On Monday, the world’s eyes were on the swearing in ceremony of the 47th President of the USA. Frankly, I had the time to watch President Trump’s inauguration speech. I was not surprised about the policies that were mentioned, inter alia, the drilling of gas and oil, as well as the pulling out of the Climate Paris Agreement and the green policies enacted in the past years by the preceding administration.
Surely, I listened carefully to what was said, especially on the topic of wars. Trump said that other people’s wars mustn’t be made America’s wars, because its military must assist its citizens first before assisting others. Oh well, understandably, charity begins at home. What’s worrying though is the fact that the way the EU’s economy has been shaped in the past four to five years, does not allow for a reversal. Judging by the Draghi report on competitiveness, the EU needs to take into consideration several proposals that were outlined in that piece of academic work. For instance, the EU’s economy will become uncompetitive relative to China’s and the USA’s if the latter disregards climate policies. Judging by what the 47th president of the USA said, the direction is to certainly generate more GHG emissions (drill baby drill), with complete disregard to regulations and protocols in place on climate change. Certainly, it is already difficult to compete with other global economies due to overregulation. Besides, the EU cannot compete with the USA and with China when it comes to raw materials including big techs and knowledge retentions. The EU owns it, and they fund it, but it’s then lost due to overregulation.
Undoubtedly, the future is uncertain. However, with tech-billionaires around President Trump we might be seeing another level of technological advancement. And the USA will be using all the means at its disposal to compete with China, and to reverse the biggest economic mistake of the past three years, that of allowing inflation to spiral out of control. The sanctions on Russia altered the way countries trade and certainly shifted international economic patterns. Undeniably, the end result was higher inflation, higher interest rates, implying higher mortgages, as well as other additional hardships. Whereas in the USA inflation stabilised way before that of the EU, people needed more than two to three years to recover and start feeling the effects of economic growth. Besides, the extensive borrowing applied by the Biden administration did not help inflation either.
However, the EU’s problem, at this juncture is its leadership, and the way it is structured. We have a president of the European Commission, a president of the European Parliament, a president of the European Council, a High Representative, as well as different Council formations. Council and the European Parliament are the co-legislators, if we exclude revenue, the MFF, as well as CFSP. The EU Commission is the guardian of the Treaty, while the HRVP is tasked to oversee Common Foreign and Security Policy and Common Security and Defence Policy, with the EU Parliament not even considered on CFSP matters other than being informed about the HRVP’s work on an annual basis. Also, we now have a Commissioner for Defence besides the other 26 commissioners, as well as a complex system of special envoys picked solely by the President of the EU Commission to task them with specific thematic matters.
Undoubtedly, the EU is a super regulator power. And the EU Commission is known for its ambitious tabled regulatory proposals. However, when the EU Commissions sends a copy to both Council and the EU Parliament, until Council reaches a position, and until the EU Parliament’s rapporteur closes the file, and proceed to trilogue stages, the tabled regulations are either diluted or strengthened to the point of absurdity. Imagine, all these factors trying to coexist along with national parliaments and the European Council. And to make matters worse, the EU must also work with other complex countries, not least those who are quite strong on geopolitics, thereby absorbing additional instability.
The EU has its own climate objectives, and the Green Deal is high on the agenda. I watched carefully what the President of the EU Commission said during the World Economic Forum. Among other things, Ursula von der Leyen mentioned social media, and how it affected democracies including disinformation. In my personal view, I am not sure what type of democracies the President of the EU Commission believes in. Let’s leave what the outgoing Ombudsman said about her modus operandi. When I was still posted in Brussels, and witnessed signs of tyrant policies during the pandemic, in all honesty, I was truly appalled with the way they were handling everything. Actually, it was quite chilling. At that point I reasoned that it must be the first time to deal with a global pandemic and there were public health security concerns. However, no protocols were in place and no proportionality was applied when locking people indoors and restricting their movements. People were almost forced to vaccinate themselves, else they would have restricted their travel. And here I am not speaking about islands, where the only means of transportation is by air or water, but also from one member state to another on mainland Europe.
However, I sniffed what was to ensue. The way the 2019-2024 EU Commission handled the pandemic, pushed for the introduction of a global tax rate, applied additional due diligence on corporates and financial institutions, and the handling of CFSP matters, in my opinion, was tantamount to tyrant behaviour. Not to mention the Digital Service Act. The way they want to control our lives is truly authoritarian. The way the EU Commission is handling matters is not democratic at all. They are just disguising themselves, using the EU institutions. Let’s handle for a while the topic of disinformation. I never comprehended what disinformation really means. You either allow free speech – distinct from hate speech – and leave people to decide what to believe. There are no two ways about it. Once, an institution tampers with free speech, it sends an authoritarian message. Disinformation is just a word mostly pushed by the Eastern member states. It is reminiscent of their communist past, where free speech was controlled. Certainly, it is chocking citizens, and businesses.
When it comes to the Digital Service Act, Trump’s administration will surely counter the disproportionate fines applied to big-tech companies. It’s become a source of revenue for the EU Commission. This assigned revenue goes to the EU budget, and member states contribute less to the EU budget. With countries on the brink of financial collapse the EU needs more of such revenue. The French economist, Blanchard, was quite clear on France’s economy and fiscal position. And if the EU wants to move forward on implementing additional spending on security, including military, then new sources of revenue, somehow, must be explored.
Surely, the EU needs to clearly define its vision on its strategic autonomy!
