By Cinzia Alcidi

After months of uncertainty and escalating rhetoric, a new EU-US trade deal has finally been announced. Under the deal, a 15% US tariff will apply to most EU imports, including cars, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. This is higher than the 10% rate applied to most imports from the EU since April, but lower than the 30% tariff President Trump had threatened just days earlier. A 50% tariff remains on steel and aluminium, with further negotiations expected in those sectors.  

In return, the EU has committed to eliminating existing sectoral tariffs, notably the 10% duty on car imports. The deal also includes an EU pledge to purchase more US gas (USD 750 billion by 2028), along with an unspecified amount of military equipment, and to raise its overall investment in the US by USD 600 billion.  

The deal has been widely criticised on the European side, viewed by some as a weak EU capitulating to Trump’s demands, unable to mount an effective response. While that perception is difficult to counter, the reality is much more complex and nuanced.  

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Stefaan Verhulst

Europe is facing a defining moment in its approach to science, research and innovation. As geopolitical tensions mount and investment in dual-use technologies surges, the EU is being called to reimagine its research policy – not just for strategic autonomy but for lasting societal relevance and real global impact.  

At a recent CEPS dialogue on ‘Reimagining EU Research and Innovation Policy,’ this author focused on five asymmetries that policymakers absolutely must address if Europe is to avoid a future of diminished influence, declining trust and squandered opportunity. And the best way to avoid such a future is to build a truly (open) Science Stack.  

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Antigona Imeri

Since November 2024, Serbia has experienced a huge wave of anti-government protests. As students and citizens continue to pump up the situation by doubling down on their demands, the government’s intimidation attempts continues. By imprisoning students and activists, and cutting professors’ salaries, the regime is effectively punishing anyone who aligns with the pro-democracy movement.

Brussels’ response? In short – not good enough.

It’s mostly carefully worded declarations acknowledging the crisis but without any meaningful action. Despite being attacked by Serbian pro-government media, Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos has tried to echo EU values through a form of dual diplomacy – openly supporting the protesters while avoiding direct criticism of the government.

High Representative Kaja Kallas’s recent visit stood out for its firmer language, urging Serbia to strategically orient itself towards the EU. But what felt like a promising stance ended with a willingness to understand President Aleksander Vučić’s ‘side of the story’.

More troubling was their boss’s position. Just weeks after one of Serbia’s largest protests on 15 March, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, together with Council President Antonio Costa, chose to host Vučić for a dinner. What followed was a tonal shift, from von der Leyen’s praise last October over Serbia’s accession progress to new but vague calls for Serbia to make ‘real progress’ on EU reforms. Not only did this meeting signal the EU’s indifference to the Serbians mobilising in the streets but the empty rhetoric signalled their further abandonment – this time concluded with dessert.

Continuously choosing handshakes over accountability, one might ask why the EU – whose foundation rests on democracy, the rule of law and human rights – remains mostly silent about growing autocracy in a candidate country, all while continuing business as usual.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Sophia Russack

This week’s motion of censure against President Ursula von der Leyen’s Commission was not about vaccines but rather a proxy war over the emerging centre-to-far-right alliances in the European Parliament (EP), with the far right exploiting the tool to destabilise and divide. Many MEPs —particularly from the centre left— also opted to abstain to signal their discontent without formally breaking ranks. 

Overall, the debacle reflects a deepening rift between the EPP and the S&D, Renew and the Greens, signalling a new, increasingly polarised, even hostile, dynamic within the EPP. But it also reveals a deeper unease with von der Leyen’s leadership style – never have so many MEPs withheld their support from a Commission President in such a visible way. 

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Louise Bengtsson and Hampus Holmer

When the Council conclusions on the Global Health Strategy – and disclaimer, one of us helped draft those conclusions – were adopted by ministers in January 2024, it marked a moment of real ambition. For the first time in over a decade, EU Member States endorsed a comprehensive vision for Europe’s role in strengthening global health, rooted in equity, resilience and multilateral cooperation. Going beyond the EU’s role in development cooperation, the strategy clearly established health as an integral part of the EU’s foreign policy and the Global Gateway.

The EU Global Health Strategy underpinning the conclusions was launched in November 2022. Since then, the international landscape has shifted. Geopolitical tensions have intensified, development assistance has declined, multilateralism is under pressure and major global health agreements have stalled or been diluted – except perhaps the Pandemic Agreement adopted in May.

Today, if the EU wants to turn strategy into real-world influence, it needs more than just policy documents – it needs political leadership.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Cinzia Alcidi

In recent weeks, EU leaders have voiced their support for strengthening the euro’s global role. Christine Lagarde has called for a ‘global euro’ moment and recent Council conclusions affirm the EU’s commitment to reinforcing the euro as both a reserve and transaction currency.

Shifting global dynamics, accompanied by the US dollar’s vulnerability, and driven by the current US administration’s erratic foreign policy and deepening fiscal challenges, are creating a favourable environment for elevating the euro’s global standing.

For Europe, this is both an opportunity and a challenge. A stronger global euro could indeed bolster the EU’s strategic autonomy, making it more resilient in an increasingly weaponised international economic landscape. Yet this requires more than just political rhetoric. It demands long overdue and politically sensitive steps towards deeper economic and financial integration, on which progress has stalled for years.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Ceren Ergenc

The second Trump administration has intensified the global reshuffling of geoeconomic alliances following China’s phenomenal industrial growth and its near domination of new technology markets. While it increasingly feels like a new superpower tussle, middle powers and developing countries can still choose from multiple alignments and derisking strategies better aligned with their specific development and security goals.

With the Competitiveness Compass, the EU has recognised that it’s lagging in global competitiveness, meaning that it plans to shift from a development-focused role to ‘open strategic autonomy’, namely prioritising its own re-industrialisation.

Enter the Global Gateway, increasingly the subject of intense debate in Brussels. That’s why the second Global Gateway Forum planned for mid-October 2025 will be fundamental in defining its future trajectory.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Apostolos Thomadakis and J. Scott Marcus

The EU’s sustainability reporting rules urgently need to be recalibrated. What began as a bold legislative push to steer markets towards environmental and social goals is now showing signs of regulatory overreach. Companies, especially SMEs, are struggling to navigate three major frameworks: the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the EU Taxonomy Regulation.

