The EU and the US

When it comes to the difficult response to the current US Administration, the EU leaders have decided to follow two lines.

First, to keep the political dialogue open. This policy dialogue should be centred on the key issues, particularly on respect for the international institutions, defence, trade and climate change. It should be based on clarity: the EU's positions should be stated without any unnecessary ambiguity.

Second, to emphasise the long term nature of the mutual relationship. Both sides have a long history of cooperation and share a number of fundamental values. That should be the basis to identify the common interests and to work together to achieve them. 

The suggestion made by some in Europe that today´s US leadership should be, as much as possible, ignored was not adopted. The EU political masters believe that a reasonable level of engagement should be cultivated.

EU and India: a partnership that needs to be explored

The political and economic partnership between the EU and India deserves greater attention. The European leaders seem blind to the potential of such an alliance and how much it would weight on China.  China’s global interests would then be matched by a strong EU-India alliance.

I keep repeating that our leaders need to be much more strategic in the relations with India. The EU has a good representative in Delhi, that‘s not the problem.  The issue resides in the fact that our leaders are not investing enough in building a strong relationship with India. They are too concerned with trying to come to terms with China and its commercial and industrial expansion. They do not see the opportunities. 

On the UN and conflict management

The United Nations is the most important actor in the areas of conflict management and peace building. It is also the key source of legitimacy for the international community. Furthermore, the UN has been able to develop a body of doctrine and the respective instruments that place the organization at the forefront of the international peace efforts.

But it is equally a machinery that is fragmented and complex, composed of entities that often are reluctant to accept effective coordination and tend to compete among themselves. The so-called “turf wars” are quite common at headquarters, with different agency personnel vying for visibility and resources, at the expense of coherence and impact.

 It is also a very decentralized organization, which is an advantage, as it brings the decision-making close to the potential beneficiaries. The decentralization gives a large degree of authority to the UN representatives in the field and the trend seems to be to further strengthen such authority.

For an external partner, the office of the UN field representative is the most appropriate entry point to explore opportunities for joint collaboration and coordinate efforts.