Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker

Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker completed today their mandates as leaders of the EU. I think it is fair to say that both have committed themselves deeply to their jobs. Donald Tusk as head of the Council had to manage and balance the views of his peers, the Heads of State and Government of the EU Member States. Not an easy job. One of his headaches came from his own country, Poland. Jean-Claude Juncker had to lead the machinery and achieve results, notwithstanding the fact that, at the same time, he was dealing with a major distraction, the Brexit negotiations.

As they move on, I think one should say thank you for the work they have done as well as for the enormous patience they have displayed. And we should know that patience and perseverance are two of the key features a leader should possess. Particularly a leader that deals with 28 national masters.

No Deal, soon in a street near you

31 October is not too far away. But it is far enough for us to be able to say what is going to happen to the UK’s Brexit. However, it should be clear, at this stage, that the No Deal is very likely. If, in the end, we get to that point, it is obvious that the relations between the EU and the UK will reach a very low point. It will take a lot of time to recover from such a fall. And that will also have an impact on other forms of cooperation between the two sides. It will certainly be, if it happens, a most defining moment in the history of modern Europe.

The new European leadership team

On international affairs, the new European leadership team will have to deal with an interesting deck of cards. I mean the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, the US Donald Trump, the very strategic Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Turkey, the unreliable Boris Johnson in the UK, just to mention some of them. I could add Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu in Israel, if he survives the next round of elections, Nicolás Maduro, and so on. That is a most unique scenario that is waiting for them. The international scene shows all the signs of a perfect storm. And I am not mentioning the tricky situation around Iran, a major epicentre of a potential catastrophe. 

On the domestic front, within the EU space, they will be confronting Matteo Salvini, the strong man in Italy, Viktor Orbán and his neighbours in the Czech Republic and Poland, political instability in Belgium, Spain and Romania, as well as lots of pressure to move faster in areas that divide the European nations, such as the common defence, the climate emergency, the Brexit negotiations, and the pivot to Africa.

This is a most challenging environment. It requires a very strong and united leadership team. Not easy, not easy at all for a team that comes to power almost by chance. Let’s keep watching how strong and determined the new team is.

I see the EU Council as positive

The European Council could not reach an agreement on nominations to the big positions. The decision is particularly difficult when it comes to agree on Jean-Claude Juncker’s successor.

The European political scene is divided, and no political group is strong enough to get its candidate through. Alliances and balancing acts are required. And those things take time to achieve.

I do not share the view of those who think the European Council meeting was a disaster. For me, it was an opportunity to clarify the different national interests and the personal dimensions of each possible candidate. They are now much clearer and that should allow Donald Tusk to come up with a combination of names that could meet the calls for fairness, geographical balance, experience, political diversity and gender equality.

The Heads of State and Government that made disparaging remarks after this Council meeting must be reminded that leadership requires maturity, capacity to negotiate in good faith and patience. European construction is not a straight line. And it is not about fulfilling the demands coming from the so-called big countries. It is a consensus project. That is the only source of its strength.

The next boss in Brussels

The results are out, and most of the European voters decided to support the common goal of a stronger Europe. That’s great news. Everybody knows there was a lot of anxiety about a possible shift towards the extreme parties. They have gained votes but not in a significant way.  

Tomorrow the heads of State and Government will meet in Brussels to launch the consultations about the nomination of the next European Commission President. My position on this matter is clear. Jean-Claude Juncker’s successor must come from one of the leading candidates that has competed for the European Parliament. That’s the way we can show respect for the Parliament and for the voters. The heads of national States must not bring forward someone that has not campaigned. Even if that person is somebody of Michel Barnier’s calibre.

The three main contenders are Manfred Weber, the head of European People’s Party grouping, Frans Timmermans, from the Socialist group and Margrethe Vestager, from the Liberal-centre family. They all have the potential to lead the Commission. They must be given priority attention.

My preference would go for Frans Timmermans. He has shown, as Vice-President to Juncker, strong political courage and clear ideas. He has a deep executive experience as well. But that’s not enough, when it comes to horse trading among the heads of Sate and Government.

Angela Merkel will fight for her spitzenkandidat, Manfred Weber. He is not liked by Emmanuel Macron. There will certainly be another clash between Merkel and Macron.

A woman must also get a top position in Brussels. This cannot be ignored by the leaders. It could be Vestager in the Commission or the outgoing Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė, who could take Donald Tusk’s position. They are both top-notch candidates.

Full respect for the British people

In the UK, those Conservative opinion-makers who are unconditionally for Brexit want their readers to believe the EU leaders do not respect the British democratic system and, above all, most of the British people.

That message is false. It is just biased propaganda to justify their own personal frenzy for Brexit.

Brexit might be a major mistake, in terms of its negative consequences for both the UK and the EU. Those fellows know it. But they have a very strong ideological position about it. The extreme Conservatives believe they can gain lots of political leverage if they mine the nationalist feelings that led many citizens to vote for the exit.

That’s what makes such opinion writers tick.

The truth is however very different. In the rest of the EU, the leaders and intellectuals that really matter respect whatever in the end the British will decide about their future links with the European space. We recognise the UK’s right to decide. And there are two more political dimensions we should keep repeating. First, the EU does not want to humiliate the people of the UK and their political establishment. Second, we recognise the evidence that shows that Brexit weakens the UK and the EU. It is bad for both sides.  