The European Commission’s proposed Omnibus Directive is meant to ease this burden. But a CEPS independent analysis, conducted for the European Parliament (EP), finds that the proposal falls short. It focuses too narrowly on reducing the number of companies in scope or the frequency of reporting, while overlooking the deeper challenge – namely the cumulative and interdependent nature of the obligations these frameworks impose in practice.

The real issue isn’t legal duplication but operational convergence. Unless this is addressed through more integrated guidance, coherent standards and clear reporting pathways, Europe risks undermining both its sustainability ambitions and its global competitiveness.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Shagofah Ghafori

Kabul’s fall in August 2021 was a slow-motion tragedy. EU Member States opened their doors, then bureaucracy slammed them shut. Across the EU, highly-skilled Afghanistanis – especially many Afghanistani women – are unable to work or practice their professions: a former minister becomes a pizza delivery man, a former army officer is found squatting next to official EU buildings.

These aren’t just individual tragedies. They’re symptoms of a systemic failure that’s quietly sabotaging people’s lives – and Europe’s future.

New proposals, reflecting the latest revisions to the ‘safe third country’ provisions under the Asylum Procedure Regulation (APR), make it easier to dismiss asylum claims. Countries like Germany and Austria claim Afghanistan is now ‘secure enough’ to deport people to.

Instability in Afghanistan has driven one of the world’s largest refugee crisis, displacing over six million people. Despite the ongoing chaos in Kabul, EU Member States have continued to issue thousands of deportation orders to Afghanistani nationals, including 23 515 in 2023 alone.

The bitter irony is that while the European Commission champions legal pathways and seeks to attract skilled workers from third countries, those already here are stuck. Rather than allowing Afghanistanis to contribute their skills, the bureaucratic merry-go-round consigns them to a state of Kafkaesque limbo.

In short, blanket restrictions and drawn‐out procedures strand them in perpetual uncertainty: children remain shut out of school, families scramble for stable housing and would-be workers are barred from the labour market. Many end up languishing for years in overcrowded reception centres and pushed into a life with limited dignity or rights.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Raquel Jorge Ricart and Diana Senczyszyn

On 5 June, the European Commission and the EEAS published a Joint Communication that officially launched the EU’s new International Digital Strategy. This clearly shows how important digital diplomacy has become over the past few years and it’s a long-awaited step in the EU’s ambition to become a stronger and more effective player in global digital governance.

Compared to previous efforts, the new strategy is significantly improved in terms of coherence, breadth and ambition. Because of this, it adequately responds to repeated calls for stronger EU leadership in global digital affairs that featured in several earlier strategies (Cybersecurity, Digital Decade, Economic Security Strategy, Competitiveness Compass) and high-level reports (such as Draghi, Letta, and Heitor). But, as is always the case, how the strategy is implemented going forward will be key to its success.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Fanny Sauvignon

South Korea began 2025 in deep political turmoil following the martial law crisis. Despite its gravity, the episode affirmed the country’s democratic resilience. In the early hours of 4 December 2024, the South Korean National Assembly had voted to lift the martial law that President Yoon Suk-yeol had announced the night before. In April 2025, the Constitutional Court formally removed Yoon from office, triggering snap elections.

For the past six months, South Korea has been deeply divided and lacking in strong leadership. On 3 June, the leadership vacuum was filled by the landslide victory of Lee Jae-myung, who took office the next day and pledged to ‘unite the people’.

At first glance, this result could mean continuity for EU-Korea relations. South Korea is expected to remain a key partner in promoting a rules-based international order, from global trade to the Indo-Pacific and beyond. The two strategic partners also have an impressive line-up of bilateral commitments.

But before framing EU-Korea relations in routine terms, it’s worth taking a closer look at today’s South Korea, its new priorities and their practical implications for Brussels and Seoul.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Laura Nurski

In recent weeks, headlines have taken a sharp turn, with Anthropic’s CEO warning that AI could eliminate half of all entry-level white-collar jobs within five years. Business media echo the same worry: is AI replacing – or going to replace – new graduates?

These statements tap into a growing sense that generative AI isn’t just augmenting work – it’s destroying it. This comes amid mass layoffs in tech and consulting. In 2024 alone, more than 95 000 US tech workers lost their jobs. Dismissals at McKinsey, Microsoft, Duolingo and Salesforce are framed as the result of AI efficiency gains.

The narrative is clear: AI is coming for entry-level jobs – and there’s nothing we can do about it. But this deterministic view ignores a simple truth: machines don’t make history. People do.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Christian Egenhofer and Damir Dizdarević

The EU is strongly committed to integrating the Western Balkans into its energy and climate frameworks as part of the enlargement process. It also provides financial support for the region’s transition to sustainable energy systems. The Instrument for Pre-Accession III, the Reform and Growth Facility and the EU Energy Support Package together provide more than EUR 20 billion in grants and loans for all sectors.

In the energy sector, new funding under the EU Growth Plan for the Western Balkans is supposed to speed up action on the commitments made under the Energy Community Treaty, which links the EU neighbourhood to the EU energy market. This should boost the region’s ongoing EU accession negotiations.

However, meeting these commitments is about more than just the Western Balkans complying with the Energy Community Treaty. It’s equally a precondition for reforming the electricity sector and, consequently, unlocking new private investment for a sector that’s currently in distress. The electricity and heat sector alone will require investment of some EUR 31-36 billon, according to the Energy Community Secretariat.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By James Moran

The recent history of the EU’s relations in its ‘southern neighbourhood’ can hardly be called its finest hour. It has been preoccupied with defensive policies, notably the focus on controlling illegal migration, spurred by the far right’s growing support. Then there’s the rise of other world powers in the MENA region such as China, Russia and Turkey, which are often less demanding on fundamental values and economic reform.

This has holed the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) in the South below the water line (the ENP in the East is effectively obsolete) and if not yet irretrievably sunk, it’s listing badly and in need of more than a salvage operation. The US’ disengagement from the region (other than Israel) hasn’t helped either.

Above all, the failure to effectively call out Israel’s disproportionate military campaign and disregard of international law in Gaza, as well as its aggression in Lebanon and Syria, has plagued the EU with accusations of double standards vis-à-vis its positioning on Ukraine. This has badly damaged the EU’s reputation as a global force for peace.

