Judy Dempsey
{
"authors": [
"Judy Dempsey"
],
"type": "commentary",
"blog": "Strategic Europe",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe"
],
"collections": [
"EU Integration and Enlargement"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Europe",
"Western Europe"
],
"topics": [
"EU",
"Political Reform"
]
}Source: Getty
Europe’s New Narrative in Bratislava
After Britain’s vote to leave the bloc, the European Union is changing its narrative to emphasize migration, terrorism, and globalization.
A new chapter for Europe began on September 16, when 27 EU leaders met in a castle overlooking the river Danube in the Slovak capital, Bratislava. It is an important chapter because the bloc’s two most powerful leaders, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and European Council President Donald Tusk, want the union to have written a new narrative by March 2017. That is when EU leaders meet in the Italian capital to celebrate the sixtieth anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, the EU’s founding document.
The narrative being crafted by Tusk and Merkel, who have had many talks with each other and with other EU leaders over the past few weeks, is aimed at rescuing Europe from imploding.
This narrative is not only about how the EU should deal with Britain’s decision on June 23 to leave the union. It is also about coming to terms with a Europe in which, probably for the first time since the EU was established, citizens feel threatened. The peace narrative that so fundamentally shaped the origins, outlook, legitimacy, and direction of the bloc is no longer the narrative that can keep the EU together.
Merkel has never alluded to the eclipse of that narrative. Nor has Tusk. But a close reading of Merkel’s comments in Warsaw on August 26, and of Tusk’s letter to 27 EU leaders (Britain’s prime minister will not be in the castle in Bratislava, confirming that the bloc is dealing with a post-Brexit era), shows what this new narrative consists of. It is about migration, terrorism, and globalization, not about peace, prosperity, or values.
Tusk wrote that the migration crisis was “the tipping point” for the EU. In 2015, he wrote, there was chaos on Europe’s borders. There was no plan to deal with the huge influx of refugees. Citizens felt threatened. There was an urgent need to protect the EU’s external borders. That, argued Tusk, has to be Europe’s immediate goal.
Recent terrorist attacks in France, Belgium, and Germany have fed into this narrative of threats and insecurity. Tusk didn’t dare call for more integration to deal with terrorism. Integration is no longer the automatic part of this new EU narrative—at least, not yet. Instead, Tusk deferred to the “national level” to combat terrorism and deal with internal security. “But we can and must do more together,” he added. He didn’t say how, but there is a wide consensus on the need for more intelligence sharing across the bloc.
On globalization, Tusk made clear that free trade and global competition were in the interests of Europeans and that the EU should press ahead with more trade agreements. But, he wrote, “it is obvious that they pose significant and often unprecedented challenges.” The EU should better protect the economic and social interests of its citizens.
This new narrative of fear, threats, and insecurity is anchored on migration, terrorism, and globalization, as if they are inseparable.
The British who voted to leave the EU believed that they could deal with these issues by going it alone. Other EU governments, such as Poland’s, want the member states, not Brussels, to have more powers. Tusk tapped into that sentiment.
“Giving new powers to European institutions is not the desired recipe. National electorates want more influence on the decisions of the Union,” he wrote. That is Merkel’s view too, as she mentioned during her recent talks in Warsaw with her Czech, Hungarian, Polish, and Slovak counterparts. No mention of integration. No mention of a two-speed Europe. Any ideas about a banking union or further development of economic or monetary union are on hold.
It’s all very well for the member states to want a greater say and to continue, as populists and Euroskeptics do, to bash the EU as if it were the scourge of all of the bloc’s problems and evils. Such bashing “serves as an easy excuse for one’s own failures,” Tusk added. The blame game is no panacea.
This new narrative hardly leaves room for Tusk’s call for “real optimism.” It’s an unsentimental, inward-looking narrative that lacks ambition and lacks confidence. It’s a narrative that does away with visions, that does away with enthusiasm, that does away with slogans. And it’s a narrative based on cold reasoning that might be superseded once Europeans feel secure and economic growth returns. But neither is a given.
About the Author
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Judy Dempsey is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie Europe
- Europe Needs to Hear What America is SayingCommentary
- Babiš’s Victory in Czechia Is Not a Turning Point for European PopulistsCommentary
Judy Dempsey
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Strategic Europe
- Why MAGA’s Far-Right European Ties Will EndureCommentary
In supporting Europe’s far-right, MAGA and Russia both want the same thing: a weaker EU. Europe must defend itself without abandoning the openness these forces exploit.
Armida van Rij
- Letter from the Editor: Europe Takes Two Steps Forward But One Step BackCommentary
As we close out another season of Strategic Europe, it is worth taking stock of the deep shifts underway.
Rym Momtaz
- Taking the Pulse: Are the EU’s Watered-Down Russia Sanctions Better than None?Commentary
The EU had to compromise to adopt a twenty-first sanctions package against Russia, exposing growing cracks in the union’s resolve. Is this latest, weaker round worth it to keep pressure on Moscow?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Why Europe Must Take Charge of its Russia Diplomacy NowCommentary
Trump is distracted and Ukraine wants Europe to step up. The continent’s leaders must find their voice and assert it in talks with Russia.
Alissa de Carbonnel
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk