Riding the highs of what she clearly sees as a personal victory over Viktor Orbán in Hungary’s parliamentary elections, the European Commission President put her foot in her mouth by saying that the Commission ‘must succeed in completing the European continent so that it is not influenced by Russian, Turkish or Chinese’. Turkish commentators were shocked to see themselves included on the Commission’s growing list of countries it increasingly views as a sort of axis of evil. Von der Leyen’s diplomatic gaffe was so severe that the EU’s executive arm sent its chief spokesman out to try to put out the flames.
Turks should not be surprised by von der Leyen’s comments, however. They represent the general trajectory of the European Commission as it seeks to turn the European Union from an economic union into a war union—a transition that the Orbán government stood almost alone in opposing. Yes, Türkiye may be an important NATO ally, and yes, it may have tried multiple times to join the EU, but in Brussels circles, this is no longer enough to keep a country off the naughty list. As Europe’s power disintegrates on the world stage, the Commission politicians and bureaucrats are creating a bunker around themselves—one that insulates them not just from the world outside, but from their own citizens.
In the late stages of a political structure, the purpose of the structure starts to recede into the background and is replaced with power networks whose primary goal is ensuring their own survival. That is what is happening in Brussels, and it is not yet adequately understood either by the outside world or even by the citizens of the EU—although more of the latter are waking up to this grim reality every day. The EU was supposed to be an economic union that would deliver stability and prosperity to its citizens. It is clearly no longer that, and so it is starting to devolve into a dysfunctional superstate in search of enemies—foreign and domestic—to justify its own existence.
‘“We need to think bigger and more geopolitically,” she said, clearly indicating that [von der Leyen] sees in Türkiye…a potential rival’
Too many are focusing on distractions when trying to analyse von der Leyen’s bizarre outburst. Some are saying that it is because the Erdoğan government has leaned into variants of Islamism—but this is a long-standing development and never led to these sorts of comments in the past. Others are pointing to the Turkish government’s increasingly expansionist aims, such as its recent alliance with the new government in Syria, but von der Leyen herself met President Al-Sharaa only a few months ago. To understand von der Leyen’s paroxysm, we merely must listen closely to her own words: ‘We need to think bigger and more geopolitically,’ she said, clearly indicating that she sees in Türkiye not a potential partner but a potential rival.
But these statements are as hollow as they are misguided. They are wrapped up in that old language of Brussels proceduralism. Von der Leyen does not outline an actual geopolitical strategy. Rather, she says that Europeans need to formulate such a strategy. The approach is bureaucratic: von der Leyen wants to activate the process by which a geopolitical entity is formed. And so, of course, no geopolitical strategy is ever formed because such a strategy would require decision-making rather than proceduralism. The actual goal of a machine is what it does, and in this instance, the goal of adding Türkiye to the naughty list is simply to increase the number of supposed threats to the EU that Commission bureaucrats are protecting EU citizens against.
Faced with this bizarre display, more capitals across the world are becoming increasingly alarmed and wondering what the Commission’s true intentions are. In Moscow, for example, some are genuinely concerned that Europe is preparing for war with Russia. But they miss the point. They view the European Commission as being representative of 27 actual countries—27 countries that could launch a war on Russia. Increasingly, however, the European Commission is a giant, self-licking ice cream cone that is trying to justify its own existence. Just as the Commission will never actually formulate a coherent geopolitical strategy, nor will it ever field a serious military. Washington, DC has long figured this out, and that is why they are cutting ties with the broken EU.
If this analysis is correct, it would suggest that the EU does not have long left in this world. It would be rash, however, to predict any collapse in the immediate future. But it would be equally irresponsible not to consider such a possibility. Due to its increasingly deranged geopolitical positioning, the EU is now facing an unprecedented energy shock. It is not remotely prepared for this. If it wanted to insulate the continent from this shock, it would try to repair diplomatic relations with Moscow in the hopes of securing energy supplies. Instead, the Brusselians are cheering on the fact that Anita Orbán, who wrote a 2008 book on why Europe needs to decouple from Russian energy, will soon be the Foreign Minister of Hungary.
Those outside of the EU need to stop being surprised by this irrationalism and accept that they are simply witnessing a different type of rationalism. Once you stop seeing the EU as an entity primarily concerned with the prosperity and security of European nations and their citizens, and instead view it as an entrenched power network of people who are fighting for their own political survival, it all makes sense. You can even see this in how European technocrats now address their own public.
This week, ECB President Christine Lagarde—one of the more competent people in the EU—gave a speech in which she explained that the world was facing potential food shortages due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Rather than decrying this situation or facing that it represents a genuine threat to EU citizens, Lagarde decided to take the opportunity to crack a joke about why she does not need to be concerned about agricultural shortages because she is no longer Agriculture Minister and then went on to explain what the shortages would mean for the ECB’s sacred inflation and growth targets. Lagarde is far from the worst of the technocrats that have come to dominate Brussels, but even she has been sucked into a mode of discourse in the European capital that is increasingly detached from reality. This cannot last.
Related articles: