Can the composition of the top jobs tell us something about the EU?

Read a few comments. If you enjoy what I do, please support me on Ko-fi! Thank you.

Questions:

1. We don’t know if there will be a final deal on these names, but from your perspective, how strong or weak would be the EU leadership if the Commission will be again run by Ursula von der Leyen, if the European Council will be run by the Portuguese ex-PM Antonio Costa, and if Estonia’s PM Kaja Kallas will become the HRVP?

2. In your opinion, do these names also tell us something specific about the priorities the EU will pursue under such leadership and how the EU will operate in the very challenging geopolitical environment?

Answers:

Alberto Alemanno, Jean Monnet Professor in European Union Law, HEC Paris

1. The current proposal for the top jobs comes across as misaligned with the political center of gravity of the new EU Parliament. As such none of the candidates appears well placed to interpret the new political balance of the Union. VdL’s previous mandate makes her inadequate to credibly lead the new five year cycle, due to her ambivalence on key issues such as climate action. António Costa might act as a credible chair due to its past track record in Portugal and long time member serving in EUCO, however, the lack of political support for a full mandate will weaken him. Lastly, the candidacy of Kallas is the weakest of all, due to her limited experience and hawkish stance against Russia. 

2. None of the three candidates seem to align with the priorities emerging from the EU elections but their job will largely be about interpreting those and making them a reality.

The EUCO may come up with alternative names closer to the new center of political power, that is the conservative right of Meloni. 

Isabel Camisão, Assistant Professor, University of Coimbra

1. I think that if these names are confirmed, particularly Ursula von der Leyen as President of the Commission and Antonio Costa as President of the European Council, we’ll have a strong EU leadership. During the first mandate, von der Leyen managed to push forward her main pet priorities, namely regarding the twin digital and green transitions and the geopolitical focus, while dealing with a major pandemic and the return of war to Europe. Considering that she headed the Commission during extremely difficult times (during crisis situations public leadership is under pressure) she performed very well, being able not only to make the case for a coordinated crisis response at the European level (in the pandemic’s case) and for a united front that stand by Ukraine (in the Russian invasion of Ukraine’s case), but also seizing the opportunity to link crisis response to the Commission’s priorities (for example linking green and digital goals to the NextGenerationEU; finally addressing the long due solution for the problem of energy dependency; or reviving the enlargement policy). Of course, not everything went smoothly, and Europe is still dragging its feet on some of the Commission’s proposals. Also, some proposals were toned down (meaning that they were less ambitious than what would be expected) in order to be accepted by MS (it was for example the case of the Migration and Asylum Pact). But, all in all, she showed that she is assertive, determined, and committed to the defence of European values. What is more, she is not afraid to stand by her convictions. As for Antonio Costa, I believe he will be a strong leader too. It is true that one of the main tasks of the President of the European Council is to reach consensus, meaning to be able to conciliate sometimes very different positions and interests and reach a position acceptable for all. However, in my opinion, this does not necessarily entail being a weak leader. On the contrary, a strong leader might have better results, providing that he/she is a clever, diplomatic leader. One that knows how to balance assertiveness with flexibility. And one that knows how to lead without outshining the prominence of the Heads of State or Government. Considering his long political experience in Portugal, and the fact that he had “to juggle” very different party preferences during his “Geringonça” government, Antonio Costa appears to be up to the task. He is a “political animal” and therefore he understands politics’ front and backstage very well. Also, considering his experience in Portugal as a Prime Minister that had to collaborate with a President of Republic from a different political party, I think he understands very well the importance of a peaceful “co-habitation” with the President of the Commission (something that Charles Michel appears to have neglected). As for Kaja Kallas for the EU High Representative position, I think that the fact that she come from a Baltic State is relevant considering the geopolitical context and one would expect firm positions for example regarding the Ukrainian war and the need to stop Putin’s ambition. 

2. I think that EU’s priorities will be very much dictated by the geopolitical context we live in, that is a very volatile, competitive and more insecure international environment, where the threats to the international rules-based order are escalating, where war has returned to our Continent, and where our old friend and ally, the US, can become essentially a rival depending on the results of the November elections. So, inevitably, our agenda will be in part determined by this uncertainty. That is why security and defence features at the top of the next strategic agenda. This does not mean that other priorities, such as green or digital transition will disappear. Actually, reaching these goals will help Europe to achieve the so-called strategic autonomy and to increase its competitiveness and resilience. Equally important, will be to revamp our industry or to enhance our influence to counter our systemic rivals’ influence (that’s clearly the case of EU Global Gateway which is a response to China’s Belt and Road initiative). Another important topic will be enlargement. So, even though who leads might matter (if we think for example about the next French elections, it is impossible not to think that, depending on who wins, the country internal, and eventually European, policies will be affected) I think that in the case of the names on the table for the EU top positions they will not fundamentally change what are already the EU’s declared priorities for the near future.

Stefan​​​​ Lehne, Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe

As to your question whether the choice of personnel reflects the priorities of the EU for the coming years: It usually doesn’t. The factors determining the leadership are the size of party groups, the geographic and gender balance and the relationship between key capitals. Substantive issues for the next five years are addressed in the European Council’s Strategic Agenda and in the new Commission President’s program.

Here is a blog piece I wrote last week that you might find helpful.