Poland must follow the EU values

A danger disguised as Law and Justice

Victor Ângelo

 

I have known Marzena for more than 15 years. It was shortly after she arrived in Brussels and started a new life, serving in the homes of the Belgian middle class. She came from deep Poland, a stone's throw from Belarus - in fact, she has relatives living in a couple of villages on the other side of the barbed wire, Poles like herself, but caught up in the post-war border-line scramble by Stalin's people. Over time, she saw many thousands of other compatriots arrive in Belgium, who today work in construction, domestic service, factories or in the many Polish stores that have opened everywhere. The money that these immigrants regularly transfer to their homeland has been one of the factors in Poland's economic modernization. The other is linked to the different advantages that came with the country's entry into the European Union in 2004.

Marzena is a modest but thoughtful person. She has learned a lot over the years. She can see the economic progress, how her country has changed since accession. But she also recognizes that today's Poland is on the wrong track when it comes to the opening of mentalities and political culture. A part of the ruling class exploits the nationalism that has kept the country alive throughout history, amid Germanic, Russian and Scandinavian pressures, and deepens it with the help of the Catholic church, which continues to weigh heavily in maintaining an extreme conservatism. There is a holy alliance, it must be said, between the government led by the Law and Justice party (PiS) and the most backward sectors of the ecclesiastical structure.

The government has been in conflict with the European Union for several years, mainly for reasons having to do with the independence of the justice system, which has been strongly limited by the political power. This conflict was recently aggravated by a ruling of the Constitutional Court, which does not recognize the primacy of European law. This Tuesday, the European Parliament (EP) heard Ursula von der Leyen and Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki on the dispute. It was a clash of positions, with it being clear that the EP supports the European Commission (EC) and expects it to take measures that will lead Warsaw to change its policy. For now, the Polish Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) - about 24 billion euros in non-repayable funds plus 34 billion in loans - is waiting for better days before being accepted. There is also the possibility that the Commission will activate the mechanism that makes the approval of European funds conditional on respect for EU values. This mechanism is the most expeditious, since it can be approved by a qualified majority, without requiring the unanimity of member states. Poland expects to receive around 121 billion euros in cohesion funds in the coming years, until 2027. In financial terms, what is at stake is immense. Warsaw, however, is still betting on a confrontation with the EC.

All this puts the future of the common project at risk. Poles want to remain in the EU - 90% of citizens are in favour, including 87% of PiS supporters. The government itself says and repeats that there is no question of preparing an exit, a Polexit. They say it is just an assertion that Europe is based on a collection of nations and not on ever deeper integration. This is a fallacious argument, for what is at issue is respect for the basic values that unite the European peoples, and which have been enshrined in Articles 2 and 3 of the EU Treaty. To allow a Member State to violate these values and remain in the Union is to offer the adversary the possibility of destroying us by continuing to sit at our table.

The Commission must win this battle. The European executive and the other institutions cannot emerge weakened from such a debate. Now is the time to hear the voices of the leaders supporting Ursula von der Leyen without ambiguity or further delay.

 

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper. Edition dated 22  October 2021)

 

Ursula and her challenges

I have now read the questions and objections that certain parties in the European Parliament have raised and addressed to Ursula von der Leyen. Most of them are about petty issues. They are far away from the key concerns that the EU has indeed to face in the next few years. Instead of asking her about the relations with the US, China or Russia, for instance, they question the comments she has made on mundane matters during the last years. Some of those questions have more to do with constraints she has faced as Germany’s Minister of Defence than with real political choices.

Von der Leyen might not have been a strong leader up to now. She might not be charismatic politician. But she is a steady person. And once in a position of greater power, as President of the European Commission – if she gets the EU Parliament’s confirmation – she might be able to stand higher than when she was just a German minister. The function can make the lady. And give her the wings that have been missing up to now.

In any case, I hope she will be voted in. I am ready to bet on the balanced approach she might be able to bring to the job. Moreover, she will be working side by side with Charles Michel, the future EU Council President. And I think this tandem can rise to the challenges that are in the horizon. And they are many and complex.

European elections, national issues

The elections for the European Parliament started today and will be completed on Sunday. They will take place in all the 28 States of the European Union. Unfortunately, these elections are still about national issues and not the European ones. This is a major shortcoming that needs to be addressed in the future. There are enough transnational challenges and options that could be discussed during the process leading to elections day. Leaders cannot ignore the fact that votes motivated only on national concerns will not help Europe to grow.

