Making Global Gateway Team Nationals work

On 20 March, the Brussels Institute for Geopolitics, together with Clingendael Institute and the Egmont Institute, convened a closed policy workshop in Brussels on a question that is becoming increasingly important for Europe’s external economic strategy: how can Member States organise themselves nationally to make the Global Gateway work in practice? Bringing together officials from DG INTPA, national representatives, development and finance actors, and think tanks, the discussion focused on the role of emerging “Team National” structures in connecting national capacities, EU priorities and private-sector engagement.

The discussion followed the launch of the Global Gateway Investment Hub at the Global Gateway Forum 2025, which has added new pressure on Member States to move from political endorsement to operational delivery. If the Global Gateway is to become more than a label, much will depend on whether Member States can identify projects early, build viable pipelines and translate national strengths into a more coherent European offer. Experiences from countries including Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands showed that there is no single model. But across different approaches, the challenge is the same: Team Nationals must not become another layer of coordination. They need to function as practical interfaces between capitals, Brussels and businesses.

A central theme was the relationship between Team Nationals and Team Europe. Participants agreed that national structures are indispensable because they are closer to companies and better placed to develop projects from the ground up. At the same time, the discussion raised a broader strategic question about the added value of the European layer, especially for larger Member States that already have strong financial and diplomatic tools. One conclusion was that Team Europe matters most when it acts as a force multiplier: combining capabilities, widening the toolbox and creating space for smaller Member States to plug into larger initiatives.

Private-sector engagement was at the heart of the debate. Participants stressed that Europe still needs a clearer narrative for business. If the Global Gateway is meant to serve geopolitical, developmental and economic purposes at once, companies need a better sense of what Europe is trying to achieve, where they fit in, and what kind of backing the EU is prepared to provide. Several interventions also pointed to the need for more practical entry points, stronger filtering at national level and more thematic or pilot-based approaches that can help make the framework more usable.

The workshop also underscored the importance of looking beyond Europe’s internal coordination challenges and focusing more clearly on partner-country needs. A more credible Global Gateway will require sharper strategic choices, clearer political direction and a more concrete sense of what distinguishes Europe’s offer in an increasingly competitive environment.

Among the participants were Juan Jose Almagro-Herrador, Deputy Head of Unit in DG INTPA’s Unit D1, San Bilal, Executive Director of ECDPM, alongside representatives from Team Netherlands, Team France, Team Germany and Team Sweden, as well as experts from Clingendael Institute, the Egmont Institute, Ecorys and the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies.

The broader takeaway was clear: whether Europe can turn the Global Gateway into a strategic instrument that is politically directed, operationally usable and commercially credible will depend in part on its ability to make Team Nationals work.