What processes and changes are observed in Europe after Donald Trump took power in the White House. Is Europe ready to respond to international challenges… Prof. Ingrid Shikova, lecturer at the Department of "European Studies" at Sofia University, spoke to FACTI.
- Prof. Shikova, is the European Union waking up after Donald Trump took office and began to reshape the world. Is the EU strong today?
- European integration has never been a "long, calm river". On the contrary, European unification is passing through turbulent and dangerous waters. But as Albert Einstein said: “A ship is always safe on the shore, but that is not what it was built for.“ The European Union is strong when it is united. Unity is the main prerequisite for its strength.
- We have seen French President Macron being very active in recent days. He has somehow accepted to represent Europe. Where are the other leaders of the EU countries?
- All the accumulated problems have shed light on a number of erroneous views: the EU underestimated the geopolitical impact of the enlargement process and overestimated the influence it could have through the good neighborhood policy. And here it is quite reasonable to quote the French publicist Daniel Carton, who in his book“ If they knew in Paris...” poses the question: “Where are the motivators among politicians who can attract European citizens, who can create supporters?”
Now we really need “motivators” everywhere in Europe, who, like Jean Monnet, are able to inspire confidence in the discouraged for the unity and solidarity of the continent and who, just like him, in a moment of crisis, can confidently say: “ We continue, we continue, we continue”. But let us not forget that the European Union is not a state. I sincerely hope that the Franco-German engine with Friedrich Merz as Chancellor will work in favor of European unity and integration. Let us not forget Poland, which currently holds the presidency of the Council of the European Union - Donald Tusk has unquestionable leadership qualities. The rapprochement of the United Kingdom with the European Union is also an important factor in these complex times.
- How quickly the world is changing today. What challenge is this?
- The world is changing faster than we thought possible. It is becoming more and more rough, more uncertain and more unpredictable. The balances of economic and political influence are changing, global challenges are increasing, requiring global solutions. The way the world functions is changing. It is obvious that we are in a new historical phase. The time of “happy globalization“ is over. If a few years ago we were talking about a stronger Europe in a fragile world, now the world is increasingly brutal and unpredictable.
The challenge is enormous.
The hostile conditions in the world, the risks and threats, the crises and challenges impose the need for more pragmatism and realism in foreign policy and its interdependence with economic security both at the European Union level and at the national level.
The implementation of the approach of interlinking foreign policy and economic security requires close cooperation between institutions, traditional diplomatic actors, including representatives of the private sector. The economic security of the
European Union and its Member States can be achieved if there is unity between them within a broader international order based on rules that currently seem to be non-existent.
The challenge is that the world is changing and the European Union must change.
- Aggressive Russia, aggressive USA – in different focuses and priorities, of course, but is the world becoming rougher, more insecure, more unpredictable…
- If it is possible to briefly summarize the entire complexity of modern development, it can be argued that the global environment has not only been changed by the action of a number of factors of a diverse nature, but also continues to change very dynamically in an unfavorable direction, and trade is increasingly becoming a means of achieving geopolitical goals. In the conditions of a changed and dynamic global environment, foreign policy and, accordingly, the external activities of the European Union are becoming increasingly closely linked to economic security, and the boundaries between economy and security are becoming increasingly blurred. The risks to economic security are numerous: risks to the sustainability of supply chains, including energy security; risks to the physical and digital security of critical infrastructure; risks related to technological security and technology leakage; risks of using economic interdependence as a weapon or for economic coercion.
- How are the balances of economic and political influence changing…
- It is an indisputable fact that the accelerated globalization in the late 20th and early 21st centuries led to economic interdependence between countries. This development could be defined as positive, especially if we recall the beginning of European integration and the idea that through economic interdependence “war should become materially impossible“. The practical implementation of this idea in the European Union led to peace and cooperation between 27 countries of the continent. However, this is not the case on a broader scale –
What has been happening in recent years, and especially in connection with the war in Ukraine, leads to the conclusion that economic interdependence is being used more and more often and more actively as a weapon, as a means of coercion.