That said, the EU still matters in the region. For most MENA countries, it’s still the largest trader, investor and source of aid, as well as a growing security provider. People-to-people links are also second to none, whether through the EU’s large immigrant communities, the millions who have studied in Europe, or through the still substantial support the EU provides to MENA civil society.

Notwithstanding Israel/Palestine, the EU is also seen as a relatively reliable partner that respects its agreements. Today, as countries like Jordan and Morocco could be subjected to unjustified US tariffs at any moment (despite having FTAs with Washington), reliability is more than ever a prized commodity.

And the region also matters to the EU. Some 250 million relatively young and increasingly well-educated citizens live just a few hundred kilometres across the mare nostrum in countries with major energy resources, whether they be sun, wind, green hydrogen or gas. It’s also an important market for EU exports and a potentially competitive source of products and labour for a rapidly ageing Europe – provided that the right balance can be found in the EuroMed partnership.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Cinzia Alcidi

Donald Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ has delivered the highest tariff hike in nearly a century. If they’re implemented, the average US tariff rate will rise to 22.5%, around 11 percentage points higher compared to March. Trump has given the world just one week to absorb the news and potentially begin negotiations.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was quick to promise a proportionate response while maintaining an openness to dialogue. But the reality is that any retaliation would be far from ideal. It would be driven by the political pressure to show that such aggression won’t be tolerated and not by cold-hard strategy (as it should be).

There are at least three reasons why it would be wise for the EU not to react – at least for now – especially if reacting involves duties or taxes targeting US goods or services.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By J. Scott Marcus

Suppose vast quantities of Europeans’ digital data were being sent every few days to a foreign power that has threatened military action against an EU Member State. How should the EU react?

Oh, and that foreign power isn’t Russia or China – it’s the United States.

We’re not talking about the data provided to online service providers such as Google and Facebook – rather the disk backups that are running on everyone’s personal computer, typically every few days. This potentially enormous security exposure is just sitting in plain sight but hasn’t yet visibly bubbled up into the consciousness of European policymakers.

That needs to change – the EU needs to conduct a detailed threat assessment reflecting the new realities, identifying who needs to make changes… and how.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Davide Monaco

In the wake of the Draghi report and the EU Competitiveness Compass, ‘competitiveness’ is again dominating debates about the present and future of EU economies and societies, despite being long criticised as an elusive concept or a dangerous (and wrong) obsession.

This is hardly new. The search for competitiveness has shaped EU integration and policy discussions for at least three decades. It was already at the heart of the 1993 White Paper on ‘Growth, Competitiveness and Employment’ and the 2000 Lisbon Strategy. A decade later, the drive for competitiveness underpinned how the eurozone debt crisis was managed, legitimising austerity, wage restraint and the rise of precarious work in many countries.

This time, we’re being assured that competitiveness will bring about ‘good jobs’ and won’t come at the expense of wages and workers’ wellbeing. But will this really be the case? If recent developments are any guide, we have some very good reasons to be skeptical.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Judith Arnal, Fredrik Andersson and Beatriz Pozo

We’re undergoing a global transformation marked by competition for resources, value chain shifts, geopolitical tensions, humanitarian crises, climate change and demographic challenges. This shifting landscape is forcing EU leaders and businesses to rethink their strategies.

The Letta and Draghi reports in particular urged the EU and its Member States to act – rethink governance, remove barriers to innovation, address productivity gaps, simplify legislation and ease compliance burdens.

But if the EU wants to face to these new challenges and emerge stronger, its financial sector needs to be resilient and competitive – and the retail payments system is a crucial part of the financial sector. It underpins economic activity, facilitates cross-border transactions and supports financial stability. In short, it’s one of the foundations of Europe’s digital and economic sovereignty.

Recently, the payments sector has experienced significant transformation driven by digitalisation, rapid technological changes and evolving consumer expectations. That’s why it’s essential to take a forward-looking approach and fully take advantage of the ‘payments revolution’.

The good news is that Europe’s payments landscape is dynamic well-functioning, and increasingly innovative and competitive. Yet it has started to lose ground in terms of reach and scalability, as some key players only operate within their national borders rather than EU-wide. This means that Europe could remain fragmented in a world where scale, speed and technological leadership define success.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Julia Pocze

The democratic rule of law is badly deteriorating in many parts of the world and those responsible are hiding in plain sight. In fact, they’re not hiding at all, but they do pretend that their conduct supposedly benefits the public good instead of seriously harming it.

A play on ‘oligarchy’, ‘broligarchy’ is being increasingly used to describe the influence and power of US tech billionaires not only on certain policies and legislation, but on the entire system of checks and balances that underpins the rule of law. While it’s true that a small group of billionaires and the political right have developed a symbiotic relationship across the US and also in Europe, there’s more to this story than merely condemning a few select incredibly wealthy individuals.

In Europe – like everywhere else – corporate influence on policymaking has long been an issue, as lobbyists working for big companies tend to have ‘privileged access’ to decision-makers and, thanks to the millions they spend, have a more extensive impact on political outcomes. This creates a ‘two-tier’ version of democracy, where immense wealth can easily be translated into political power, reinforcing and exploiting existing inequalities across society.

Meanwhile, another International Women’s Day has come and gone, with many political leaders emphasising equal rights and social justice. Their words, however, are hollow so long as moderates continue flirting with the ever-stronger extreme right and most political groups continue to accommodate corporate interests that might be diametrically opposed to justice and equality.

To deliver on the grand ideals of justice, democracy and even equality – as promised in the EU Treaties, in the Charter, in national constitutions and countless political manifestos – the EU must meet the challengers to its core values head on. Instead of falling in line with the backlash against diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), it must double-down on its supposed commitment to these principles.

For the third year in a row, CEPS is marking International Women’s Day on 8 March with a special short series of Expert Commentaries to highlight the insights and expertise of some of our most talented female researchers.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Alice Orlandini

Five years on, Covid-19 taught us the hard way, that health crises can turn our lives upside down overnight – forcing lockdowns, halting even the world’s strongest economies but, most importantly, killing millions. The pandemic exposed the weaknesses of the most advanced healthcare systems – including the EU’s – and demonstrated that unilateral actions are a losing strategy when it comes to tackling cross-border health threats. It became clear that preparedness and prompt, coordinated responses are the crucial ingredients in a successful approach.

