The EU’s independence moment

As promised in my preceding opinion piece, today, I will be treating the subject of the State of the Union Speech. President Ursula von der Leyen’s 2025 State of the Union address was delivered not with gravitas but with the usual rhetoric and fanfare, after jumpstarting her GPS political discourse failure. Well, it was her first major address since securing a second term in 2024, and it seemed to be carrying the same weight of continuity, ambition in failure, and urgency in inertia. Yet, for all its rhetorical strength and usual illusionary repetition, the speech revealed a Union still struggling to reconcile its lofty ideals with its fractured realities.

Von der Leyen opened with a declaration that this must be Europe’s Independence Moment. Meanwhile, von der Leyen is desperately signing trade agreements with other continents and countries. Whatever that means in the context of such rushed trade agreements – inter alia the Mercosur agreement – remains to be seen. The phrase, repeated throughout the address, was intended to galvanise the bloc’s strategic autonomy long pushed by the French, which among others includes the military sectors, and economic and political independence, for which the president is capitalising for her country. But as I’ve argued in previous commentaries, the EU’s independence cannot be declared, due to the multifaceted factors on security which depend on transatlantic relations. And the EU’s independence must be earned through coherence, credibility, and competence. This will take almost a generation. The speech revolved around an illusion, revealing urgency before the end of 2029, with an awkward aspirational discourse.

Obviously, the President’s emphasis on defence was striking but not surprising. Von der Leyen proposed a European Defence Semester and a roadmap for €800 billion in military investment, which I have been following for over six months now. President von der Leyen spoke of a Union that must take care of its own defence, invoking the spectre of Russian aggression and global instability. Yet, the proposal to exempt defence-related deficits from the EU’s fiscal rules, namely the six-pack and two-pack regulations, risks undermining the very fiscal discipline that holds the Union together. I think what the EU needs is a competitive economy to compete with China, not Russia. And this is where I am not understanding the logic. The two largest economies globally are the USA and China. This means that we need to compete with both, although with the former the EU is an ally when it comes to security and defence.

Let me repeat what I said last week. For instance, France is already wobbling on the edge of a fiscal cliff. With a national debt exceeding €3.3 trillion and a deficit of 5.8%, the country spends more on interest payments than on education. Italy fares no better, with structural inefficiencies and stagnant growth. These are not the conditions under which a continent must re-arm. They are symptoms of a deeper malaise, one that cannot be cured by budgetary exceptions dressed as strategic foresight. The money must go towards technological progress, not military. Again, von der Leyen’s speech also revisited the Green Deal, announcing a Climate Adaptation Plan and a Clean Tech Industrial Accelerator, although some ambitious regulations went absent without leave. President von der Leyen, rightly framed energy policy as a matter of sovereignty, not just sustainability. Yet, the pivot toward American LNG and the €750 billion commitment to US energy imports raises uncomfortable questions. Is Europe trading one dependency for another, or is this just trade appeasement?

The President’s endorsement of Enrico Letta’s Much More than a Market report was one of the more promising elements of the address. President von der Leyen proposed a 2028 target for completing the Single Market, potentially echoing the transformative spirit of 1992. However, this reinforces my argument that the EU has been sleeping on its problems for over two decades, and von der Leyen seems to have the magic wand to fix everything in just under three years. Letta’s call for a “Savings and Investments Union” is timely. Europe’s competitiveness depends on unlocking private capital and streamlining regulatory frameworks. Yet, the Commission’s track record on Capital Markets Union has been underwhelming. Without systemic reforms and a centralised supervisory body, the EU risks squandering its last chance to lead in global innovation. Besides, we need a report on the competitiveness of the banking sector mirroring Draghi’s bulky dossier, and we must align the EU Commission’s ambitions with the ECB’s priorities or vice versa the ECB’s priorities with those of the EU Commission.

Trade policy was another climax. Von der Leyen defended her recent deal with President Donald Trump, struck at Turnberry, which scrapped EU tariffs on US industrial goods while accepting a 15% levy on most EU exports. Well, I have already expressed my opinion on this matter, critics in the European Parliament labelled it a humiliation. It was indeed a humiliation, because President Trump literally chewed her proposals and spat them out without giving her the chance to oppose anything. However, von der Leyen argued that the deal provides “crucial stability” in a time of global insecurity. WE always have a pretext to sell home! But stability should not come at the expense of sovereignty and the independence that dominated the speech. The EU must not become a passive player in transatlantic relations.

Another proposal was the creation of a Peace Centre for Democracy. Technically, this is a hub to monitor threats to democratic institutions and support civil society, especially in light of the USA’s foreign aid trimming. Again, controlling and controlling in a centralised system, choking everyone in a democratic dressed setup. What powers this hub will have, we still need to see. In principle, if they were to be honest about it, it is indeed a welcome initiative for democracies, but we all know how these hubs end up, rife with abuses. I do hope that this is not connected to the proposal to abolish the encryptions on end-to-end users. As I always said, I never understood what disinformation means. Well, on electoral manipulation and authoritarian tendencies across Europe it is understandable and requires a coordinated response. However, the Centre must not become another Brussels bureaucracy. It must be rooted in local realities, with genuine engagement from member states. We must also guard against politicisation. Democracy cannot be defended by decree. Democracy must be nurtured through dialogue and transparency, which is deeply rooted in a country’s culture.

Notably absent from the speech was any mention of the EU-Tunisia migration pact. President Kais Saied has made it clear that Europe is no longer welcome to renegotiate terms. The infrastructure for clean energy may be in place, but the political game is being played by Saied, and he is winning. The EU’s failure to assert its values in the Southern Mediterranean undermines its credibility. Everything became just Eastern, and the EU forgot all about the Mediterranean. Von der Leyen’s address was a speech of conviction, primarily to convince herself and her closest allies. Frankly, even the President doesn’t seem convinced by what’s being written into her speeches. But conviction alone does not build consensus. The Union that von der Leyen described, of being resilient, united, and independent, is still a work in progress and is still far from being realized. And while her second term offers continuity, it also demands clarity. Europe must reform and rebuild. But it must do so with coherence, not contradiction.