Responding to Germany and to AKK

AKK, full name, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, the new leader of the CDU governing party in Germany, is more concerned with the growing influence of the AfD – Alternative for Germany, the extreme-right, ultranationalist party – than with European affairs. That explains, to a very large extent, the way she responded to Emmanuel Macron’s Renaissance proposals. She was above all writing to her constituency within CDU and to many of those voters that have decided to move their support to AfD during the last few years. One of the things she must achieve is to bring that support back to CDU. Her leadership is a lot about that objective.

All that is fine. We know that party politics is primarily a domestic matter. However, AKK’s approach is not a balanced one. Germany is a key player within the EU. As such, it ought to show leadership and ambition on European matters. That is particularly needed now, when the European elections are already taking shape in the near horizon and a new leading team will take over in Brussels and be directing the institutions for the next five years. Moreover, this is a time of major political challenges, both within Europe and in the international scene. Internally, Europe as a project is seriously questioned by a bad mixture of populist sentiments and national fragilities. Externally, the risks to European interests are many, complex, simultaneous and compound. They come from some neighbours – these are always the most dangerous threats. But in the connected world we live in, the concept of neighbourhood needs to be reassessed. And the threats also come from unsettling changes of policy at the level of our traditional allies.

There is thus plenty of room to be leader about. That should be one of the messages to be sent back to Germany and to AKK.

Macron and the Germans

The CDU Leader’s response to Emmanuel Macron shows there is a big gap between the German right-wing vision of Europe’s future and the more centrist proposals made by the French President. And, in many ways, the CDU’s views, as expressed by Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, reflect the opinion we can find in the German streets.

They also send a clear message to Macron. We can cooperate but we do not belong to the same political family. And we, Germans, we lead our grouping of parties in the European institutions.

Macron must feel a bit alone tonight.  

EU Parliament and Italy

Yesterday, Giuseppe Conte, the Italian Prime Minister addressed the EU Parliament in Strasbourg.

I do not share some of the views he expressed. However, I would assess his speech as moderate and pro-European.

The Prime Minister talked about immigration – a very central theme for his government but also for the rest of Europe. And about the need to go back to reinforced solidarity among the European States, as well as about defence matters, foreign policy and the EU at the UN. He emphasised that cooperation with North Africa and the Sahel are a priority for his government and invited the EU to be more coherent and proactive towards those two neighbouring regions. But above all, Conte reminded the MEPs that the connection between the EU institutions and the citizens is crucial. Too much emphasis on economic measures without considering the people’s views is wrong, that was basically his opening point and one of the key messages. It’s an opinion that reflects the view that there is a serious gap between the citizens and the elites. We might see that as a populist slogan, but I think it’s important to pay attention to it.

Giuseppe Conte represents a government that is politically distant from the mainstream parties that control most seats in the EU Parliament. Therefore, as many had anticipated, the responses that followed his speech were distinctly negative. The star MEPs focused their critical interventions on some of the recent decisions taken by Conte’s powerful deputies – Matteo Salvini and Luigi di Maio. These are the strong players in Conte’s government. The MEPs gave no truce to Conte on account of those two.

In my opinion, that approach was the wrong one. Conte’s statement was a constructive attempt to build a bridge. His effort should have been recognised. Nevertheless, the MEPs decided to push the Prime Minister into his usual corner, and punch him, instead of offering a helping hand and try to bring him to the centre-ground of the European preoccupations. I judge the MEPs showed little maturity. Once again, they were more concerned with theatrics and sound bites, trying to project a tough public image, than with looking for sensible action.

The Prime Minister must have gone back to Rome with a strengthened impression that key European politicians, in the EU Parliament, do not understand the political realities his country is going through. They prefer to put Italy in the dock.

That's poor political judgement.

Europe´s face cannot look tired

I have supported since the early days Jean-Claude Juncker as President of the European Commission. I know he has the experience and the courage required for such a tough job. But these days he looks tired and too thin-skinned, irritable. He should pay attention to that. Leaders, particularly at challenging times, should look as being in control, calm and refreshed.

The rentrée, after the summer break, will be particularly demanding for Europe. Greece will continue at the top of the list, side by side with the immigration issues, plus matters related to internal security and instability in North Africa and Middle East. To that already heavy list, one should add the policy matters raised by the very special political options of Viktor Orban in Hungary and Cameron´s exigencies in terms of reform, and also the need to re-open the dialogue with Russia.

