DOCSLIB.ORG

Eu Crisis Response Capability Revisited

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Eu Crisis Response Capability Revisited EU CRISIS RESPONSE CAPABILITY REVISITED Europe Report N°160 – 17 January 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... i I. INTRODUCTION: THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT .................................................. 1 II. STRUCTURE AND FRAMEWORK ........................................................................... 4 A. THE BIG BANG ENLARGEMENT.............................................................................................4 B. THE EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION ............................................................................................4 1. The death and rebirth of the Intergovernmental Conference...................................4 2. The European Foreign Minister.................................................................................8 3. Legal personality and external representation.............................................................9 C. ONGOING DEBATES...............................................................................................................9 1. "Enhanced" and "Structured" cooperation....................................................................9 2. Which headquarters?................................................................................................10 3. Financing ESDP.......................................................................................................11 D. THE COMMISSION ...............................................................................................................12 1. The Directorates-General.........................................................................................12 2. European Commission Delegations.........................................................................13 3. Specialised Units .....................................................................................................14 E. THE COUNCIL .....................................................................................................................16 1. The High Representative and the Council Secretariat .............................................16 2. General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) ..................................18 3. Committee of the Permanent Representatives (COREPER) .....................................18 4. Political and Security Committee (PSC) .................................................................18 5. European Union Military Committee (EUMC) .........................................................19 6. European Union Military Staff (EUMS) .................................................................19 7. Committee for Civilian Aspects of Crisis Management (CIVCOM) ......................20 8. European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM).........................................................20 F. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT.....................................................................................................20 G. MEMBER STATES ................................................................................................................21 III. CAPABILITIES............................................................................................................ 22 A. HEADLINE GOALS, ECAP AND THE MISSING CAPABILITIES................................................24 B. THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE AGENCY (EDA)........................................................................27 C. THE EU-NATO RELATIONSHIP ..........................................................................................28 D. CIVILIAN CAPABILITIES ......................................................................................................30 E. THIRD-COUNTRY CONTRIBUTIONS......................................................................................32 IV. PRACTICES AND POLICIES ................................................................................... 33 A. CONFLICT PREVENTION ......................................................................................................33 1. International Peacebuilding Regimes ......................................................................33 2. In-country peacebuilding .........................................................................................37 3. Preventive action .....................................................................................................42 B. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................................44 1. Diplomatic peacemaking .........................................................................................44 2. Traditional peacekeeping.........................................................................................45 3. Sanctions..................................................................................................................45 V. OPERATIONS.............................................................................................................. 46 A. DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO (DRC) .......................................................................46 B. MACEDONIA .......................................................................................................................48 C. BOSNIA ...............................................................................................................................49 VI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 52 APPENDICES A. GLOSSARY ..........................................................................................................................53 B. ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP .......................................................................55 C. CRISIS GROUP REPORTS AND BRIEFINGS SINCE JANUARY 2002..........................................56 D. CRISIS GROUP BOARD MEMBERS........................................................................................58 Europe Report N°160 17 January 2005 EU CRISIS RESPONSE CAPABILITY REVISITED EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Three years after Crisis Group first took a snapshot of however, still question whether the EU can not only European Union crisis response capacity, much has talk but walk. changed for the better in both conflict prevention and conflict management. Mechanisms then only planned The EU and NATO now speak to and about each other or just introduced such as the Political and Security constantly in Brussels, and they are beginning to get Committee are functioning well; important new ones daily experience of each other in the field in more than such as the European Defence Agency have come on one Balkans