INTERVIEW: The unity of our union is much stronger than perceived, says EU’s Federica Mogherini

Federica Mogherini, High representative of the European Union for foreign affairs and security policy
Updated 28 December 2018
Follow

INTERVIEW: The unity of our union is much stronger than perceived, says EU’s Federica Mogherini

  • Our greatest enemy is a lack of trust in the means at our disposal
  • If we want to play a decisive role, not only in our region but also globally, we have all the right instruments to do so

Federica Mogherini has overseen EU foreign and security policy since November 2014. With her term coming to an end in 2019, Mark Leonard of the European Council on Foreign Relations, a pan-European think tank, interviewed Mogherini about the state of European security and the future of the international order, arms control and migration, among other issues.

Leonard (ML) So far, the EU has maintained its unity over key issues, such as Brexit and post-Crimea sanctions on Russia. Is this unity likely to hold in 2019, particularly given the looming EU parliamentary elections and changes at the top of the European Commission and European Council?

Mogherini (FM) The unity of our union is much stronger than is often perceived. What I see in my daily work is an EU that makes decisions jointly, implements them together and — especially in the field of foreign and security policy — acts as one. 

Many complain about a lack of unity, but my impression is that these complaints derive more from a comfortable cliche that is repeated on the basis of past experiences rather than from a realistic reflection on the situation today.

We need to define what we mean by unity. It does not mean uniformity. We number 28 — soon 27 — which is still a lot. With 500 million people, the EU is the largest integration project ever realized. 

It is the biggest market in the world and the second-largest economy. It comprises many different cultures, languages and politics. History and geography have given us different backgrounds. It is only natural that this translates into different views, opinions and voices, even within each of our democratic societies.

I have always refused to use the expression: “The EU must sing with one voice.” We need to use all the different voices we have, because our plurality is our point of strength. But we need to sing the same song, in a coordinated manner, like a choir. And in my daily work, I see unity of purpose, common decisions and coordinated action happening. I do not see this trend being challenged.

ML You have called for Europe to defend its sovereignty by, for example, creating new structures that would allow it to continue to adhere to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran. Will these structures work, and could the special-purpose vehicle to maintain trade with Iran be used to counter other US sanctions?

FM We are working, as a union of 28 member states and with the rest of the international community, to preserve a nuclear agreement that has so far been implemented in full, as certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 13 consecutive reports. We do this because of our collective security: We do not want to see Iran developing a nuclear weapon, and the JCPOA is delivering precisely on that purpose. 

I often hear that, on this issue, Europe is motivated mainly by economic or trade considerations. That is not the case. We do this to prevent a nuclear non-proliferation agreement that is working from being dismantled, and to prevent a major security crisis in the Middle East.

ML Why has Europe’s weight in its neighborhood decreased, especially when it comes to shaping events in Turkey, Libya and Syria? Is this an indication that Europe will not be one of the great powers of the 21st century?

FM Our destiny is in our own hands. If we want to play a decisive role, not only in our region but also globally, we have all the right instruments to do so, and we have the weight to do so. This is also what our partners around the world expect from us, particularly in these difficult times. To play such a role, Europeans need to realize how big and powerful they are when they act together as a union, and focus more on the responsibility we can exercise on the global scene if we resist the temptation of inward-looking policies — or rather, politics.  

Our greatest enemy is a lack of trust in the means at our disposal. The EU has unparalleled “soft” power — in economic, diplomatic and cultural terms — and we are increasingly active as a global security provider, building our “hard” power as never before. In Syria and Libya, we are not a military player, and I am proud of this. Violence has brought more violence, while we have always worked for peaceful and negotiated solutions.

Does this mean we are powerless? Quite the contrary. At the UN General Assembly this year, more than 50 countries and organizations took part in the discussion we initiated on Syria to support the difficult work the UN is doing there. Everyone understands that the EU’s role in Syria and Libya is unique and irreplaceable.

ML What impact will Brexit have on the EU’s security strategy? Will it help forge a stronger consensus?

FM I have no doubt that our future is one of close partnership and cooperation. If you look at what has happened since the Brexit referendum in 2016, we are still making unanimous decisions on foreign, security and defense policies. 

We reacted as one to the nerve-agent attack in Salisbury, England, earlier this year. We continue to work together when it comes to preserving the Iran nuclear deal. And we are pursuing shared objectives in Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan, Myanmar
and elsewhere.

In the coming months, I will present a proposal for a new way of collaborating with non-EU countries and international organizations that are involved in EU civilian and military operations, or that are otherwise associated with our security and defense policies. 

