Von der Leyen 2.0 and a shifting approach to EU international partnerships

#
EC - Audiovisual Service

Authors

Chloe Teevan explores Ursula von der Leyen's vision for Europe, emphasising the need for strategic international partnerships to address global challenges. For the new president, who just got confirmed for a second time, and her Commission, building alliances and integrating economic and political dialogues is important to achieving the EU's goals in the coming years.

9 minutes
% Complete

    In her bid for re-election as European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen laid out a far more defensive vision for Europe than in 2019, including in what little allusion she made to Europe’s external action. Russia was omnipresent throughout the speech, and a new agenda and Commissioner for the Mediterranean was announced. Yet, one has to search her political guidelines for 2024-2029 to find a little more on how the EU hopes to engage much of the rest of the world. There, we find mention of international partnerships with other regions under the heading of ‘economic foreign policy,' with the Global Gateway connectivity initiative front and centre.

    This direction is unsurprising given geopolitical and geoeconomic advancements over the past years, and the changing shape of European politics. Five years ago, Ursula von der Leyen communicated a vision of a “more strategic, more assertive and more united” Europe in the world. Over the past five years, the EU has been tested time and time again. COVID-19, Russia’s war in Ukraine, growing tensions with China and Israel’s Gaza war all posed challenges that Europe has responded to with varying degrees of these qualities.

    Yet, what has become clearer than ever is that the EU can only achieve its goals – whether on containing pandemics or building support for Ukraine – if it works closely with others to build mutual understanding and interests. It needs to build alliances where it can in the years ahead, developing a meaningful political and economic dialogue and strong partnerships with its neighbours and with other key countries across Africa, Latin America and Asia-Pacific.

    Assessing Von der Leyen 1.0

    In 2019, we analysed Von der Leyen’s agenda for a ‘geopolitical Commission’, which emphasised the need for the EU to protect and update multilateralism, develop greater strategic autonomy and better link internal and external policy. In 2019, Von der Leyen also put specific emphasis on a renewed partnership with Africa. The range of crises that she faced as Commission president clearly shaped many of the subsequent choices, sharpening certain priorities and undermining others.

    Shifting approach to international partnerships still lacks political direction: In 2019, Von der Leyen already signalled a shift from development cooperation towards a more comprehensive approach to international partnerships by renaming the Commissioner and the Directorate-General from Development Cooperation to International Partnerships. 

    China’s presence already loomed large, but it was the fierce competition around COVID-19 mask diplomacy and related narratives around COVID-19 containment that gave birth first to the Team Europe approach and later to the Global Gateway strategy. This shift to a more united and strategic approach to international cooperation, combined with economic diplomacy under the banner of ‘economic foreign policy’ will further speed up under Von der Leyen 2.0.

    The Global Gateway aims to propose “an integrated offer to our partners – with infrastructure investment, trade, macro-economic support”. Yet clear strategic guidance and political and economic dialogue are still missing in many EU partnerships and in the Global Gateway strategy. This is beginning to some extent in the Mediterranean, but the EU needs renewed political dialogue with key partners in Africa, Latin America and Asia-Pacific. 

    The European External Action Service (EEAS) is still not empowered to play the role of a well-performing European diplomatic service and provide political direction, nor is it sufficiently resourced to do so. If anything, the Commission has encroached ever more when it comes to setting the agenda for external action.

    Work to do on linking internal and external agendas: The Von der Leyen Commission’s strong focus on the twin transitions carried through to the external agenda, with a growing focus on climate diplomacy and the development of a more united digital diplomacy. These priorities have also been translated to the Global Gateway strategy. However, there remains a disconnect between the EU’s domestic conversations on industrial policy and competitiveness and its external action.

    There is also a lack of consideration of the sometimes dramatic consequences of EU regulations for its partners, and the necessary adjustments are not yet being factored in (for instance, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism or the Deforestation Regulation); a fact that is tacitly acknowledged in the new political guidelines.

    Slow progress on relations with Africa and on multilateralism: Despite initially ambitious rhetoric on the EU side, events got in the way and EU-Africa relations did not make significant headway. The EU’s response to COVID-19 caused tension, while expectations and rhetoric around Ukraine augmented this. Russia’s war in Ukraine fundamentally shifted European foreign policy priorities, concentrating a huge amount of EU leaders’ energy on Eastern Europe and greatly increasing the focus on security and defence in Europe. The Sahel crisis demonstrates that the EU and its member states are likely to continue to lose influence in Africa unless they develop a radical response.

    To ensure that the EU’s international partnerships actually deliver on Europe’s political and economic interests, as well as driving sustainable development and better relations across the world, there is a need for better political direction.

    The EU is trying to better link its bilateral relations with the multilateral agenda in accordance with the 2021 Multilateralism Strategy, but the EU and its member states still struggle to be coherent in their approach to alliance building at the multilateral level. This was highlighted only too clearly by the very mixed response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine across the Global South and Europe’s initial response. 

    Needless to say, hoped-for reforms of the multilateral system have not materialised, with the UN Security Council becoming only more dysfunctional and the World Trade Organization remaining gridlocked. The Summit for the Future in September provides an opening for meaningful engagement, notably with the launch of the Global Digital Compact, around which the EU has been deeply engaged.

    A partnership agenda that delivers

    To ensure that the EU’s international partnerships actually deliver on Europe’s political and economic interests, as well as driving sustainable development and better relations across the world, there is a need for better political direction. Key to this will be a clearer division of labour under a strong EU foreign policy chief, a reformed and empowered EEAS, and a more strategic Commissioner for International Partnerships, or perhaps ‘economic foreign policy,’ as well as the new Commissioner for the Mediterranean.

    The EU Global Gateway strategy, a key pillar of Von der Leyen’s international agenda in her first term, will become still more central to that agenda, complemented by further important shifts in the EU’s external affairs budget and institutions. As we have argued elsewhere, this needs to be accompanied by a truly integrated approach to external action across the EU institutions and member state governments. 

    The Global Gateway strategy needs to link better with the EU’s own domestic priorities, including the competitiveness debates in Europe. If the EU really wants to build meaningful partnerships, it will need to invest in a truly new approach to economic partnerships. This means building a new industrial deal with developing countries, tying them into European value chains and supporting their industrial development. This will hopefully begin with the new agenda for the Mediterranean but should also, in time, expand to other countries.

    While it is clear that the EU will continue to focus on Eastern Europe and on countries of growing political and economic significance like Brazil and Indonesia, Africa remains key to Europe’s future – and the EU ignores it at its peril.

    While it is clear that the EU will continue to focus on Eastern Europe and on countries of growing political and economic significance like Brazil and Indonesia, Africa remains key to Europe’s future – and the EU ignores it at its peril. Renewed relations with Africa cannot rely on the Global Gateway strategy and economic relations alone, and must integrate a renewed political focus on Africa, driven by political dialogue with key countries. This should include more joint missions by top EU and member state officials to African capitals.

    The views are those of the author and not necessarily those of ECDPM.

    Loading Conversation