location. A great deal more work is line. The enlarged EU has gained experience with required, however, to ensure that the relationship is a police and military missions in the Balkans and truly complementary one, as envisaged in the Africa and has just launched its most ambitious important "Berlin Plus" arrangements they reached in operation, replacing NATO as Bosnia's primary 2003. European armed forces that are stronger, flexible security provider. Nevertheless, many old problems and more interoperable would make the EU a much of Council/Commission coordination have not been better partner not only for the U.S. but for the UN and resolved, and fundamental questions about member regional organisations as well. On the other hand, an state political will to act together are being asked EU failure to improve its capabilities would only with more urgency in the post 9/11, post-Iraq War strengthen the unfortunate argument of some in the environment. The Constitution adopted in June 2004 U.S. that America should increasingly go it alone. will help if it is ratified but the EU cannot afford to let momentum slow by turning inward during the This report is not a comprehensive examination of all difficult year or two while that issue is fought out. aspects of EU foreign policy but rather, like its predecessor, an overview of those aspects that relate The reason is simple for pushing forward on conflict particularly to the important field of crisis response management capabilities and for acting to the greatest and management, civilian and military. It is written extent possible as if the Constitution's provisions for a wider than specialist readership, to draw relating to Common Foreign and Security Policy attention to developments within the EU that have (CFSP) were already in force. The world has become been both rapid and not as well understood or if anything more dangerous in the past three years. appreciated as they deserve to be. The EU is the only serious partner in sight that can significantly help the U.S. deal with a wide range of Brussels, 17 January 2005 security problems -- and with the potential strength to cause Washington to take notice from time to time of constructive criticism and alternative policies. That will not happen until the Union builds some further military muscle and above all learns how to punch at a higher political weight. The European Security Strategy (ESS), adopted in 2003, is a blueprint for what a coherent European foreign policy should look like but it is as yet mostly words on paper. There is hope that the progressive "mainstreaming" of political and conflict issues into development aid and trade deals will result in a renewed debate on reinforcing conditionality in the whole of EU external assistance. Many observers, Europe Report N°160
Load more

Recommended publications
  • How Big Is Belgium's Love Still for Europe? - the Low Countries 29/05/2020 21:18
    How Big Is Belgium's Love Still for Europe? - the low countries 29/05/2020 21:18 © Trui Chielens Zero Point 1945 SOCIETY HISTORY How Big Is Belgium's Love Still for Europe? By Ellen Vanderschueren, Jasper Praet, Hendrik Vos translated by Elisabeth Salverda 29/05/2020 ! 11 min reading time After the Second World War, Belgium was one of Europe’s founders. Over the years, Belgian politicians have played a prominent role in European politics. There was always a shared feeling among the population that integration with Europe was useful and in the national interest. In recent times, however, this consensus has been somewhat worn down. n 2009, the first President of the European Council to be appointed was a I Belgian, when Herman Van Rompuy became “President of Europe”. Five years later Donald Tusk, a former prime minister of Poland, took over the helm. And five years after that, in 2019, the role fell to a Belgian once more: Charles Michel fit the jigsaw of nominations and was asked by his colleagues to chair the European Council. Belgians have quite often had a steering role in European politics. Belgium was one of the founders of the European project, and has played a very active role over the years in its process of integration. https://www.the-low-countries.com/article/how-big-is-belgiums-love-still-for-europe Pagina 1 van 15 How Big Is Belgium's Love Still for Europe? - the low countries 29/05/2020 21:18 Herman Van Rompuy and Charles Michel, the first and current President of the European Council Much has changed over the past seventy years: the Community with a focus on coal and steel has grown into a European Union that plays a significant role in almost all economic and political spheres.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast
    Briefing May 2019 European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast Austria – 18 MEPs Staff lead: Nick Dornheim PARTIES (EP group) Freedom Party of Austria The Greens – The Green Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) (EPP) Social Democratic Party of Austria NEOS – The New (FPÖ) (Salvini’s Alliance) – Alternative (Greens/EFA) – 6 seats (SPÖ) (S&D) - 5 seats Austria (ALDE) 1 seat 5 seats 1 seat 1. Othmar Karas* Andreas Schieder Harald Vilimsky* Werner Kogler Claudia Gamon 2. Karoline Edtstadler Evelyn Regner* Georg Mayer* Sarah Wiener Karin Feldinger 3. Angelika Winzig Günther Sidl Petra Steger Monika Vana* Stefan Windberger 4. Simone Schmiedtbauer Bettina Vollath Roman Haider Thomas Waitz* Stefan Zotti 5. Lukas Mandl* Hannes Heide Vesna Schuster Olga Voglauer Nini Tsiklauri 6. Wolfram Pirchner Julia Elisabeth Herr Elisabeth Dieringer-Granza Thomas Schobesberger Johannes Margreiter 7. Christian Sagartz Christian Alexander Dax Josef Graf Teresa Reiter 8. Barbara Thaler Stefanie Mösl Maximilian Kurz Isak Schneider 9. Christian Zoll Luca Peter Marco Kaiser Andrea Kerbleder Peter Berry 10. Claudia Wolf-Schöffmann Theresa Muigg Karin Berger Julia Reichenhauser NB 1: Only the parties reaching the 4% electoral threshold are mentioned in the table. Likely to be elected Unlikely to be elected or *: Incumbent Member of the NB 2: 18 seats are allocated to Austria, same as in the previous election. and/or take seat to take seat, if elected European Parliament ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• www.eurocommerce.eu Belgium – 21 MEPs Staff lead: Stefania Moise PARTIES (EP group) DUTCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY FRENCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY GERMAN SPEAKING CONSTITUENCY 1. Geert Bourgeois 1. Paul Magnette 1. Pascal Arimont* 2. Assita Kanko 2. Maria Arena* 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe's Two-Faced Authoritarian Right FINAL.Pdf