Instead of fruitful cooperation, it is becoming a threat to the economy and security. The term “weaponization” of economic interdependence has appeared - that is, its transformation into a strategic weapon in international relations. In the current complex conditions, the rivalry between the countries of the world is expressed both in economic rivalry and in the rivalry to guarantee security.
In an interconnected world, ensuring the security of the European Union as a whole is a common task. The individual reactions of individual member states could not provide full protection of their interests in modern conditions. The vulnerabilities of the EU Member States are different, the interests in some areas differ, but at the same time all countries are interested in the good functioning of the single market, trade policy and security protection. And if the Member States more easily reach an agreement on the need for security, including economic security, then the views on its implementation and on the specific instruments for its implementation are very different. These differences are likely to continue to make it difficult to build a common approach at the European Union level, and overcoming them is a necessary condition for achieving the desired result.
Economic security becomes paramount.
Some Member States strongly support the European Commission's approach and associate it with the opportunity to develop European industry, to encourage the creation of economic "champions" - European companies capable of competing in world markets. For other countries, this approach is a threat to European openness to free trade and to small and medium-sized enterprises. The close economic ties with China will force some member states to seek compromise solutions, even the implementation of differentiated integration.
To a large extent, these disputes stem from the existential question: protectionism or liberalism?
Or something in between? How can free trade be protected without being naive enough to assume that everyone will follow the same rules? The assertive behavior of the United States, the impotence of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the need to reform it, the problems and disagreements in relations with China presuppose the need for a political discussion on economic security, EU trade policy, the effects of globalization and their interrelation with foreign policy.
- The fact is that we are in a new historical phase, in which the time of the so-called “happy globalization“ may be over… What's next?
- Yes, as I have already mentioned, the “happy globalization“ is over. If we analyze the historical development of the European Union, we can establish that until recently the European Union acted in international economic relations, treating them to a significant extent as a separate sphere from geopolitics and security. Analysts claim that the EU has managed to conduct an international economic policy, “reasonably isolated“ from geopolitics, but this separation of the two spheres has always been too fragile, and currently seems completely outdated.
Analyses of changes in the global environment, as well as the behavior of the European Union and the implementation of its policies, have led to interesting comparisons and metaphors. Here is a statement that has gained popularity - “in today's global politics, if you are not sitting at the table, you are very likely to be part of the menu.“
The European Union is spoken of as a “herbivore“ a force that feels good and acts effectively only in a world based on rules.
For too long, the European Union has approached foreign policy through its integration logic.
But in the changed global environment, the fierce competition, the transformation of economic interdependencies into a weapon and the use of this weapon without rules, conditions are created for the supremacy of “predators“, who also use hard power to impose it. In these conditions, strategic autonomy or its other name - economic security, comes to the fore and becomes more important than open markets and traditional comparative advantages. The series of crises and challenges on a global scale have necessitated the European Union to pay serious attention to economic security and no longer consider it separately from geopolitics, including reassessing the advantages and disadvantages of globalization.
The trend towards increasing protectionism and increasing trade conflicts on a global scale in recent years poses numerous challenges for the European Union.
More and more countries are adopting protectionist measures to protect their national economies. The so-called "made here, not in the world" policy is spreading. The protectionist practices of countries such as the USA, China, India lead to the so-called spillover effect, and this effect - to trade conflicts. History proves that Newton's third law is also fully effective in international economic relations. Usually, unilateral protectionist actions lead to countermeasures, and the creation of an atmosphere of “revenge“ can have unpredictable consequences. In addition to the USA and China, many other countries apply protective measures, such as increased import duties and export subsidies. The growth of the geopolitical dimension of trade policy and economic nationalism give reason to talk about “deglobalisation“ or at least a slowdown in the process of globalization - the so-called slowbalisation, and this inevitably leads to trade conflicts, instability and the collapse of the value chains of individual products (value chain). The current situation can be characterized as a “cold trade war“.