This is even truer since Covid-19 is unlikely to be an isolated event. Future pandemics are inevitable due to climate change, deforestation and the loss of biodiversity. With governments around the world scaling back their commitment to both environmental policies and health preparedness, we’re already starting off on the wrong foot in terms of prevention – when actually this could be a great opportunity for the EU to take the initiative and show some global leadership.

For the third year in a row, CEPS is marking International Women’s Day on 8 March with a special short series of Expert Commentaries to highlight the insights and expertise of some of our most talented female researchers.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Cosima Lenz

Gender is largely absent from the EU’s antimicrobial resistance (AMR) policies and strategies. Yet AMR is a major global health threat. It happens when microbes (bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites) stop responding to medication, making infections harder to treat, and increasing the risk of severe illness and death. Misuse and the overuse of antibiotics accelerate resistance, turning once-treatable infections into serious health risks.

AMR is a global crisis, causing around 4.7 million deaths in 2021, including 35 000 in the EU and EEA. Recognising the urgency of this threat, the EU named AMR among its top priorities in its Global Health Strategy. The EU is playing a key role in shaping global and regional AMR policies and research through its funding commitments – which account for one-third of global AMR development assistance in 2020 – and collaborations, such as the Joint Programming Initiative on AMR, the Global AMR R&D hubs and other Horizon Europe initiatives.

Despite growing awareness of the need to recognise gender in AMR research, EU efforts have failed to incorporate gender or gender considerations. This is a significant oversight and needs to be immediately rectified as gender influences AMR risk, management and the effectiveness of health policies and interventions. Global research shows that women are more likely than men to use antibiotics in their lifetime. This trend is reflected in EU data, where women report slightly higher antibiotics use over the past year compared to men.

For the third year in a row, CEPS is marking International Women’s Day on 8 March with a special short series of Expert Commentaries to highlight the insights and expertise of some of our most talented female researchers.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Tinatin Akhvlediani

Georgia is no stranger to political turmoil but the country now finds itself at a perilous tipping point. Georgians are known for taking to the streets, waving EU flags with unmatched passion and fighting for their European future.

But this time, with mounting geopolitical tensions and a ruling party desperate to cling to power while appeasing the Kremlin, the stakes are higher than ever. Despite months of protests, Georgian Dream (GD), the ruling party controlled by oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili, who amassed his fortune in Russia, has only tightened its grip, escalating repression, detaining and assaulting demonstrators, and fast-tracking Georgia’s descent into authoritarianism.

In 2024, the ‘foreign agents’ law was reintroduced despite overwhelming public protests, elections were manipulated and rigged, and then came the final blow – the prime minister’s announcement that Georgia would halt EU accession negotiations until 2028. This was the last straw. Protesters flooded the streets in November and have remained there ever since.

In response, GD has passed laws that tighten restrictions on demonstrations, increase penalties for disobeying or insulting police officers, and makes it easier to fire civil servants. Additionally, new legislation is underway to ban foreign funding for media outlets and to replace the ‘foreign agents’ law with even stricter legislation to target civil society. Many civil servants have already been fired for joining public protests and several hundred demonstrators have been detained, including journalists, politicians and activists. More than 300 of them have reported beatings, torture and other ill-treatment.

The EU’s response? Underwhelming at best. A symbolic visa suspension for holders of diplomatic passports and officials, allowing EU Member States to impose visa requirements, though with the discretion to grant exemptions. Even without exemptions, the impact is limited – the diplomats and officials were not particularly eager to travel to the EU for work anyway and they can still obtain visas for personal travel. At best, it introduces procedural hurdles rather than any real consequences.

Throughout 2024, the EU has frozen EUR 30 million earmarked for Georgia’s defence sector (in July) and has suspended EUR 121 million in bilateral support (in October), followed by the European Council deciding to halt Georgia’s accession.

In short, the EU wielded the stick but not with enough force to shift GD’s course. Worse still, there’s no clear strategy for what comes next.

For the third year in a row, CEPS is marking International Women’s Day on 8 March with a special short series of Expert Commentaries to highlight the insights and expertise of some of our most talented female researchers.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Laura Nurski

Skills have become a central pillar in policy discussions on the future of work. Since the 2000 Lisbon Strategy, the EU has gradually shifted from focusing on formal education and qualifications – as indicators of skill bundles – to a greater emphasis on skills as individual units that can be independently acquired and traded. The Recommendation on Microcredentials – first adopted in 2022 and now featured prominently in the Union of Skills – represents the clearest indication of this shift.

Since then, policymakers frequently turn to skilling as a silver bullet – something to reduce labour shortages and help the workforce adapt to technological change, ultimately providing social mobility and even supporting the inclusion of vulnerable groups in both the labour market and society at large.

In the recent Competitiveness Compass skills are seen as ‘horizontal enablers’ of competitiveness that also ensure social fairness. But it doesn’t explain how exactly this mechanism would work. This isn’t surprising, as the debate on skills is riddled with misconceptions that oversimplify skills’ role in the labour market and in society.

In short, if we don’t move beyond this simplified view, inclusive competitiveness will remain out of reach.

For the third year in a row, CEPS is marking International Women’s Day on 8 March with a special short series of Expert Commentaries to highlight the insights and expertise of some of our most talented female researchers.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Apostolos Thomadakis

The European Commission’s ‘Simplification Omnibus’ proposal, unveiled on 26 February, was presented as a necessary step to reduce the regulatory burden on businesses and enhance European competitiveness. By amending key sustainability directives – including the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the EU Taxonomy Regulation – the Commission claims to be streamlining compliance processes for companies.

However, beneath the rhetoric of simplification lies a profound retreat from the EU’s sustainability commitments. The proposal significantly weakens corporate transparency, accountability and long-term economic credibility, undermining years of progress in environmental, social and governance (ESG) regulation.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Sophie Pornschlegel and Sophia Russack

Germany went to the polls last Sunday and the conservative CDU came first, followed by the far-right AfD. Upcoming coalition negotiations will ultimately determine the next government’s composition, but CDU leader Friedrich Merz will likely become the next Chancellor, with the Social Democrats (SDP) as the probable junior coalition partner.

The past 3.5 years were sobering – the ‘traffic-light’ coalition of the SDP, Greens and liberal FDP fell short of playing a constructive role in EU policymaking, despite having set itself an ambitious EU programme. Finding compromise in a tripartite coalition proved challenging and relations between France and Germany – already not in the best shape – further eroded.

