lange, the old and probably new chairman of the Trade Committee in the European Parliament. He is only interested in protecting domestic industry. Whatever respect for international trade law is left in Washington will then give way to purely domestic political calculations.
However, Lange is convinced that the Europeans will not be intimidated by this and will prepare their own countermeasures: “There is a broad consensus that the EU should react robustly to unlawful new tariffs and import quotas imposed by US President Trump“, he told Table.Briefings. In addition to its own tariffs, the EU also has effective tools such as the Anti-Coercion Instrument or the Regulation on Foreign Subsidies, said the SPD politician. And it is “also willing to use them”.
The Ursula von der Leyen coalition is in place. The heads of the EPP, Social Democrat and Liberal groups have agreed on the political content, personnel policy aspects, and the structure and upgrading of committees. The substantive demands of the three groups are to be reflected in the guidelines that Ursula von der Leyen will present to the group leaders this Thursday morning. The negotiations, which have been ongoing since the European elections, are thus considered to be complete. There is an increased likelihood that von der Leyen will be re-elected as Commission President today. As things stand at present, a joint declaration by the group leaders of the platform is not planned.
The heads of the EPP, S&D and Renew political groups had actually wanted to decide on changes to the committees at the Conference of Presidents (COP) yesterday (Wednesday). However, the decision was postponed until the next regular COP in September. In order to determine the competencies of the committees, it must be clear what competencies the Defense Commissioner, who is to be newly created in the “Von der Leyen II Commission”, should have. Only then would it be possible to determine how many members the Defense Committee should have. The plan is as follows:
At the Conference of Presidents, the heads of the right-wing political groups, including the ECR, massively criticized the cordon sanitaire, i.e. the exclusion of the radical right-wing group “Patriots for Europe” from the allocation of important posts. It is unacceptable to exclude democratically elected MEPs from the legislative process.
The three groups in the platform, EPP, S&D and Renew, had already supported von der Leyen over the past five years. The renewed alliance removes a decisive uncertainty factor for the re-election of the CDU politician. The election of Parliament President Roberta Metsola and the 14 Vice-Presidents of Parliament on Tuesday had already shown that the Christian Democrats, Social Democrats, Liberals and Greens are largely pulling in the same direction. It is still unclear whether the informal coalition intends to set out its agreement in writing.
The Greens are not officially part of the informal coalition but are nevertheless likely to vote overwhelmingly in favor of von der Leyen. EPP leader Manfred Weber rejected closer cooperation, partly due to pressure from parts of his parliamentary group who are critical of the ecologist party and would prefer to cooperate with forces from the national-conservative ECR group.
However, von der Leyen and her staff have held talks with Green parliamentary group leaders Terry Reintke and Bas Eickhout in recent weeks. The parliamentary group is confident that von der Leyen will include the Green priorities of climate protection and the rule of law in her program.
The candidate will submit her political guidelines for her second term of office to the parliamentary groups at 8 a.m. on Thursday. Von der Leyen must strike a fine balance in this document, in which the priorities of the parliamentary groups supporting her are reflected according to their respective strengths. The document was drawn up by her closest circle of staff and is intended to be a kind of coalition agreement. The Social Democrats had originally pushed for a reasonably binding document to be negotiated between the political groups, but were unable to prevail against the EPP.
Most MEPs emphasize that they only want to decide on their voting behavior after reading the guidelines and von der Leyen’s speech in plenary from 9 am. The Greens, for example, will discuss this in their parliamentary group immediately after the speech and agree on whether they want to vote in favor or not. It is assumed within the group that most of the 53 MEPs will vote in favor of von der Leyen. It is said that around six MEPs still have reservations. The secret ballot is scheduled for 1 p.m. The result is expected at around 2:30 p.m.
A large majority of the 77 MPs in the liberal Renew parliamentary group are also said to support her. Strack-Zimmermann had sharply criticized von der Leyen for her policies during the election campaign and sent her a letter last week calling on her to take up key demands such as a move away from the end of the combustion engine and a rejection of new joint debts.
However, the Commission President is unlikely to be prepared to do this, especially as these demands are not capable of winning a majority in the Renew Group either. However, the German liberals say that they will not support von der Leyen without a clear concession. They are probably speculating that the Commission President will have a clear majority beyond the necessary 361 votes even without them.
At the meeting of the EPP group on Wednesday, a lot of displeasure was expressed, according to participants: As the winner of the European elections, the Christian Democrats should have been given more posts in Parliament, according to the criticism. Nevertheless, the vast majority are likely to vote for von der Leyen, according to the group.