EU Council on Brexit and China

The European Council meeting of yesterday and today was not an easy affair. But it went well. The Heads of State and Government have shown a deep commitment to the discussions. They could agree on a response to Theresa May’s request for a delay in the Brexit date – and this was a very delicate matter, that took many hours to be discussed – and on an approach towards China. In both cases, the twin concerns were to keep the EU united and, at the same time, to leave the door open for a balanced relationship.

The member States might have different views about important issues. However, no one wants to rock the boat. And all understand that by reaching a common understanding about their shared interests they can then have a clear - and stronger - position towards the outside world. Collectively, their interests are leveraged. 

Theresa May and her negative delaying tactics

As I listened this afternoon to Theresa May’s statement at Westminster – and to the following parliamentary debate – I could only conclude that the Prime Minister has no concrete alternative plan to the existing draft Brexit Deal.

Moreover, she is not credible when she sustains that “the talks are at a crucial state”. There are no real talks taking place. And there is no plan to that in the days to come.

The Prime Minister is just trying to gain time. Not that she expects a miracle to happen in the next couple of weeks. No. Her hope is that in the end the British Parliament will approve the Deal, with some cosmetics added to it, but basically the same document that she has agreed with the EU last November.

To believe in an approval because the MPs will have their backs against the wall is a very risky bet. Also, it’s distinctly unwise. In the end, it might bring all of us closer to a No Deal Brexit. Such possible outcome would have deeply negative consequences both to the UK and the EU. Only open fools, like David Davis, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg, can believe that a No Deal situation is a good option for the UK.

It’s time to bring the Prime Minister back to earth and stop the delaying tactics.

As a footnote, it’s quite shocking to see that idiotic belief about the positives of a No Deal being militantly supported by some mainstream British media. For instance, by The Telegraph, the well-known right-wing daily newspaper. This media behaviour is clearly the result of a mixture of chauvinist madness with commercial opportunism – trying to sell newsprint paper to the retrograde Conservatives that constitute a good share of the British market. It’s abundantly irresponsible.

Let's be positive and wise

Today's world in Brussels should be "restrain". This is a time that requires moderation, tact, discretion, prudence, circumspection, you call it whatever you deem more appropriate. I prefer “restrain”.

And I would add to it that this is no time to irritate the side that might seem very confused. It’s actually the moment to be warm about the future, because the future can only be about cooperation and mutual interests.

After the Brexit vote

After the Westminster vote on the Brexit Deal, and its most shocking result, the question that is in all minds is very clear: what’s next? Obvious interrogation, that’s true, but the answer is far from being clear. But the British political class must find an answer to it. For that, they must immediately take the initiative of stopping the Brexit time glass. It’s impossible to keep the current deadline of 29 March. It’s also completely unwise. An extension is required. And that extension is possible, at least up to the opening of the new European Parliament in July 2019.

It’s on the interest of both sides – the British and the EU – to reach an agreement. That’s now the position of many at Westminster. But there are some in that Parliament and above all in the popular media that advocate a No Deal. That is absolute madness. They can’t be serious when they defend that. They are either politically blind or foolish.

On the EU side, it is critical to avoid any kind of statement that would complicate things. Leaders need to show they are patient people and balanced as well. Silence is the best option. When silence is not possible, then the EU leaders should just state they are open to look at any meaningful proposal coming from London.

Westminster is making it impossible

At this stage, the best option for all of us in the European neighbourhood – UK and EU – would be to have the Withdrawal Agreement approved by the British parliament. That would be the most reasonable way forward, this late in the process. Both sides need a Brexit arrangement that would bring clarity and could ensure a good degree of continuity to a very close relationship.

Unfortunately, Westminster seems determined to vote down the deal. That will complicate further a political situation that is already very delicate. The UK population deserves better. And they are also tired of the discussions about the Brexit. But the politicians in Parliament are too divided. Moreover, many of them are just guided by personal reasons and by an idea of Britain that does not tally with the international affairs of today.  

The event of the year: Brexit

From a European perspective, Brexit is the leading issue of 2018. At least for many EU leaders and British politicians that spent a great deal of the year discussing the matter. It has also been the key theme for people who comment on EU affairs. Including for myself, as it was recurrent subject in my weekly radio programmes.

It is not yet clear, as the old year comes to its conclusion, what will be the final act of such a political drama. Is it to end as a Shakespearean tragedy? Or, are we going to watch a final scene inspired by Mr Bean’s approach to film-making?

It’s quite interesting to end the year with such a dilemma in the air. But the matter is extremely serious, and it will dominate a good chunk of the coming year’s political agenda. Clarity should therefore be the word to wish for the New Year. But, like so many wishes, this one might also end up unfulfilled.

Europe´s unity

Donald Tusk has been re-elected as President of the European Council. The Council brings together all the Heads of State and Government of the Union. They have voted today for Tusk. With one exception: the Polish government did not support his own citizen. For reasons of domestic politics, that's the truth. Not for reasons of competence: Tusk´s competence has been recognised by everybody else.

This was an important development. The Polish ultra conservative leaders had actively campaigned against the re-election. Some of us thought that the rest of the EU leaders would be willing to accept the Warsaw position in order to keep the European unity. But this time, reason has been stronger that unity at any cost. And that is certainly good news.