    1 Europe’s two-faced authoritarian right: ‘anti-elite’ parties serving big business interests 15 May 2019 INTRODUCTION If the more pessimistic projections are to be believed, authoritarian right-wing politicians will do well in the upcoming European Parliament elections, reflecting a surge in EU scepticism and disillusionment with establishment parties, many of whom have overseen a decade or more of punishing austerity. These authoritarian right parties are harnessing this disillusionment using the rhetoric of ending corruption, tackling ‘elite’ interests, regaining ‘national’ dignity and identity, and defending the rights of ‘ordinary people’. However, the contrast between this rhetoric and their actual actions is stark. From repressive laws to dark money funding; from corruption scandals to personal enrichment; from corporate deregulation to enabling tax avoidance, the defence of ‘elite’ interests disguised as the defence of disaffected classes is a defining characteristic of Europe’s rising authoritarian right parties. After the election, Europe could well see the formation of a new axis by these parties across the EU institutions, simultaneously becoming a significant force in the European Parliament, while having a strong voice in the Council and European Council, and nominating like-minded commissioners to the EU’s executive. Such an alliance could undermine or prevent action to tackle some of the most pressing issues facing us such as climate change, whilst working against workers’ rights, and measures to regulate and tax business
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • A Dinner with Helmut Schmidt
    A Dinner with Helmut Schmidt 1 On 6 February 2010, I organized a remarkable diner with Helmut Schmidt and some influential political leaders in Europe. The animated discussion was an inspiration for us all and was recorded for the records of history. This is the transcript. At the dinner have ave participated: 1. Hemut Schmidt 2. Guy Verhofstadt, MEP, former Prime Minister Belgium 3. Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, MEP, former Prime Minister Denmark 4. Stefan Collignon 5. Christian Paul, Député, Assemblée Nationale, Paris 6. Angelika Schwall-Düren, Member of Bundestag 7. Danuta Huebner, MEP, former European Commissioner 8. Koert Debeuf, Liberal Foundation, Bruxelles Photography by: Peter Cunningham His wisdom and outspokenness will be missed by all Europeans. Stefan Collignon 10. November 2015 2 . After the initial presentations and small talk, the discussion quickly went to the heart of Europe’s problems. Danuta Hübner asked: Do we suffer from lack of leadership? Helmut Schmidt: Actually, the Europeans do lack good leadership, yes, but on the other hand it is more important that we do not see the European edifice blowing up overnight, so to speak. I have known Jean Monnet since 1947-1948, and one of his concepts, at least in those years, was: “Let Europe grow gradually, one step after the other”. So, it took us twenty years from 1952 until the early Seventies to grow from six Members to nine. More than twenty years. And it took us another ten years to grow from nine to twelve. And another decade from twelve to fifteen and then these very intelligent Foreign Secretaries of the European countries let the whole thing explode overnight.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Spitzenkandidaten Process
    BRIEFING Election of the President of the European Commission Understanding the Spitzenkandidaten process SUMMARY The European Parliament has long sought to ensure that, by voting in European elections, European citizens not only elect the Parliament itself, but also have a say over who would head the EU executive – the European Commission. What became known as the 'Spitzenkandidaten process' is a procedure whereby European political parties, ahead of European elections, appoint lead candidates for the role of Commission President, with the presidency of the Commission then going to the candidate of the political party capable of marshalling sufficient parliamentary support. The Parliament remains firmly committed to repeating the process in 2019 and, with EP elections now only weeks away, attention has shifted to the European political parties. A number of parties have nominated lead candidates, and this briefing gives an overview of their nominees, as well as looking more broadly at the process. This is a revised and further updated edition of an earlier briefing; previous edition from February 2019. Lead candidates of the six European political parties due to participate in the Eurovision debate, to be held in Parliament’s Brussels hemicycle, on 15 May 2019. EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Laura Tilindyte Members' Research Service PE 630.264 – April 2019 EN EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service The 2019 elections: European political parties It is widely acknowledged that the European political parties will play a crucial role for the future of the Spitzenkandidaten procedure. In this respect, commentators consistently point to the daunting and, before 2014, unprecedented challenge of a multilingual, continent-wide campaign in 27 or 28 countries, each with their own political culture and sensitivities.1 The Commission has made recommendations (February 2018) in this regard, suggesting, for example, earlier selection of the lead candidates (ideally by the end of 2018), leaving more time for the campaign.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter from Guy Verhofstadt MEP to Seema Malhotra MP
    2 7 SEP 201& Member of the European Parliament European Parliament Brexit Coordinator Group of the Alliance of liberals and Democrats for Europe The Chair D 314758 18.09.201 8 Ms Seema Malhotra MP House ofCommons London, SWIA OAA United Kingdom Dear Ms Malhotra, At my hearing before the Exiting the European Union Select Committee on 20 June 2018, you asked me a question on the impact ofBrexit on existing contracts. I promised that Jwould get back to you in writing on this issue. When it comes to ensuring the continuity of contracts concluded before Brexit - such as insurance and OTC derivatives contracts - the assessment made by the EU so far indicates that issues are likely to be linked to a far more limited set ofcontracts than initially feared by some. As regards cross-border insurance contracts, the vast majority are one-off or short term year contracts like travel insurance. For these contracts there are no cliff-edge risks. For the rather limited number of cross-border EU-UK insurance contracts that would still be in place after the UK's withdrawal, they would remain valid and the performance of existing obligations under the contract could generally continue to take place. This would mean that there is as a rule no issue ofcontract continuity. In the case of uncleared OTC derivatives, many of these contracls expire before March 30, 2019. In addition, derivative contracts concluded between UK and EU market participants should in principle remain valid. As analysis from market participants has shown, under the applicable national third country provisions of different Member States the performance of existing obligations under the contract could continue.
