Reflections on the challenges and advantages of being European

They were joined by Henryka Mościcka-Dendys, Undersecretary of State in Poland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Undine Ruge, former Director-General for European Policy and Europe Advisor to Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz.

Addressing the audience at the Hôtel Van Eetvelde, Van Rompuy claimed to have felt European for as long as he could remember. In a wide-ranging conversation – stretching from his own sense of a European identity to steering 28 European leaders through the Euro crisis, Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the Brexit referendum – he also reflected on the dramatic fallout of the Arab Spring uprisings and on accepting the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the EU. He remarked that becoming recognized and accepted as speaking on behalf of Europe on foreign affairs and security had nevertheless been an ‘uphill battle’.

‘The problem was not with the Russians, the Chinese or the Americans. The problem was with our own friends,’ Van Rompuy said as he expanded on the internal wrangling over Europe’s voice on the world stage during his mandate (2009-14).

He described the moment when the EU was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize as the pinnacle of his career, even if it was ‘not based on his own personal merits’ but drew on Europe’s history and the past leaders who had brought peace and prosperity to the continent.

‘I realized that others could have received that prize for what they did for Europe,’ he explained, recounting how only weeks after the award ceremony he had travelled to Helmut Kohl’s home town in Ludwigshafen to personally bring him the award in acknowledgement of what he had done ‘to reunite Germany in a more united Europe’.

Reflecting on current politics and the situation in the east of the continent, Van Rompuy commented that he could never have imagined Russia would one day try to reoccupy Ukraine through war. ‘We could imagine many things, many pressures, but not waging war and risking the lives of hundreds of thousands of people for a few square kilometres in this Eurasian continental country.’

Before 2013, he explained, Russia had been making overtures to the West and was positioning itself as a partner ensconced within the global system, with EU-Russia meetings happening every six months. ‘Don't forget,’ he said, ‘that until ... 2013, Russia was a member of the G8. I’d had many meetings with Dmitry Medvedev. He was a full member and he was trusted. … He was a part of the club.’

Turning westwards, Van Rompuy suggested that Europe’s complexity regarding who embodies the European voice was not necessarily a weakness. This was a reference to Henry Kissinger’s purported comments that when dealing with Europe, it was never clear whom to call. ‘You have one spokesperson, one who can speak on behalf of the United States, but there are four seasons in a day,’ Van Rompuy said, alluding to the volatile US political climate. ‘I prefer a system which is more complicated, takes more time, but that at the end of the day works in the interests of those 450 million Europeans. I don't envy the United States system because it's full of dangers. ... We have our balance of power. Sometimes it's too much, but in the light of history and with a broader perspective, it's much more effective.’

Van Rompuy also reflected on Europe’s voice at moments of crisis, such as in 2011 in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, when Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron took the initiative to oust Gaddafi in Libya with the US ‘leading from behind’. He recalled emergency ad hoc summits dedicated to war and peace, and the complex art of building coalitions and consensus through the UN Security Council, the Arab League and other bodies, at speed.

‘The operation [in Benghazi] started. After one week, it was clear that we [did] not [have] the right logistics,’ Van Rompuy said. ‘And so we missed, for instance, refuelling in the air, and we had to make an appeal to NATO.’ It was a moment, he explained, that exposed the weakness of military forces in Europe ‘even with the backing of the French and British armies’.

In times of crisis, he said, Europe sought to designate a leader to tackle the situation at hand. On Brexit, that fell to Michel Barnier or Jean-Claude Juncker, while on trade, Juncker represented Europe in cutting a deal with Trump on soybeans. He also recalled how Merkel, when dealing with Trump, declined to speak for or do business on behalf of Europe, saying she ‘didn’t have the legal competence’.

More broadly, a mandate to speak on behalf of Europe, Van Rompuy explained, was never enough on its own. Personal charisma and political know-how also came into play, ensuring Europe’s voice was ‘alive and trusted’.

Henryka Mościcka-Dendys and Undine Ruge reflected on the significance of Europe Day in their respective countries, Poland and Germany.

Mościcka-Dendys recalled Polish history of the Cold War and the post-Cold War period, Poland's accession to the European Union and recent political developments. For her, joining the EU on 1 May 2004 has become inextricably linked to the Europe Day celebrations on 9 May.

For Undine Ruge, several anniversaries come together in early May in Germany. In addition to Europe Day, there is Liberation Day, celebrating the downfall of Nazism, Basic Law Day, marking the enactment of Germany’s constitution, and the date the country became a NATO member in 1955. She reiterated that Europe Day was an opportunity to keep the conversation about Europe alive.

‘I come from a generation that accepted Fukuyama’s claim about the end of history and ... democracy winning,’ Mościcka-Dendys pointed out. ‘We believed the promise that there would never be a war again.’ She said that if Europe wants to be a key international actor, it has little choice but to get serious about its own defence spending.

Ruge stressed the importance of the so-called Weimar triangle (France, Germany and Poland) on matters of peace and security. She also underlined that the incoming Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, used this year’s Europe Day to meet with the leaders of the European institutions in Brussels ahead of a meeting with the NATO Secretary General.

With Europe seeking to forge its own geopolitical path, the panellists reflected on its engagement with partners. ‘We have always perceived ourselves as an economic giant and not necessarily as a political actor,’ said Mościcka-Dendys. ‘We have to be more visible on the political level.’ All the panellists emphasized the need to engage constructively in Africa and Latin America. The erosion of international norms has in fact created space for Europe to become a more attractive and reliable partner, Ruge believes.

Expanding on the topic of ‘Who Speaks for Europe’, Ruge – former advisor to both Merkel and Scholz – said that the Lisbon Treaty, which paved the way for a permanent President of the European Council (a post first held by Herman Van Rompuy) had a big impact on European leadership. She said Merkel’s long tenure allowed her to develop personal relationships, giving her influence beyond formal roles. Nevertheless, an important skill required of any leader, she said, was the art of cultivating ‘acceptance’.

Luuk van Middelaar concluded the discussion by recalling the Schuman Declaration and how, 75 years ago, political leaders had the courage to ‘invent the unimaginable’ – a spirit that he hopes lives on and inspires others to take a leap of faith towards an outward-looking European future, drawing on its rich and diverse history.