This will also be an essential part of our future relationship with the UK. We will seek ways for non-EU countries to participate in defense projects launched under the Permanent Structured Cooperation framework.

ML What do you believe foreign policy can and should do to fight populism?

FM I do not like the expression “populism.” I believe a lot of people have lost trust in institutions — all of them. But in most European countries, the EU is more trusted than national institutions. 

The reaction coming from some political forces is to shift the blame and find a scapegoat. Governments come to Brussels, make decisions by unanimity, then blame the results on the EU. But the union is what we make of it. We have a collective responsibility to make it work. It is a reflection of our own collective political will.

In these past few years, our foreign policy has advanced and protected Europeans’ interests and values in a way that no member state could have achieved alone. In today’s world, even the bigger member states are small, such that national sovereignty can be effectively exercised only through the EU. We show this every day in our foreign policy. We are more effective at negotiating trade deals as the world’s largest market than as 28 separate countries. 

ML If there is a populist surge in the upcoming European Parliament elections, what lessons should Brussels take from it, and what new course would you advocate?

FM Whatever the result of the election, the lessons will have to be taken not so much in Brussels but everywhere around the union, and most of all in member states’ capitals. EU policies and actions are defined through our collective work, which is the result of our political will. If it works, it is a collective success for all of us. If it fails, it is a collective responsibility and a problem for all. No one is excluded.

I believe that Europeans need their union, and need to change some of the policies that the EU has put in place. This is something we have begun to do in recent years, deepening European integration on security and defense, establishing a strong and united external policy to govern migration flows, and launching the largest ever investment plan for Europe and Africa.

Some want to change EU policies to improve them — even radically — but others just want to destroy the union. We have to be very careful because in times of frustration, destruction can sound fascinating for many. Yet the secret of change is to focus not on destroying the old but on building the new. I hope this will be possible in 2019.

ML Do recent developments in the EU’s external approach to migration in places such as Africa and the Middle East signal a move away from emergency responses toward long-term solutions?

FM Not just recent developments. This has been the goal of our external action on migration since the very beginning. Let me remind you of the situation three years ago: Hundreds of people were dying almost every day in the Mediterranean and in the North African desert. Until then, the EU had been indifferent to a phenomenon that it considered to be outside its competence and under the exclusive purview of individual member states. 

This has changed, finally. We had to create an emergency response to end the carnage, and we did it with Operation Sophia at sea and the Emergency Trust Fund to finance our work with Africa. 

At the same time, we started to work on a better system to manage migration flows and address their long-term causes. We started to train local security forces; we worked on voluntary returns for migrants, with the opportunity to start a new life; and we established our investment plan for Africa and Europe’s neighborhood.

 


University of Birmingham students facing disciplinary hearing over pro-Palestine activism

Updated 7 sec ago
Follow

University of Birmingham students facing disciplinary hearing over pro-Palestine activism

  • Student Antonia Listrat: ‘Funding genocide is violent; protesting genocide is peaceful’
  • Legal rights group sounds alarm over ‘nationwide crackdown’ on solidarity with Palestinians

LONDON: Two pro-Palestine students at the UK’s University of Birmingham are facing disciplinary proceedings over their activism, with a major legal rights group sounding the alarm over a “nationwide crackdown” on solidarity with the Palestinian people.

The European Legal Support Centre submitted legal documents to the university’s misconduct panel on behalf of the two students, Mariyah Ali and Antonia Listrat.

Amid the war in Gaza and sweeping pro-Palestine solidarity at institutions across the UK, the two students had demanded that their university divest from arms companies supplying the Israeli military.

Ali and Listrat face a disciplinary hearing on April 7, with the ELSC urging the university to dismiss the proceedings.

Coventry MP Zarah Sultana labeled the university’s move “an assault on democratic rights,” while the decision was questioned by UN Special Rapporteur Gina Romero, who highlighted “harassment, intimidation and reprisals” against the students at the university.

The pair have been supported by the university’s student body, which elected Listrat as guild president and Ali as ethnic minorities officer.

Ali said: “The disciplinary process against Antonia and me is a blatant attempt to suppress dissent and silence the wider student movement.

“This authoritarian crackdown is not just an attack on our right to protest — it is a display of institutional Islamophobia and bureaucratic repression.

“The student movement for Palestine is stronger than ever. Instead of charging students, the University of Birmingham must focus on divesting from companies complicit in genocide and war crimes.”

