Von der Leyen: change of course?

We would like to share here the opinion signed by UEF President Domenec Ruiz Devesa and published in the Spanish newspaper Informacion with the title: Von der Leyen: ¿cambio de rumbo?

To read in Spanish here LINK or here below in English

President Von der Leyen arrived at the September 2025 State of the Union debate weakened by a poor start to her second term, particularly on her stance on Gaza, but also on the rather vassal relationship with Trump's United States, and the bizarre proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034 presented in July. Against this backdrop, the Commission president declared "Europe's independence" and her willingness to work with the pro-European majority in the European Parliament. She made numerous announcements of plans, summits, initiatives, from cars to affordable housing, from support for the Mercosur agreement, to strengthening energy interconnections and battery production, to support for just transition in the framework of the Green Pact, to more protection for European steel, and all with a strong social accent (including the goal of eliminating poverty in Europe by 2050).

All very laudable but it remains to be seen how it will play out, given Germany's well-known penchant for the use and abuse of big announcements, and its overriding need to change the conversation around a number of important gaffes. Only on the Middle East is there a real change of course on the part of the European Commission.

Von der Leyen, after many, many months of thunderous silence and inaction, has finally taken the bull by the horns, proposing to (partially) suspend the trade dimension of Israel's Association Agreement with the EU. But as Josep Borrell points out, this measure, which has yet to be approved by member states in the Council (by qualified majority) is rather limited (imposition of tariffs worth some 230 million euros per year), and comes "50,000 deaths too late". It is also proposed to suspend funding for Horizon Europe and other programmes; and to sanction extremist Israeli ministers (this will be more difficult because it requires unanimity). Welcome correction but much more will be needed to stop the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people.

On Ukraine, perhaps the only major area where the Commission and the High Representative have remained on track after the change of cycle, work is underway on the 19th sanctions package to accelerate the end of dependence on Russian crude oil, end the ghost tanker fleet, and limit Russia's trade with third countries. In addition, Von der Leyen announced a plan, the details of which are still unclear, to mobilise Russia's frozen financial assets to provide a 'reparations loan' to Ukraine, which is not to be repaid until the aggressor compensates for the damage it has caused.
That said, von der Leyen was unwilling or unable to propose a change of course on other key issues. He spoke of continuing to implement the Letta and Draghi reports on the internal market and competitiveness, but nothing about issuing common debt to finance investments and strengthen the euro as an international currency, as proposed by the former president of the European Central Bank. He defended tooth and nail the humiliating and damaging trade agreement (sic) with Trump, whose only justification is our dependence on Washington in military matters, but did not propose to create a Common European Defence, as foreseen in the Treaty, with a strategic and operational dimension, but more money for joint arms production.
He also re-emphasised his proposal for a multi-annual budget which, if approved as it stands, would mean the end of regional and cohesion policy as we understand it, completely marginalising the role of the European regions and the European Parliament in its design and implementation.

She also defended the enlargement of the Union without linking it to institutional reforms, which is unfeasible, beyond calling for an end to unanimity in foreign policy decision-making, without proposing any plan in this regard, or making any reference to the proposal for reform of the Treaties submitted by the European Parliament to the Council in November 2023.

At the moment, only the European Parliament has the power to provoke a real turning point that would restore the credibility of the integration project and its federal vocation. On the one hand, it can vote against the proposal to reduce European tariffs on US goods, arguably the most implausible part of the deal reached by Von der Leyen and Trump, when the EU must accept tariffs of 15 per cent on its goods. On the other hand, it can reject outright the proposed new Multiannual Financial Framework, asking for its return and negotiating on a new proposal and linking its final approval to the opening of the treaty reform procedure. It remains to be seen what majorities can be achieved on these issues in the coming days. Watch out.