With the current geopolitical situation, the new government will have to show much more EU leadership than before. But whether they can deliver is another matter entirely.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Davide Colombi

The Italian government’s recent refusal to comply with an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant exposes deep-rooted hypocrisy in EU migration policy. While claiming to fight ‘human trafficking’, the Italian government has shielded a high-ranking Libyan official accused of crimes against humanity and war crimes.

This case exemplifies a broader trend where ‘migration’ concerns are used to justify legal exceptionalism, erode the rule of law and foster impunity.

The case concerns Osama Elmasry (or Almasri) Njeem, chief of the Libyan judicial police. He was arrested in Turin on 19 January following an ICC arrest warrant for crimes including torture, rape and sexual violence, murder and persecution. Just two days later, he was released and flown back to Libya on an Italian state aircraft.

The Italian government presented a list of unconvincing justifications for why it released him: the Court of Appeal of Rome hadn’t validated the arrest as it awaited the necessary approval from the Minister of Justice; the documents hadn’t been translated from English to Italian; and he was expelled for being a ‘national security risk’. However, Italy’s refusal to execute the ICC arrest warrant isn’t just a procedural failure but a direct violation of Italy’s – and the EU’s – legal obligations.

The ICC is currently assessing a legal complaint against Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Justice Minister Carlo Nordio and Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi, and it has given the Italian government 30 days to provide further information so it can assess its decision to not cooperate.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Robert Praas and Pierre-Alexandre Balland

Zooming out from the buzz around DeepSeek, it’s clear the AI game is rapidly changing. The usual big tech players no longer have the playing field to themselves. During the last few weeks, a wave of impressive, mostly open-source AI models have hit the scene, many created by smaller, scrappier companies outside the traditional Silicon Valley giants.

In short, the AI landscape is no longer just about who has the most money or the biggest data centres – it’s about who can innovate smarter, faster and achieve more with less.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Loqman Radpey

Europe’s engagement with the new Syrian leadership has been notably swift, yet it still refuses to recognise the Taliban. On 19 December 2024, the European Council issued guidelines for recognising Syria’s transitional government, tying it to respect for ‘human rights, including women’s rights, non-sectarian governance, and the protection of members of religious and ethnic minorities.’ On 4 January 2025, the German and French foreign ministers visited Damascus, less than a month after Bashar Assad’s fall.

Europe’s differing approaches to Syria’s new governing authority and the Taliban clearly shows the complexity of modern diplomacy and the intricate geopolitical and ideological factors driving Europe’s Middle East foreign policy decisions.

Of course, Europe currently hosts millions of Syrian refugees, many of them having fled the violence and extremism that flourished during the civil war. With continuing pressures on European governments – ranging from housing to social integration – the prospect that these refugees might soon return to a stable Syria is an alluring incentive for Europe to positively engage with Damascus and support its transition.

But by proactively helping Syria (and doing its best to avoid the mistakes it made with Afghanistan), Europe would also be doing itself a huge favour, by alleviating social strains in hosting EU countries, taking away some of Russia’s influence in the region and contributing to long-term security in the Middle East.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Robert Praas and Pierre-Alexandre Balland

The release of the freely available and surprisingly capable language model DeepSeek R-1 shocked the world, made it question the growing demand for computer chips and led the mighty NASDAQ to dive on Monday. Here’s a Chinese open-source project matching OpenAI’s capabilities – something we were told wouldn’t happen for years – and at a fraction of the cost. The panic revealed more about our assumptions about AI than about the model itself.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Karel Lannoo

The EU should stick to its course, pursue the Green Deal and complete the single market. It needs to demonstrate its resolve and act united as a new – potentially hostile – US administration rolls in and shakes up the foundations of transatlantic cooperation and the world order. But it must also stand firm if China makes its own attempts to split an EU united front.

To do so, the EU should act decisively with the powers it has according to the Treaty, while being much more vocal against any efforts to politically undermine Europe and divide it.

We’ll see over the next few weeks how up to this task the newish von der Leyen II Commission is and how determined it is to counter pressures from both Member States and from abroad. It should clearly indicate whether it believes Europe is still able to credibly anchor itself in between the US and China – but if the past few weeks are any indication, things are not looking promising. Europe, and the EU, have been pushed into a defensive position against full-on attacks from many fronts, including the new US President, but also industry and opinion leaders and the EU’s own extremist parties.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Andrea Renda and Pierre-Alexandre Balland

The announcement of the USD 500 billion US Stargate Project marks a bold leap into the future for AI. Announced with great fanfare at the White House by President Trump, flanked by the CEOs of OpenAI, SoftBank and Oracle, the initiative aims to build the most advanced AI infrastructure the world has ever seen.

This matters because AI drives innovation, creates industries, and fuels economic power – and those who lead in AI will shape the global power balance. And the scale is staggering. An initial USD 100 billion investment, ramping up to half a trillion dollars over four years, to fund state-of-the-art data centres, cutting-edge hardware and sustainable energy systems.

Although the funding is currently private and tech leaders have skirmished over the availability of the committed funds, being announced right at the start of Trump’s presidency signals strong political backing and an explicit alliance with the Big Techs. This could lead to smoother AI regulatory processes, tax incentives and alignment with additional public spending initiatives, such as a future iteration of the Inflation Reduction Act or the CHIPS Act.

The picture becomes even clearer if we consider that Stargate was announced immediately after Trump had scrapped the Biden administration’s Executive Order on AI, erasing and rewinding US AI policy and paving the way for an era of laissez faire AI.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Steven Blockmans

Since the US Presidential election there’s been a debate in Europe over a possible ceasefire agreement and the security guarantees Ukraine needs to deter Russia from resuming hostilities. A European ground operation in Ukraine is a welcome idea but only if it can be backed up by the US. This means convincing Donald Trump that European leaders are fully serious about guaranteeing European security.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Andrea Renda and Pierre-Alexandre Balland

We live in a complex world, rich with data and insights, where finding our way is becoming increasingly challenging. As Herbert Simon wrote back in the 1950s, ‘a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention’. And when there’s a dearth of attention, knowing where to look becomes an uphill battle.

Nowhere is this truer than in the burgeoning world of AI. New policies and standards are emerging every day. Large corporations update their models, while startups secure funding to drive innovation. Scientific collaboration spans across continents, researchers tap into software and data swaths to achieve new breakthroughs, all while business leaders form alliances and politicians ponder their next moves. All this in a frantic effort to ride the wave of the most powerful general-purpose technology of the past few decades.