- Against the background of everything that surrounds us at the moment, is there still room for the topic of the enlargement of the European Union. And which item on the agenda today is this topic…
- Enlargement of the European Union is the right response to the new geopolitical reality. The big challenge, however, is how and when to implement the enlargement. The scope of the challenge is comparable to the great enlargement of 2004-2007. The consensus among the Member States that enlargement is a necessity is not sufficient for its concrete implementation. There are disagreements and dilemmas about the manner and speed of accepting new members. The European Union has always stressed that the accession process is based on the merits of each candidate country in fulfilling the membership criteria, but the current tense geopolitical circumstances require real action and rapid results in integrating the candidate countries. It is true that preparing for membership takes time, but it is also true that delaying membership for too long leads to a decrease in interest, Euroscepticism and an increase in the influence of other countries. The dilemma is how to balance the geopolitical imperative of supporting candidate countries with the conditionalities and strict requirements based on merit. And here the question arises - well-prepared countries and the fastest possible integration - can the EU have both?
Another important question is how the European Union itself should prepare for the admission of new countries.
The topics of the EU budget, the implementation of the common agricultural policy, cohesion policy, as well as institutional issues such as unanimous decision-making, the number of Commissioners and their portfolios, the decision-making process also require rapid and adequate answers. Will a European Commission with 35 Commissioners be able to work effectively, will decisions be taken unanimously, especially in the field of common foreign and security policy, and last but not least, how will agricultural and cohesion policies be developed and reformed and implemented – The preparation of the European Union for enlargement with new members depends on adequate answers and correct decisions on these issues.
And another very important topic - how to gain public support for a new enlargement of the EU in the difficult economic situation in which some of the member states are and which have not yet fully recovered from the Covid 19 crisis. Here it is useful to recall the reaction of EU farmers regarding the import of agricultural products from Ukraine.
- How is Bulgaria positioned as a member of the EU. Prime Minister Zhelyazkov was not invited to the first meetings when the conflict in Ukraine was discussed in Paris. What should this tell us?
- European integration is a difficult art that requires a sufficient dose of perfection and experience. Membership in the European Union is becoming an increasingly complex task that requires greater efforts. This is because, on the one hand, the quality of governance of individual member states affects the achievement of common integration goals, and on the other hand, European integration affects the quality of their own governance.
As a member of the European Union, Bulgaria can play an important role in international relations through proactive actions in the three dimensions: European, multilateral and bilateral - a stable and prosperous Bulgaria in an autonomous and secure European Union, support for multilateralism and active participation in multilateral organizations for better global governance, determination of priority bilateral relations in accordance with the interests and capabilities of the country. Bulgaria's proactive participation in all upcoming discussions is more than necessary, including through the implementation of a preliminary comprehensive national analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of achieving economic security in the country, of risks and their management, of the most important challenges and of the likelihood of undesirable events. Economic security should be embedded in the country's foreign policy strategy and be among the main priorities.
In this regard, the development of analytical capabilities is becoming increasingly important in order to maximize the effectiveness of Bulgarian participation in the creation of policies and appropriate instruments for their implementation. An energetic foreign and security policy requires an adequate ability to assess the strategic context and formulate positions. It is very important to build a “security culture“, which is based on increased awareness of risks and threats and the protection of interests.
This dynamic approach to security, which systematically examines the triangle “interests – threats and risks – policy“, requires strengthening the intersectoral dimension.
An important prerequisite for both Bulgaria's effective participation in the European integration process and for enhancing its role in the international arena is for it to be perceived as a reliable and predictable partner, with a greater capacity for initiative, with proactive and constructive positions on important issues and capable of proposing innovative strategic ideas. A country can have much more weight in European and international affairs than its territory or population suggests, as long as it is active, innovative, convincing and consistent. And here we must ask ourselves the question - are we active, innovative, convincing and consistent? And let's not keep repeating that we are a small country. Yes, we certainly cannot be in the main role, but awards are given to good actors for secondary roles as well.