The CDU politician is also likely to receive votes from the ECR parliamentary group. Three MPs each from the Czech ODS and the Flemish NVA will probably vote for her. It is still unclear how Giorgia Meloni’s 24 Fratelli d’Italia MEPs will react.
The heads of the political groups have taken further decisions on the distribution of committee chairs to the political groups. In addition to the previously known committees, the chairmanship of the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) is to go to the EPP Group.
The chairmanship of the Conference of Committee Chairs (CCC) traditionally goes to the EPP or S&D, with the political group that does not provide the President of the Parliament being chosen. In the S&D Group, the European Social Democratic Party (SPD) has laid claim to Bernd Lange becoming head of the CCC again. The Italian delegation, which is the largest in terms of numbers, has also laid claim.
The EU Commission is keeping text messages in which von der Leyen and Pfizer boss Albert Bourla discussed vaccine deliveries under lock and key. You have accused the Commission of poor administrative practice as a result. How serious is that?
Initially, the EU Commission did not even accept that text messages are documents. I’m not a lawyer, but I can read. The regulation states that it is the message and not the medium that counts. That’s why we came to the conclusion that it was bad administrative practice. The Commission continued to stonewall. It is good that the European Court of Justice will clarify this issue. We don’t know when, but it will probably be this year.
Ten years ago, you announced that you wanted to help the EU institutions become more transparent. What is your assessment today?
We have achieved improvements in many areas. At the same time, the EU has changed during this time. The Commission has gained more power compared to the Council and it is active in new areas. During the coronavirus crisis, it managed the joint procurement of vaccines. It has set up the Recovery and Resilience Facility and is increasingly involved in defense. It sees itself as a geopolitical player. The challenge now is to ensure that we keep pace with accountability.
What exactly is the problem?
The Commission is increasingly invoking exceptions that apply to international relations when it does not release documents. There is a certain discrepancy. The Commission is galloping away and accountability is trying to keep up.
In your experience, is the Commission being deliberately secretive?
Admittedly, many decisions had to be made very quickly during the crisis. If the Commission now sees itself as a power player and talks about strategic autonomy, then that is a cause for concern in terms of how it handles access to documents. The Commission cannot give the EU Member States lessons on the rule of law and then not abide by the rules itself. The Commission is indeed critical of how some Member States handle access to documents. If it were to assess its own practice, the marks would probably not be so good either.
You recently reprimanded the Commission for not paying sufficient attention to conflicts of interest in the case of an official’s follow-up job after retirement. How big is the problem?
Sometimes we see that things that seem insignificant at first glance become a major problem. At the beginning of the Russian war of aggression, we had an energy shortage because Russia had targeted former politicians. Each individual case may not have been that significant, but collectively these cases caused a huge amount of damage.
Interestingly, the Commission emphasizes that it ensures that no conflicts of interest can arise when it allows retired civil servants to work in the private sector. At the same time, companies openly show their enthusiasm when they hire former civil servants. They even list in press releases exactly which cases someone in the Directorate-General for Competition has worked on. That doesn’t add up.
Do you expect a lot of work in the fall when a new Commission takes office and many people in Brussels are looking for a new job?
Probably already! We have spoken out clearly in the past when the head of the European Defense Agency moved to Airbus and the head of the European Banking Authority went to the largest financial lobby group. In both cases, we pointed out that they took exactly the one job they should not have taken. We have raised awareness of the issues and will continue to do so. It will be interesting to see how the European Parliament applies its new rules. However, we are not responsible for that.
Has EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen understood the problem of the revolving door effect?
I cannot judge that. The decisions are made elsewhere in the EU Commission. We often hear that civil servants have a right to work. And colleagues are usually generous to colleagues. There is something to be said for shifting the decision on follow-up jobs to an external ethics committee.
Don’t such posts also promote the narrative of Brussels as a self-service store? How important is it to create more transparency given the rise of right-wing parties?
The right-wing parties turn their love of transparency on and off at will. But of course, we have seen time and again in the past how such cases have been exploited. Britain’s Nigel Farage asked the then EU President Jean-Claude Juncker in the European Parliament to congratulate his predecessor José Barroso on his position at Goldman Sachs. Such stories are problematic and the Commission should understand that.
The fact that Wolfgang Bücherl is completely convinced of the European idea today has a lot to do with the fact that he grew up with this vision. His birthplace in the Bavarian Upper Palatinate is less than 15 kilometers from the Czech border. As a teenager in the former border zone, he first experienced the isolation that accompanied the East-West division.
“For us young people, the border was the end of the world until 1989”, says Bücherl. There was no exchange with people on the other side, which made the change that came in 1989 and 1990 all the more liberating. “I experienced a lot of change back then – and I really wanted to be part of it.”