For businesses, policymakers and investors, understanding the AI revolution requires improved skills in locating, processing and analysing data to detect patterns and forecast trends.

And even if they do find the data, understanding what it means often requires guidance, analysis and easy access to technical and non-technical explanations. After all, knowing where we are is a key prerequisite for understanding where we’re going.

To bridge this knowledge gap, CEPS has created a large-scale data platform called AI World. It’s a ‘one-stop-shop’ for all things AI, from insights on market developments, and leading companies and locations, to emerging applications and techniques.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Irina Kustova, Christian Dietz and Renske van Hoof

COP29 left many disappointed, seen by many as a choice between failure and disaster. Fair criticism but the Paris Agreement is still delivering as it was designed to do – namely a bottom-up, consensus-driven framework.

While COP29 was mainly seen as a stepping stone to COP30, when updated national climate plans are expected to be presented, the bar was set high this year for hammering out a landmark climate finance deal. However, COP outcomes often reflect the lowest common denominator; some proposals are inevitably too modest for some and too ambitious for others.

This means success or failure is rarely a clear-cut binary. While these two weeks of COPs always capture the global spotlight, they’re merely steps in an incremental, consensus-driven process. As the European Commissioner for Climate aptly put it: ‘It is less than what we would have liked, but better than we feared’.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Sophia Russack

The European Parliament (EP) hearings for the new Commissioners are now over. After some last-minute drama and a little delay, the EP has greenlit all candidates – for the first time in 20 years.

In theory, the confirmation hearings are a great instrument for scrutinising the incoming Commissioners. Such a process can be healthy, especially for a complex polity like the EU (i.e. often accused of being untransparent and unaccountable). In practice, however, it’s compromised by party-political tit-for-tat and structural issues around how it’s organised. Below are my five main takeaways from the last three weeks.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By J. Scott Marcus

The Free World that we knew has been transformed overnight and now we in the EU must deal with the world as it is. That the United States has decisively chosen to be led by a man who is a convicted felon, who lies far more often than he tells the truth and who tried to steal the 2020 election by violent means – these might be issues for America and for Americans to now deal with.

That the US has chosen to be led by a man who is enamoured with authoritarian rulers, who sees no merit in promoting liberal democratic values worldwide, who places no great value on America’s allies and who is prone to protectionist tariffs and trade wars – these are issues for us in the EU to now deal with.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Karel Lannoo, Jesper Berg and Apostolos Thomadakis

Sustaining the current progress towards a Capital Markets Union (CMU) requires both strong political commitment and high prioritisation. While integration is often cited as a key objective, the more fundamental issue for EU capital markets is their limited depth rather than integration alone. Unlike more market-based financial systems, the EU’s financial system relies heavily on banks, where deposits are liquid and nominal in value. This creates a mismatch when it comes to financing long-term, illiquid investments typical of capital markets.

Within the EU, there is a significant and positive correlation between institutional savings and the robustness of capital markets in individual countries. For example, in the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark, where institutional savings are high – especially in pension funds and life insurance companies – capital markets tend to be more advanced. This is partly due to the prevalence of pre-funded pension systems in contrast to the pay-as-you-go pension systems dominant in other EU nations. Importantly, pre-funded pensions not only bolster capital markets but also improve fiscal sustainability by reducing dependency on current revenues to fund retirement benefits.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Sophia Russack

While in some EU Member States, there is still a firewall against the far right, at the European level, cooperation between conservatives and the far right is taking place without much fuss. This is already apparent in the way the hearings of the designated Commissioners are being organised in the European Parliament, starting on 4 November. The process of critical questioning is becoming increasingly party-politicised. The largest political faction, the conservative European People’s Party (EPP), has advantages in the process. What’s more, it seems ready to work with the far right.

This is dangerous because it increases the risk that party-political considerations will overshadow what this procedure is actually about, which is to check whether candidates are suitable for influential Commissioner posts. That could compromise Parliament’s role in oversight.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Tinatin Akhvlediani

On 26 October, Georgians went to the polls in a critical parliamentary election that President Salome Zourabichvili described as a referendum on the country’s European future. It is a future that Georgians have fervently supported through countless rallies and protests in recent years against the pro-Kremlin drift of the current ruling party, Georgian Dream (GD).

This election, the first conducted under a fully proportional system, raised hopes of a multi-party government. Yet, instead of marking a turning point, GD claimed a sweeping 54 % of the vote, securing 89 out of 150 seats in parliament, thus clinging onto majority control for the fourth consecutive term since 2012.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Karel Lannoo

Tackling Europe’s economic decline, preparing and adapting for a new wave of enlargement and defending Europe’s geopolitical position… the new European Commission will definitely need to deliver. The past five years have shown that it can prepare and react when it needs to, responding on the spot to multiple crises. But the path ahead will be steep.

The economic challenges are undoubtedly enormous. Mario Draghi’s recent report outlined them clearly. There’s doubt over Europe’s ability to create wealth. It doesn’t invest or innovate enough, it doesn’t spend enough on R&D and it lacks high-skilled labour. Europe also needs to prepare for a rapidly ageing population and invest much more in defence.

Europe’s productivity gap with the US is somewhere between 12 %-30 %, depending on the measure used. And as the Letta Report also laid out well, the EU is just not enough of a single market – it’s too fragmented in finance and digital services, and energy is far too expensive.

There have undoubtedly been many challenging moments for the EU. Jean-Claude Juncker spoke about the ‘last chance’ Commission more than a decade ago. Competitiveness was already a major concern at the turn of the millennium – think back to the 2000 Lisbon Declaration and Germany’s then-sorry state in 2000-03 as the ‘sick man’ of Europe.

Yet the EU has demonstrated that it can react to unexpected events. Apart from the green and digital transition, the Commission spearheaded the EU response to Covid-19, to the energy crisis and to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The EU adopted the Sure programme and the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) to prevent an economic meltdown. It unanimously adopted 14 packages of sanctions against Russia and agreed in June 2022 to grant candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova, with accession negotiations starting exactly two years later.

What’s problematic now is the extreme right’s increased size in the European Parliament (EP) and many Member States. Compared to 15 years ago, the ‘centrist’ parties’ (EPP, S&D, Renew and the Greens) share of EP seats have declined from about 85 to 65 %. The extreme right parties have all adopted populist policies to win voters’ favour, be it with anti-immigration (or just purely racist) posturing, protectionist policies and/or irresponsible fiscal measures.