This is a full agenda. It calls for leadership that projects strength, confidence and optimism. And those features have to be seen on the TV screens, when people like Juncker are talking to the media or to the EU Parliament.  They are the public faces of the Union. 

Juncker´s challenge

Jean-Claude Juncker has won the vote at the European Parliament. He managed to get the support of a very large grand coalition of centre-right and centre-left MEPs. The way he addressed them was consistent with the process he led up to this day: being smart, saying the things that are mainstream, and paying attention to those who matter. He lost little time on extremists, on anti-EU MEPs, on all those that would vote in any case against him. His vast European experience gave him a strong advantage as well. He knows the issues better than any of the deputies in the EU Parliament.

His mandate will start on November 1. The expectations of the EU citizens are pretty low at the moment. Therefore, Juncker starts from a favourable ground. He just needs to adopt, sooner after taking office, one or two actions that could be perceived by the Europeans as new, a change.

But his time in office will run through a difficult time for the EU. The challenges ahead are immense. Maybe the biggest one will be to keep the Union together. Today more than ever the future on the EU is at risk. His experience might be of great help in trying to achieve the required and missing cohesiveness.

   

EU games

The EU elections will bring a sort of a hung parliament without any clear majority on the right or left side of the assembly. Jean-Claude Juncker and Martin Schulz will be leading two parliamentary groups very similar in terms of number of seats won. No need to have a crystal ball to know that. The tiny difference between their respective groups will not be enough to decide who of the two will be the next President of the Commission.

In the case, the EU Council, which brings together heads of State and government, will have once again a major say in the selection of the new Commission boss. And there, Schulz will be in a serious situation of disadvantage. First, because of his nationality. Merkel does not seem prepared to have a strong German in Brussels. It would be a bit of a competition. Besides that, it would attract again too many attacks on Germany, particularly when new crises will emerge. And other countries might have also some difficulties in seeing a fellow from the top country in charge of the EU. For some people, the Commission should always be led by people from the smaller member States.

And that´s where Juncker might have an advantage.

But nothing is decided.

The British might think that politically, for their domestic political games, Juncker is the ideal candidate to say no to. He can be presented in the UK as being to European, too much for the Eurogroup. In the circumstances, to veto him could give some little mileage to Cameron. And Cameron will certainly need, after these elections, whatever little advantage he thinks he can grab.

Let´s be clear about the EU elections

The key call for this weekend´s European election is to vote for pro-EU candidates. At a time of uncertainty and big challenges, including widespread demagoguery, the European project would be under a critical threat if the ultra-nationalists and extremists were to get a sizeable percentage of seats at the new European Parliament.  

Schulz and Juncker, the twin brothers

 As it gets closer to the EU parliamentary elections it is also clearer that the two main candidates for the top job of Commission President are just the opposite face of the same coin. There is no major difference, in terms of EU policies and choices, between Martin Schulz, from Germany and leader of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, meaning the social-democrat head, and Jean-Claude Juncker, from Luxembourg and the front name for the European People´s Party, the centre-right. Therefore, the question is more about personalities than anything else. Some people would find Schulz more attractive, they would say he might be more progressive, whatever that means in the case of these two men, others would say that Juncker has more experience. Between the two, it is obvious that Juncker is the one that has been around longer, that knows more when it comes to the business of government and also has been tested as the leader, for a very long period, of the finance ministers´ Eurogroup. That makes him a better candidate. But politics is a very complex field and competence is not always a criteria of success.

Our friends the spies from the other side of the table...

I do not understand why some EU leaders, in the Parliament and the Commission, are so surprised by the news that the Americans have been spying on them. You have to be very naïve or have no experience of international affairs to believe that “friendly nations” are just that, friends…Friends have interests and they try to protect them. That means, among other things, that they want to know, well in advance, what you are cooking, to be able to reach the dinner table prepared for event…

The US has a special interest in EU affairs. They are particularly interested in trade intelligence, but also on the European positions regarding key international matters, such as Iran, Israel, Russia, Security Council resolutions and so on. Furthermore, they hope to get some additional information about other players by plugging in to the intelligence systems of the European nations.  

They have also a special sharing system with like-minded nations such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and… the UK. Therefore, the British are very much aware of the US is doing regarding the gathering of clandestine information in Brussels, Berlin, Paris, or elsewhere. This also raises a very simple issue: many of the things that are said within the EU are certainly shared by London with their Washington mates. So what? Just make your position clear and transparent and be also sure that when you negotiate with the US you are negotiating with a very well informed – and therefore prepared – interlocutor.