“We will always defend and support the rules-based system we helped build with our allies, but we can no longer rely on it as the only way to defend our interests or assume that its rules will protect us from the complex threats we face.”
Ursula von der Leyen he has achieved it. Europe and more specifically the European Union, have returned to the global forefront, to set the agenda. The only ‘but’ is that if we talk about Europe it is because of the controversy generated by the president of the European Commission in a speech that they have been forced to clarify in the very heart of the EU.
It was on Monday in Brussels and before the community ambassadors. Von der Leyen added, in the face of international diplomacy, and in light of the war in Iran, that Europe “can no longer be the guardian of the old world order” and even less a world “that has already gone and will not return”.
Such was his reflection that he even reached United Nations, on which he proposed a possible reformulation of their goals and ways. “When traditional formats are inoperative” it’s time to find “creative ways to resolve the most serious crises“he added to the astonishment of those present and the rest of the world.
exercise realpolitik or diplomatic slide in a moment where every word matters? He heart of the EU opts for the latterand it has been his own ‘colleagues’ who have come urgently to make light of the matter. Which has it.
And in between, the ‘nuclear question’
As if that were not enough, the same protagonist has once again generated something more than debate by stating, already this Tuesday, that Europe and, therefore, the EU, “have a reliable and affordable source of low-emission energy” such as nuclear energy.
Thus, to put a stop to the almost total dependence on third-party suppliers of fossil fuels and the consequent increase in bills, the ‘head’ of the EU believes it is necessary to develop the two locally produced energy assets: nuclear energy and renewable energy to end of guarantee energy independence. His message, aligned with some capitals, has sitting like a shot, the second in 24 hours, in the ‘greenest’ governments and figures of the ‘Twenty-Seven’.
António Costa and an almost total amendment to his argument
The response of president of the European Councilin the same forum and just hours later, is more than just a semantic nuance. Because, after stating that “in a reality in which Russia violates the peace, China disrupts trade and the United States challenges the international order based on rules”, António Costa has asked “what should be the mission of the EU in this new reality“. Without room for doubt, the response was immediately: “Defend the rules-based international order“No additions.
For the Portuguese politician and ‘head’ of the 27 heads of State or Government of the EU, the institution “has to “defend the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations“Violation of international law should not be accepted, whether in Ukraine, Greenland, Latin America, Africa, Gaza or the Middle East. “Human rights violations should not be tolerated, whether in Iran, Sudan or Afghanistan,” he added.
The President of the European Council wanted to add that this task also involves practicing a “multidimensional” foreign policy, “actively collaborating with the international community to defend the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and international law.” Because unlike Von der Leyen, Costa admits that The UN “must be reformed but cannot be replaced” to continue being”the cornerstone of the multilateral system.
Teresa Ribera and the ‘wild card’ of a bad expression
The tension is evident within the Commission. One of the vice presidents, the Spanish Nadia Calviño, has dropped a wild card in these cases, that German politics “could not having expressed itself in the most appropriate way“. He added that there is no doubt that “she is fully committed to the international order.”
Without wanting to publicly draw blood for their disagreement – which has grown worse this Tuesday due to Von der Leyen’s defense of nuclear energy -, Ribera has stressed the importance of “defending, influencing and underlining that international legislation is a nuclear element of the European project and security.”
The Government of Spain “identifies” with Costa; the PP, with Von der Leyen
Spain has a lot to say in the controversy surrounding Von der Leyen’s ideas. The Government of Pedro Sánchez has been leading a movement against the war in Iranwhat has caused. Among them those of the president of the Commission, over whom Moncloa now distances herself.
The Foreign Minister, Jose Manuel Albareshas made it clear that Spain “identifies” with António Costa’s position and has advocated “ensuring that the world remains rules-based.” “Europe has to defend international order because the alternative is disordernot the order, and there is no opposition between an old order and a new one that would replace it,” explained Albares.
In the opinion of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it is necessary to choose between “law or force; peace and peaceful relations between States or the use of war as an instrument of foreign policy; progress or historical regression.” And regarding the European Union itself, he added that “it is a construction based on rights that protect all its members and on treaties”, which obliges the Commission to be a “guarantor” of its compliance.
Harsher in tone, Yolanda Díaz considers that Ursula Von der Leyen “far from placing itself on the side of international legality, from stopping war and barbarism in Europe, has placed itself on the right side of barbarism“.
The People’s Party, however, leans towards the position of German politics, to the point of consider it “truism”because “it is evident that the world has changed.” In the words of the parliamentary spokesperson, Ester Muñoz, “if you want a world with rules, you have to have the capacity to impose those rules” but “at this time The European Union does not have the capacity or the influence to impose these rules“.
Iran places him on the “wrong side of history”
The still current regime of the ayatollahs has accused the president of the European Commission of “hypocrisy” after having made “career by getting on the wrong side of historygiving the green light to occupation, genocide and atrocities.
To this list of alleged affronts in the eyes of Tehran, they now add the “whitewashing of the crimes of aggression and war crimes of the United States and Israel against the Iranians,” as pointed out by the spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Esmaeil Baqaei.
“¿Where was your voice when more than 165 innocent Iranian angels were massacred? in the city of Minab”, has been asked in reference to the beginning of the US-Israeli offensive against Iran.