Such policies will certainly not improve Europe’s competitiveness – especially when there’s still, even after Letta and Draghi, no real consensus on what competitiveness actually is. And thus, this is why the new Commission’s use of ‘competitiveness’ as a possible guiding mantra for the next five years is fraught with difficulties.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Lorenzo Pupillo

On 19 July, the world experienced ‘Blue Friday’ when 8.5 million PC screens worldwide were hit by the infamous Blue Screen of Death (BSOD), a critical error message displayed by Microsoft Windows when the system encounters a serious issue that it cannot recover from.

This unprecedented outage was triggered by a faulty update from CrowdStrike, a leading cybersecurity provider. The disruption affected government services, emergency operations, transport, payment systems and financial markets across the world.

While not a cyberattack, its scale was historic and raised two major concerns. First, the failure stemmed from a CrowdStrike update that was meant to protect networks. Second, fixing the problem required manual intervention – rebooting each computer into Windows’ Safe Mode and applying a patch, a very time-consuming process when you’re talking about millions of devices.

Some have since argued that new regulation is necessary to ensure such a shock doesn’t happen again – in the EU, this isn’t necessary. We already have what we need in the form of two strong pieces of legislation, the Network and Information System 2 Directive (NIS2) and the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA). They just need to be implemented properly, combined with better preparedness and a concerted effort to expand the number of trusted security software providers.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By James Moran

With Israel on the warpath around the region, despite international efforts to shift the conflicts from the battlefield to the negotiation table, there are growing fears about the consequences for the wider world, including in the EU.

Whether the US can rein in Israel’s military machine is an open question. The record doesn’t bode well. Months of US-facilitated talks on ceasefires in Gaza and lately at the UN on Lebanon have had very little effect on Israel. That’s because Benjamin Netanyahu has realised that it’s in his interests to undermine these negotiations – perhaps believing that endless fighting rather than sitting down to actually talk helps to keep him and his extremist allies in power.

He may be right. Spurred by perceptions of military prowess and a classic ‘rally round the flag’ mentality, recent polls in Israel show growing public support for his government, as the memory of his intelligence failures a year ago fades.

One thing is clear – this Israeli administration is probably the least interested in peace since Israel’s founding in 1948 when it comes to addressing the conflicts’ root cause, namely peace with the Palestinians. Netanyahu is on the record as being fiercely opposed to any two-state solution and has constantly eschewed any peace process.

To make matters worse, a year on from 7 October, Israel has yet to articulate a longer-term political strategy for ‘the day after’ the guns fall silent. Many fear that their intentions might involve the (re)occupation of Gaza and south Lebanon, and the theft of more Palestinian land for illegal West Bank settlements, a recipe for a true ‘forever war’. Yet another angry generation is growing up amidst the unprecedented carnage and rubble of Gaza and elsewhere.

With the US preoccupied with its upcoming election, Washington’s impotence will probably continue for some time. Should Trump prevail, American support for peace efforts may well evaporate entirely.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Marta Dell’Aquila

During these frantic days at the beginning of a new mandate, at a time when the new College of Commissioners is being formed, Ursula von der Leyen’s commitment to achieve full gender balance – shown as being important to her since the very beginning of her first mandate – is not being realised. Despite her request for one male and one female candidate and some last-minute changes, many Member States still only nominated men.

We now know who has been selected to form the new College (pending the European Parliament’s approval) – and it doesn’t look good.

First, there’s no dedicated Commissioner for Equality, as this will be handled together with the crisis management and preparedness portfolios. Secondly, out of a College of 27, only 11 (or around 40 % and including von der Leyen herself) are women. Technically speaking, this would satisfy the gender balance criterion – but just barely.

So maybe this isn’t the worst outcome imaginable but the cold hard reality is that von der Leyen failed in her quest to achieve meaningful gender balance – because Member States simply decided to ignore her (not unreasonable) request.

To be sure, it’s challenging to advocate for gender equality in a highly political landscape where several countries have shifted to the right and the ‘success’ of some anti-gender movements has been an unsettling development. And if Member States openly disregard the importance of a simple yet crucial gender-balance request from the President of the European Commission no less, the starting point for continuing progress is not ideal.

Even worse, the risk is that the EU waters down – or even backslides on – some of the key achievements of the past few years in this crucial domain. This cannot be allowed to happen.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Apostolos Thomadakis

If Europe wants to stay ahead of the curve and be able to follow – and eventually lead – its international counterparts, the new European Commission should have a focused agenda that balances regulatory simplicity with forward-looking strategies. This is particularly the case in capital market integration, bank competitiveness, digital finance and sustainability.

Over the past few decades, Europe’s financial system has grown in size and complexity but remains largely bank-centric compared with more market-oriented systems. Important efforts have been made to diversify, deepen and integrate the EU’s financial markets, including significant legislative initiatives like the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and the Banking Union.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Andrea Renda

Landing on Ursula von der Leyen’s desk just as she’s putting together the new College of Commissioners, the long-awaited report by Mario Draghi on ‘the future of European competitiveness’ totals almost 400 pages collaboratively drafted by two (invisible) teams in Brussels and Rome.

Draghi‘s opus magnum doesn’t disappoint when it comes to length and ambition, and is full of interesting proposals, especially in its ‘Part B’. Yet given the vision it puts forward, it will have no doubt also raise some eyebrows given its emphasis on growth and competitiveness over social and environmental stances. It’s also a loud wake-up call that too much might end up being proposed – perhaps too late – and without any form of ‘Plan B’.

The first part of the report, which outlines a competitiveness strategy for Europe, could be seen as merely restating the many challenges the EU has faced over the past two decades. These include sluggish productivity growth; encumbered and impaired decision-making; increased dependency on other world powers; the piling up of massive regulatory burdens on businesses, impairing innovation; Europe’s outrageously high energy prices; and the EU’s fragmentation and related inability to deepen integration in key areas of the economy.

Thus, nothing new at the end of the day – if anything, this part of the report reads like many dozens of analyses produced by international consultancy firms or the International Monetary Fund. Yet Draghi adds a more dramatic tone as he explains that the EU faces an ‘existential challenge‘ and that failure to act will lead to its eventual collapse.