The student union also passed a motion supporting pro-Palestine solidarity that was subsequently blocked by union trustees.

By taking punitive measures against the students, the university is “contradicting the democratic will of students,” the ELSC said.

Anna Ost, the center’s senior legal officer, added: “We are deeply concerned that the university’s intention and effect in targeting these two students is to dissuade the wider university community from speaking out for Palestine.

“The university needs to change its approach, drop the disciplinaries, and demonstrate that fundamental freedoms are still promoted on its campus.”

The targeting of the students is part a wider crackdown on pro-Palestine activism across the UK in the wake of Israel’s war in Gaza.

Since October 2023, at least 28 universities across the UK have disciplined more than 113 students for activism, a joint investigation by Sky News and Liberty Investigates found.

The ELSC warned that the campus crackdowns, which have involved police and private security, is creating a “chilling effect” that “sets a dangerous precedent for campus democracy.”

British universities are legally bound to protect freedom of expression under the education and human rights acts, it added, warning that the University of Birmingham is “violating these obligations by penalizing students for their political beliefs.”

The center called on the university to dismiss the charges against the students and uphold freedom of speech, expression and assembly on campus.

Listrat said protesting is “an integral part of campus life” that signifies a “healthy and progressive society.”

She added: “As far-right rhetoric rises throughout the world, we need to make a huge effort to protect our rights and uphold international law and morality.

“Enabling genocide and profiting from human rights violations is quite a violent stance that the University of Birmingham has taken. Funding genocide is violent; protesting genocide is peaceful.”


German military to order exploding drones for first time, sources say

Updated 43 min 16 sec ago
Follow

German military to order exploding drones for first time, sources say

  • Russia and Ukraine have fielded such single-use drones
  • The procurement of armed drones has been controversial in Germany

BERLIN: The German military will be armed with loitering munitions, or exploding drones, for the first time, two defense ministry sources said on Thursday, as Berlin tries to catch up with a technology that has shown its destructive power in Ukraine.
Both Russia and Ukraine have fielded such single-use drones, which cruise toward their target before plummeting at velocity and detonating on impact.
But the procurement of armed drones has been controversial in Germany, with some politicians associating them with targeted extrajudicial killings by US forces in Afghanistan.
It took years of heated debate before parliament agreed in 2022 to enable a large drone such as the Heron TP, which flies at much higher altitudes, to carry arms.
However, military upgrades are more urgent now for Germany, amid the continuing war between Russia and Ukraine and doubts about the future of US military protection.
Last month, parliament approved plans for a defense spending surge worth hundreds of billions of euros.
Contracts with two companies for a first batch of exploding drones will be signed in the coming days, the sources said, declining to name the companies. The army, air force and navy will test them in the following months.
“The use of drones and the defense against drones is crucial for the survival of our troops on the modern battlefield, that’s something we learned in Ukraine,” said one of the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“Each soldier must be capable of operating drones, just as today, everybody knows how to use binoculars.”
Germany will aim to sign longer-term contracts by the end of the year for a larger number of drones, shortening the period for introducing new weapons which usually takes years.
As drone technology evolves rapidly, the deals will specify that companies supply a limited number initially for training purposes, and that they may be asked later to supply a larger number of the latest models at short notice, if needed.
“There’s no use in purchasing thousands of drones ... only to realize they are outdated by the time we need them,” one of the sources said.


Trump moves to fire several national security officials over concerns they’re not loyal

Updated 03 April 2025
Follow

Trump moves to fire several national security officials over concerns they’re not loyal

  • National security adviser Mike Waltz is fighting back criticism over using Signal app to discuss attacks on Yemen's Houthi militants

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump has moved to fire several senior White House National Security Council officials soon after he was urged by far-right activist Laura Loomer to purge staffers she deemed insufficiently committed to his Make America Great Again agenda, several people familiar with the matter said Thursday.
Loomer presented her research to Trump in an Oval Office meeting on Wednesday, making her case for the firings, the people said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive personnel matters. Vice President JD Vance, chief of staff Susie Wiles, national security adviser Mike Waltz and Serio Gor, the director of the Presidential Personnel Office, took part in the meeting, the people said.
NSC spokesman Brian Hughes declined to comment on the meeting or the firings, insisting that the White House does not discuss personnel matters.
Loomer, who has promoted 9/11 conspiracy theories, was a frequent presence on the campaign trail during Trump’s 2024 successful White House run. More recently, she’s been speaking out on social media about some members of Trump’s national security team that she insists can’t be trusted.
The move by Trump to push out staff comes at a moment when his national security adviser Mike Waltz is fighting back criticism over using the publicly available encrypted Signal app to discuss planning for the sensitive March 15 military operation targeting Houthi militants in Yemen.
A journalist, The Atlantic magazine’s Jeffrey Rosenberg, was mistakenly added to the chain and revealed that Trump’s team used it to discuss precise timing of the operation, aircraft used to carry out the strikes and more.
Waltz has taken responsibility for building text chain, but has said he does not know how Rosenberg ended up being included.