He first joined the Commission as a trainee after studying political science in Munich. In 2003, he then joined the Brussels authority on a permanent basis, including as head of the speechwriting team for Commissioners Vladimír Špidla and Vivianne Reding and as coordinator of relations with the Council. From 2011, he continued his work in the area of health and food safety.
Bücherl has been head of the EU Commission’s regional representation in Munich since March and is responsible for Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg. He says that this job requires a “sure instinct for regional specificities”. These include the fact that Baden-Württemberg is in regular and lively contact with Switzerland as a non-EU country, while Bavaria is increasingly looking towards Eastern Europe.
Before Bücherl joined the regional office, this position had not been permanently filled since 2020. The office was first represented from Berlin and then on a temporary basis. “Everyone welcomes the fact that there is now once again a permanent head of the regional representation for Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria”, says Bücherl. He has noticed a great deal of interest in Europe among people in recent weeks, even if an initial impulse often has to be used as an icebreaker. “After that, the questions and criticism often bubble up from the people.”
Thematically, the focus was primarily on democracy and the bureaucracy of the EU. In these times, many people are also concerned about Europe’s defense and security. Against the backdrop of the influence of Russia and China, Bücherl observes “a great openness to an active role for the European Union” and greater cooperation between the member states among the people he speaks to.
Border controls, which have been commonplace at crossings to Switzerland, Austria and the Czech Republic since last year, played a major role regionally. Commuters and retailers in border regions in particular often criticize the issue. Bücherl also has a need for discussion on this issue. “As the Commission, we primarily view such measures by the member states with a critical eye, because we naturally want to ensure that the fundamental freedoms of the European Union are not permanently impaired and that border controls are a last resort.”
The new Commission should position itself on the issue after the European elections and seek dialog with the member states accordingly. Bücherl sees the new EU migration package as an opportunity to reduce the need for internal European border controls. Jasper Bennink
In Strasbourg today, the European Parliament is voting on the new Commission President, while in Milwaukee the Republicans are choosing the candidate for the US presidential election at their convention. Ever since Donald Trump chose Senator J.D. Vance as his running mate, it has been clear that a second Trump term would be uncomfortable for Europeans, both in terms of security and trade policy.
Trump’s antipathy towards the European Union has clearly not diminished; he still sees US companies as being at a disadvantage. He not only wants to hit exporters from China with high tariffs of 60 to 100 percent, but also European companies with a standard rate of ten percent. If J.D. Vance has his way, the tariffs could be even higher.
Vance is pursuing a “classic mercantilist trade policy”, warns Bernd Lange, the old and probably new chairman of the Trade Committee in the European Parliament. He is only interested in protecting domestic industry. Whatever respect for international trade law is left in Washington will then give way to purely domestic political calculations.
However, Lange is convinced that the Europeans will not be intimidated by this and will prepare their own countermeasures: “There is a broad consensus that the EU should react robustly to unlawful new tariffs and import quotas imposed by US President Trump“, he told Table.Briefings. In addition to its own tariffs, the EU also has effective tools such as the Anti-Coercion Instrument or the Regulation on Foreign Subsidies, said the SPD politician. And it is “also willing to use them”.
The Ursula von der Leyen coalition is in place. The heads of the EPP, Social Democrat and Liberal groups have agreed on the political content, personnel policy aspects, and the structure and upgrading of committees. The substantive demands of the three groups are to be reflected in the guidelines that Ursula von der Leyen will present to the group leaders this Thursday morning. The negotiations, which have been ongoing since the European elections, are thus considered to be complete. There is an increased likelihood that von der Leyen will be re-elected as Commission President today. As things stand at present, a joint declaration by the group leaders of the platform is not planned.
The heads of the EPP, S&D and Renew political groups had actually wanted to decide on changes to the committees at the Conference of Presidents (COP) yesterday (Wednesday). However, the decision was postponed until the next regular COP in September. In order to determine the competencies of the committees, it must be clear what competencies the Defense Commissioner, who is to be newly created in the “Von der Leyen II Commission”, should have. Only then would it be possible to determine how many members the Defense Committee should have. The plan is as follows:
At the Conference of Presidents, the heads of the right-wing political groups, including the ECR, massively criticized the cordon sanitaire, i.e. the exclusion of the radical right-wing group “Patriots for Europe” from the allocation of important posts. It is unacceptable to exclude democratically elected MEPs from the legislative process.