That said, the report is centred around a rather narrow notion of competitiveness – and in a rather uncompromising way. Other objectives, such as decarbonisation and social cohesion, appear ancillary at best. In fact, 400 pages down, the reader still lacks a precise definition of competitiveness.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Katharina Weber

It’s the same old story – when push comes to shove, no one wants to pay, especially for sustainability. We want more sustainable practices, production and supply chains but there are few who are willing to actually open their wallets for such a cause.

In the last few weeks several actors have urged the European Commission to delay implementing the EU’s Regulation on Deforestation-free Products (EUDR), including the US. and various industry associations.

Preparations are in full swing for the regulation to come into effect at the end of this year. And as the public sector and industry each experience their own difficulties to ensure they’re ready, there are still unresolved questions over who should pay for the regulation’s additional requirements.

Supply chain regulations aim to prevent companies from using environmental or social malpractices as a competitive advantage. The EUDR specifically targets deforestation driven by agriculture, aimed at minimising the EU’s contribution to deforestation and forest degradation worldwide.

Public debate on the EUDR is marked by controversy. Indonesia and Malaysia have been very vocal in condemning it as a neo-colonial protectionist instrument. Many NGOs, on the other hand, have welcomed the regulation as a way to take responsibility for deforestation from the demand side. Still, this support doesn’t come without concerns and dissatisfaction over the EU’s unilateral approach, smallholder livelihoods, human rights and overall design loopholes.

While these are important elements to consider, one group is conspicuously missing in the whole debate – multinational corporations. And this needs to be rectified if regulations such as the EUDR are to successfully achieve their aims and purpose.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Camille Ford and Dylan Macchiarini Crosson

After last week’s Democratic National Convention (DNC), Europeans may start studying the polling data coming out of rural Pennsylvania or Michigan to gauge their fate. While recent polling suggests President Biden’s decision to pass the torch has provided a much-needed boost to the Democrats, that doesn’t negate the real possibility of a second Trump presidency.

Rather than frantically trying to read the tea leaves, Europeans should instead look to candidates’ recent records as well as their national convention performances to understand how they see the future of US foreign policy – and how it will impact transatlantic security, trade and climate cooperation.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Andrea Renda

Digital technology is often accused of enabling surveillance and abuse. From China’s Big Brother social credit system to Silicon Valley’s surveillance capitalism, experts have warned of the enormous power that governments and large platforms can gain by controlling online content. Yet it would be a mistake to call the technology itself responsible.

Rather, its malicious design and use is to blame – a well-designed, digitally-enabled democratic process can actually protect and empower citizens in the face of corrupt or rotten institutions. In short, technology is both a problem and a solution when it comes to protecting democracy. It can allow non-democratic regimes to claim they won an election, even when they clearly didn’t; or it can help bring the truth to the surface, proving that the king isn’t wearing new clothes and is actually stark naked.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Raluca Csernatoni

Developing disruptive ways of warfare and advanced technological capabilities is a critical function for any military organisation, including NATO. Yet relying exclusively on technological superiority and novel technologies to sustain outdated ways of fighting has significant drawbacks.

That is why understanding all the socio-technical factors that cause disruptive innovation should be a vital concern for NATO leaders. Indeed, ‘disruptive innovation’ doesn’t just happen – rather it starts with a mission-oriented vision, organisational changes and managing uncertainty.

In an increasingly uncertain era, from rapid advancements in Emerging and Disruptive Technologies (EDTs) to shifting geopolitical tensions, NATO faces many challenges. Threats are constantly evolving, from small and agile groups inventively exploiting commercial technology, to vast civil and military resources being operated by corporate giants and great powers.

In this respect, innovation is the lifeblood of defence organisations like NATO and why the Alliance’s approach to harnessing cutting-edge technologies will define its future operational success and relevance.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Daniel Cassidy-Deketelaere

Labour’s stonking general election victory on 4 July could raise hopes on both sides of the Channel that the UK may now seek to reverse at least some aspects of Boris Johnson’s hard Brexit. Alas, new prime minister Sir Keir Starmer won’t be clambering for closer (re)integration anytime soon. The key EU message from Labour’s election manifesto can be summarised as: no single market, no customs union, no freedom of movement. Starmer even said just before the election that Britain ‘would not rejoin the EU in my lifetime’ (he’s 61).  

And with a clear emphasis on domestic priorities, Labour’s electoral coalition being on shakier ground than its large majority would have you believe and the post-election threat from the populist right, it’s safe to assume Starmer isn’t bluffing. He won’t be seeking deeper economic or political reintegration with the EU anytime soon – even if it does rationally make economic sense. 

But the manifesto did pledge to ‘reset the relationship and seek to deepen ties with our European friends, neighbours and allies’. Labour has now begun to outline what it means by this. In a deeply unsettled world, its initial suggestions and ideas are cautiously positive – and the EU needs to sit up and listen to them.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Dylan Macchiarini Crosson and Steven Blockmans

The European Political Community (EPC) meets on 18 July for the fourth time. Hosted by the UK at Blenheim Palace, the birthplace of Winston Churchill, echoes of his ‘blood, toil, tears and sweat’ speech in May 1940 cannot be ignored. Facing an existential battle on the continent, Keir Starmer, the UK’s freshly elected prime minister, will have a baptism of fire at the first major international gathering he’ll host. 

Due to the EPC’s origins and aims – namely to show a united front against Russia and provide a forum for strategic intimacy amongst leaders of 47 European countries (plus the EU) on equal footing – the format is a high-stakes gamble in diplomacy. 

The previous underwhelming summit in Spain was boycotted by Türkiye’s strongman Erdoğan and his Azeri counterpart Aliyev, and even the photo-op was mishandled. The UK must get this summit right to keep the EPC on track.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By J. Scott Marcus

Why does the EU fail to produce its own Google, Amazon or Facebook? Is Europe lacking entrepreneurship, technical savvy or simply imagination? Contrary to what many think, the EU does even better than the US at creating high-tech start-ups; however, many European firms whither on the vine due to a lack of finance.

Yet a simple solution has been lying in plain sight for decades – we simply need to grasp it. The answer, as with a great many questions, is money. In each of the past five years, the EU has created more high-tech start-ups than the US. Nonetheless, many of them fail to scale up, while some move to greener pastures on the other side of the Atlantic.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.