BACKDOOR GAMES IN EUROPE

Finally, the heads of the EU states could reach a compromise and choose the heads of European institutions only after the third attempt and practically facing a power crisis. Traditionally, European officials shift posts after the May elections to the European Parliament. In fact, the elite of the strongest EU countries did not see a particular threat for themselves in the results of elections. Therefore, it was decided to continue the conventional election mechanism when France and Germany share the most important posts in the EU. But the process was too ugly and rough.

To be appointed the head of the European Commission, a candidate needs to secure the support of 21 leaders of the twenty eight EU countries, representing 65% of the block's population. Apparently, this turned out to be an impossible task for Europeans divided into factions, but mindful of their national interests and overloaded by personal ambitions and preferences of their elites. The process of determining candidates was so hard that the French president Macron said: “We are putting both the European Council and Europe in a bad light. It seems that Europe is not behaving seriously. ”

In fact, Macron was one of the main instigators of electoral unrest. Originally, it was expected that EC would be headed by a candidate from the largest faction of the European People’s Party (EPP), which also includes CDU/CSU of Merkel, the German Manfred Weber. However, according to the results of elections, it became clear that conservatives had lost some of the positions. So, EPP, in fact, won the parliamentary elections, but not to such an extent to approve Weber without any problems. Therefore, Macron, whose party is in the liberal camp and who in every way seeks to move away from the role of Germany’s younger brother, decided to seize the moment and justified his objections by saying that Weber was not competent enough, and that he did not have solid international and managerial experience. Merkel listened to all this stoically and pretended to make concessions. Eventually, the three main European forces, conservatives, socialists and liberals, reached an agreement at the recent G20 summit in Osaka to nominate another candidate - a representative of social democrats, the former foreign minister of the Netherlands, Frans Timmermans, who is also the First Vice-President of EC. However, the leaders of Ireland, Croatia, Latvia, Estonia, Romania (who did not like, that they were not even consulted) and, mainly, the countries of the Visegrad Group - Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, opposed his nomination. The latter hold a grudge against Timmermans because he has repeatedly criticized them for withdrawing from European values, clamping down on freedom of speech, etc. Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are unhappy with the migration policy of Brussels. Italy agrees with them on this issue too.

Technically, it would have been possible to push Timmermans to the position of the head of EC, but it would not be profitable for anyone. So, they had to look for a new candidate, which turned out to be Ursula von der Leyen — a controversial figure of German politics and a very faithful ally of Angela Merkel and the Bundestag chairman Wolfgang Schäuble. Being an heir of a large fortune, a doctor by profession, and a mother of seven children, Leyen decided to go into politics when she was over 40. Nevertheless, her career, which began in the parliament of Lower Saxony, was very successful. Soon, Leyen headed the Ministry of Family Affairs, Women, Youth and the Elderly, then the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Defence, becoming the first woman in this post. However, she did not play well at her last post. Many, including the former Defence Minister Rupert Scholz, quite openly accuse her of almost ruining the army. The report on the state of affairs in the army submitted to the parliament at the beginning of this year also noted a shortage of funds, depreciation of equipment and many other problems, including violations of the rules of public procurement. Opposition has repeatedly called on Leyen to resign, but she remained, although she significantly lost her rating.

“Von der Leyen is our weakest minister. Obviously, this is enough to become the President of the European Commission,” said the former President of the European Parliament, Social Democrat Martin Schulz, in his Twitter account. Although the problem is, of course, not in Leyen or her weaknesses, but in the situation when her nomination became the only way out of a difficult situation.

So, the 60-year-old German Ursula von der Leyen will replace Jean-Claude Juncker. Instead of Italian Federica Mogherini, the head of EU foreign policy will be 72-year-old Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Borrell. Chairman of ECB, Italian Mario Draghi, will be replaced by 63-year-old head of IMF, Frenchwoman Christine Lagarde. Instead of Pole Donald Tusk, 43-year-old Belgian Premier Charles Michel will be the head of the European Council. The European Council is similar to the upper house of parliament, which determines the policy of the union. By the way, Michel was a fiasco in both national and European elections, but now he will become the youngest president of the European Council in history. Thus, the “weak” Leyen is not alone in the list of new EU leaders. It seems that the candidates for most of the positions have been chosen only because they were thought to be the only candidates not to make the things worse.

But this did not change the situation but made it even worse. During a joint press conference with Finnish Prime Minister Antti Rinne, the incumbent chairman of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, stated bluntly that the democratic procedure had been replaced by “backdoor games”. Indeed, in many European countries, the nomination of von der Leyen is recognised as a result of a deal between Germany and France. For example, Western media noticed that Merkel, who had allegedly made concessions, won the most from the approval of her ally. Apparently, she removed the unpopular EU minister, pushing her to one of the most important positions in Brussels and made room for Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, who headed the CDU in December and seems to be the next chancellor of Germany in the 2021 elections. Macron did not lose either. Ursula von der Leyen also seems to be obliged to him, his compatriot Christine Lagarde will now take the position of President of the ECB, and his friend Charles Michel as the head of the European Council.

'Benefits' of the Visegrad Group are obvious - they understand that despite talks about united Europe and common values, Germany is promoting its interests and beneficial policies throughout the EU, especially in the field of migrants or trade. Timmermans remains in the European Commission, and Michel, who supported the UN Pact on Migration, is now in the European Council. French and German media, offering everyone to rejoice at the appointment of women to important posts in the EU, are silent about the fact that politicians from the east and north of Europe did not take any important posts, as always. In addition, besides Michel, who is 43, all the other European officials are again people aged from 60 to 70 and above, although at the May elections the youth were very active and clearly claimed to “rejuvenate” the authorities.

It is quite difficult to say where and in what structural form Europe will move on in such a situation. There is no agreement on any issue, even on such seemingly all-European liberal values ​​as open borders or freedom of movement of goods, people and capital. The infamous migrant crisis has hit hard on these ideas. Globalisation no longer seems attractive, but, on the contrary, often entails increasing inequality, a gross violation of human rights, loss of jobs, decline of entire industries in favour of large international corporations and strong harm to the environment. Apparently, if Western European countries continue to be Euro-optimists, Eastern Europe becomes increasingly Euro-sceptic, even though the main Euro-optimists in Western Europe represent very power elite, not just voters. But in this case, the situation is even more depressing. Euro-sceptics and Euro-optimists have united as opposition to further EU enlargement. But this is because Brussels does not know what to do with itself, let alone to take responsibility for new members.

There were many optimistic comments after the parliamentary elections that at least the nationalists and sceptics get seats, but their success was not that big at all. Meanwhile, the centre-right and centre-left blocs can no longer feel so confident, giving up positions to "green" liberals and the very right. For traditional heavyweights of European politics, this was supposed to be an alarming bell, which, judging by the nominees for top positions in the EU leadership, do not want to listen and continue to go along the usual well-trodden road, failing to admit that this may well be a road to nowhere...