The three groups in the platform, EPP, S&D and Renew, had already supported von der Leyen over the past five years. The renewed alliance removes a decisive uncertainty factor for the re-election of the CDU politician. The election of Parliament President Roberta Metsola and the 14 Vice-Presidents of Parliament on Tuesday had already shown that the Christian Democrats, Social Democrats, Liberals and Greens are largely pulling in the same direction. It is still unclear whether the informal coalition intends to set out its agreement in writing.
The Greens are not officially part of the informal coalition but are nevertheless likely to vote overwhelmingly in favor of von der Leyen. EPP leader Manfred Weber rejected closer cooperation, partly due to pressure from parts of his parliamentary group who are critical of the ecologist party and would prefer to cooperate with forces from the national-conservative ECR group.
However, von der Leyen and her staff have held talks with Green parliamentary group leaders Terry Reintke and Bas Eickhout in recent weeks. The parliamentary group is confident that von der Leyen will include the Green priorities of climate protection and the rule of law in her program.
The candidate will submit her political guidelines for her second term of office to the parliamentary groups at 8 a.m. on Thursday. Von der Leyen must strike a fine balance in this document, in which the priorities of the parliamentary groups supporting her are reflected according to their respective strengths. The document was drawn up by her closest circle of staff and is intended to be a kind of coalition agreement. The Social Democrats had originally pushed for a reasonably binding document to be negotiated between the political groups, but were unable to prevail against the EPP.
Most MEPs emphasize that they only want to decide on their voting behavior after reading the guidelines and von der Leyen’s speech in plenary from 9 am. The Greens, for example, will discuss this in their parliamentary group immediately after the speech and agree on whether they want to vote in favor or not. It is assumed within the group that most of the 53 MEPs will vote in favor of von der Leyen. It is said that around six MEPs still have reservations. The secret ballot is scheduled for 1 p.m. The result is expected at around 2:30 p.m.
A large majority of the 77 MPs in the liberal Renew parliamentary group are also said to support her. Strack-Zimmermann had sharply criticized von der Leyen for her policies during the election campaign and sent her a letter last week calling on her to take up key demands such as a move away from the end of the combustion engine and a rejection of new joint debts.
However, the Commission President is unlikely to be prepared to do this, especially as these demands are not capable of winning a majority in the Renew Group either. However, the German liberals say that they will not support von der Leyen without a clear concession. They are probably speculating that the Commission President will have a clear majority beyond the necessary 361 votes even without them.
At the meeting of the EPP group on Wednesday, a lot of displeasure was expressed, according to participants: As the winner of the European elections, the Christian Democrats should have been given more posts in Parliament, according to the criticism. Nevertheless, the vast majority are likely to vote for von der Leyen, according to the group.
The CDU politician is also likely to receive votes from the ECR parliamentary group. Three MPs each from the Czech ODS and the Flemish NVA will probably vote for her. It is still unclear how Giorgia Meloni’s 24 Fratelli d’Italia MEPs will react.
The heads of the political groups have taken further decisions on the distribution of committee chairs to the political groups. In addition to the previously known committees, the chairmanship of the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) is to go to the EPP Group.
The chairmanship of the Conference of Committee Chairs (CCC) traditionally goes to the EPP or S&D, with the political group that does not provide the President of the Parliament being chosen. In the S&D Group, the European Social Democratic Party (SPD) has laid claim to Bernd Lange becoming head of the CCC again. The Italian delegation, which is the largest in terms of numbers, has also laid claim.
The EU Commission is keeping text messages in which von der Leyen and Pfizer boss Albert Bourla discussed vaccine deliveries under lock and key. You have accused the Commission of poor administrative practice as a result. How serious is that?
Initially, the EU Commission did not even accept that text messages are documents. I’m not a lawyer, but I can read. The regulation states that it is the message and not the medium that counts. That’s why we came to the conclusion that it was bad administrative practice. The Commission continued to stonewall. It is good that the European Court of Justice will clarify this issue. We don’t know when, but it will probably be this year.
Ten years ago, you announced that you wanted to help the EU institutions become more transparent. What is your assessment today?
We have achieved improvements in many areas. At the same time, the EU has changed during this time. The Commission has gained more power compared to the Council and it is active in new areas. During the coronavirus crisis, it managed the joint procurement of vaccines. It has set up the Recovery and Resilience Facility and is increasingly involved in defense. It sees itself as a geopolitical player. The challenge now is to ensure that we keep pace with accountability.
What exactly is the problem?
The Commission is increasingly invoking exceptions that apply to international relations when it does not release documents. There is a certain discrepancy. The Commission is galloping away and accountability is trying to keep up.
In your experience, is the Commission being deliberately secretive?
Admittedly, many decisions had to be made very quickly during the crisis. If the Commission now sees itself as a power player and talks about strategic autonomy, then that is a cause for concern in terms of how it handles access to documents. The Commission cannot give the EU Member States lessons on the rule of law and then not abide by the rules itself. The Commission is indeed critical of how some Member States handle access to documents. If it were to assess its own practice, the marks would probably not be so good either.
You recently reprimanded the Commission for not paying sufficient attention to conflicts of interest in the case of an official’s follow-up job after retirement. How big is the problem?
Sometimes we see that things that seem insignificant at first glance become a major problem. At the beginning of the Russian war of aggression, we had an energy shortage because Russia had targeted former politicians. Each individual case may not have been that significant, but collectively these cases caused a huge amount of damage.
Interestingly, the Commission emphasizes that it ensures that no conflicts of interest can arise when it allows retired civil servants to work in the private sector. At the same time, companies openly show their enthusiasm when they hire former civil servants. They even list in press releases exactly which cases someone in the Directorate-General for Competition has worked on. That doesn’t add up.
Do you expect a lot of work in the fall when a new Commission takes office and many people in Brussels are looking for a new job?
Probably already! We have spoken out clearly in the past when the head of the European Defense Agency moved to Airbus and the head of the European Banking Authority went to the largest financial lobby group. In both cases, we pointed out that they took exactly the one job they should not have taken. We have raised awareness of the issues and will continue to do so. It will be interesting to see how the European Parliament applies its new rules. However, we are not responsible for that.
Has EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen understood the problem of the revolving door effect?
I cannot judge that. The decisions are made elsewhere in the EU Commission. We often hear that civil servants have a right to work. And colleagues are usually generous to colleagues. There is something to be said for shifting the decision on follow-up jobs to an external ethics committee.
Don’t such posts also promote the narrative of Brussels as a self-service store? How important is it to create more transparency given the rise of right-wing parties?
The right-wing parties turn their love of transparency on and off at will. But of course, we have seen time and again in the past how such cases have been exploited. Britain’s Nigel Farage asked the then EU President Jean-Claude Juncker in the European Parliament to congratulate his predecessor José Barroso on his position at Goldman Sachs. Such stories are problematic and the Commission should understand that.
The fact that Wolfgang Bücherl is completely convinced of the European idea today has a lot to do with the fact that he grew up with this vision. His birthplace in the Bavarian Upper Palatinate is less than 15 kilometers from the Czech border. As a teenager in the former border zone, he first experienced the isolation that accompanied the East-West division.
“For us young people, the border was the end of the world until 1989”, says Bücherl. There was no exchange with people on the other side, which made the change that came in 1989 and 1990 all the more liberating. “I experienced a lot of change back then – and I really wanted to be part of it.”
He first joined the Commission as a trainee after studying political science in Munich. In 2003, he then joined the Brussels authority on a permanent basis, including as head of the speechwriting team for Commissioners Vladimír Špidla and Vivianne Reding and as coordinator of relations with the Council. From 2011, he continued his work in the area of health and food safety.
Bücherl has been head of the EU Commission’s regional representation in Munich since March and is responsible for Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg. He says that this job requires a “sure instinct for regional specificities”. These include the fact that Baden-Württemberg is in regular and lively contact with Switzerland as a non-EU country, while Bavaria is increasingly looking towards Eastern Europe.
Before Bücherl joined the regional office, this position had not been permanently filled since 2020. The office was first represented from Berlin and then on a temporary basis. “Everyone welcomes the fact that there is now once again a permanent head of the regional representation for Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria”, says Bücherl. He has noticed a great deal of interest in Europe among people in recent weeks, even if an initial impulse often has to be used as an icebreaker. “After that, the questions and criticism often bubble up from the people.”
Thematically, the focus was primarily on democracy and the bureaucracy of the EU. In these times, many people are also concerned about Europe’s defense and security. Against the backdrop of the influence of Russia and China, Bücherl observes “a great openness to an active role for the European Union” and greater cooperation between the member states among the people he speaks to.
Border controls, which have been commonplace at crossings to Switzerland, Austria and the Czech Republic since last year, played a major role regionally. Commuters and retailers in border regions in particular often criticize the issue. Bücherl also has a need for discussion on this issue. “As the Commission, we primarily view such measures by the member states with a critical eye, because we naturally want to ensure that the fundamental freedoms of the European Union are not permanently impaired and that border controls are a last resort.”
The new Commission should position itself on the issue after the European elections and seek dialog with the member states accordingly. Bücherl sees the new EU migration package as an opportunity to reduce the need for internal European border controls. Jasper Bennink