Russia, African juntas blast Ukraine as they deepen ties

Updated 03 April 2025
Follow

Russia, African juntas blast Ukraine as they deepen ties

  • Moscow has tried to build new partnerships in Africa, where it has been growing in influence in recent years, including militarily
  • Foreign ministers from Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso met Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Moscow for the summit

MOSCOW: Russia and a group of west African countries led by military juntas hailed growing military ties at a summit in Moscow on Thursday, with some condemning Ukraine as a “terrorist” state.
Facing isolation in the West following its full-scale offensive against Ukraine, Moscow has tried to build new partnerships in Africa, where it has been growing in influence in recent years, including militarily.
Foreign ministers from Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso met Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Moscow for the summit, which Lavrov said would “strengthen the whole suite” of their relations.
The three Sahelian countries are led by juntas who seized power in coups and have turned away from former colonial power France while moving closer to Russia, which has been sending mercenaries to help them fight a transnational jihadist insurgency.
Lavrov said Russia was ready to help “strengthen the three countries’ combat capability” and train soldiers and law enforcement officers.
He added that Moscow could help the countries form a joint armed force “by organizing special courses, by using instructors who are already working in large numbers in the countries” and by “supplying military production.”
Mali’s Abdoulaye Diop said that Mali and Russia shared views on “fighting against terrorism.”
“We consider Ukraine as simply a terrorist state,” the minister said at a press conference.
Mali last year broke off diplomatic relations with Ukraine, accusing a senior Ukrainian official of having admitted Kyiv played a role in a heavy defeat suffered by Malian troops.
Niger then joined Mali in cutting diplomatic ties, accusing Kyiv of supporting “terrorist groups.”
Ukraine’s foreign ministry on Thursday rejected claims it had interfered in Mali’s affairs as “baseless,” and suggested Diop’s comments were unserious given he “represents an illegitimate junta that usurped power.”
Moscow has concluded defense agreements with Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger and supplied them with military equipment.


UK watchdog announces probe into Prince Harry charity

Updated 03 April 2025
Follow

UK watchdog announces probe into Prince Harry charity

  • The watchdog added that it would be examining whether the charity’s current and former trustees had “fulfilled their duties and responsibilities under charity law“
  • The row at Sentebale escalated on Sunday after its chairperson Sophie Chandauka accused the prince of “bullying“

LONDON: The UK’s charity watchdog on Thursday opened a probe into Sentebale, the African organization co-founded by Prince Harry, after a bitter boardroom row led King Charles III’s younger son to step down as patron.
“After a period of assessing the initial concerns raised with the Commission, the regulator informed the charity on 2 April 2025 it has opened a regulatory compliance case,” the Charity Commission said in a statement.
The watchdog added that it would be examining whether the charity’s current and former trustees had “fulfilled their duties and responsibilities under charity law.”
The row at Sentebale escalated on Sunday after its chairperson Sophie Chandauka accused the prince of “bullying” and being involved in a “cover up.”

Earlier, Harry and Sentebale’s co-founder, Lesotho’s Prince Seeiso, announced their departure from the charity they established in 2006, following a “devastating” dispute between trustees and Chandauka.
Relations with Chandauka, who was appointed in 2023, “broke down beyond repair,” they said in a joint statement last week, prompting trustees to leave and demand that Chandauka resign.
Harry founded the charity in honor of his mother, Princess Diana, with Seeiso to help young people with HIV and AIDS in Lesotho and later Botswana.
The latest accusations are a fresh blow for the prince, who kept up only a handful of his private patronages including with Sentebale after a dramatic split with the British royals in 2020.
While Harry was integral to the founding vision of the charity, to which he once said he was “committed for the rest of my life,” Chandauka has said “Sentebale has a future” beyond the prince.
Harry chose the name Sentebale as a tribute to Diana, who died in a Paris car crash in 1997 when the prince was just 12. It means “forget me not” in the Sesotho language and is also used to say goodbye.