    [Show full text]
  • Guy Verhofstadt Speaker Profile
    Guy Verhofstadt Member of the European Parliament, 47th Prime Minister of Belgium (1999 - 2008) Guy Verhofstadt is one of Europe's most experienced leaders and is currently the leader of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), the centrist-liberal grouping in the European parliament. He is also the former prime minister of Belgium. Guy argues for reform to the EU so that it focuses much more on the key problems facing both Europe and the world - the economic crisis, crime, the disparity between rich and poor, and other key political issues "One of the architects of the current structure of power in the European Union" In detail Languages Guy Verhofstadt became president of the Flemish Liberal He presents in English, Dutch & French. Student's Union (1972-1974) while studying law in Ghent. He began his political career as a Ghent city councilor in 1976. In Want to know more? 1982, at the age of 29, he became president of the PVV, the Give us a call or send us an e-mail to find out exactly what he Flemish Liberal Party. He was elected to the Chamber of Deputies could bring to your event. - the lower house of Belgian's Federal Parliament - in 1985, and he served as deputy prime minister and minister of budget and How to book him? scientific research until 1988. Prime Minister Verhofstadt led the Simply phone or e-mail us. transformation of the PVV into the VLD, the Flemish Liberals and Democrats, in 1992, and was elected to the Belgian Senate three Publications years later.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe and the Vanishing Two-State Solution
    EUROPE AND THE VANISHING TWO-STATE SOLUTION Nick Witney ABOUT ECFR The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) is the first pan-European think-tank. Launched in October 2007, its objective is to conduct research and promote informed debate across Europe on the development of coherent, effective and values-based European foreign policy. ECFR has developed a strategy with three distinctive elements that define its activities: •A pan-European Council. ECFR has brought together a distinguished Council of over two hundred Members – politicians, decision makers, thinkers and business people from the EU’s member states and candidate countries – which meets once a year as a full body. Through geographical and thematic task forces, members provide ECFR staff with advice and feedback on policy ideas and help with ECFR’s activities within their own countries. The Council is chaired by Martti Ahtisaari, Joschka Fischer and Mabel van Oranje. • A physical presence in the main EU member states. ECFR, uniquely among European think-tanks, has offices in Berlin, London, Madrid, Paris, Rome, Sofia and Warsaw. In the future ECFR plans to open an office in Brussels. Our offices are platforms for research, debate, advocacy and communications. • A distinctive research and policy development process. ECFR has brought together a team of distinguished researchers and practitioners from all over Europe to advance its objectives through innovative projects with a pan-European focus. ECFR’s activities include primary research, publication of policy reports, private meetings and public debates, ‘friends of ECFR’ gatherings in EU capitals and outreach to strategic media outlets. ECFR is a registered charity funded by the Open Society Foundations and other generous foundations, individuals and corporate entities.
    [Show full text]
  • LETTER from the HOME SECRETARY to the EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT BREXIT COORDINATOR Guy Verhofstadt Member of the European Parliament
    LETTER FROM THE HOME SECRETARY TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT BREXIT COORDINATOR Guy Verhofstadt Member of the European Parliament European Parliament Brexit Coordinator Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Dear Mr Verhofstadt Thank you for your letter of 30 April and for inviting Home Office officials to present to members of the European Parliament the draft online administrative procedure (Settlement Scheme), which is being developed by the Home Office to allow EU citizens and their family members in the UK to demonstrate in future their rights, as provided for in the Withdrawal Agreement. The UK Government’s key priority, like that of the European Parliament, is to make this process simple and effective for EU citizens. Our default position will be to say ‘yes’ to applications. As you say, we are still developing the system and discussing its design with stakeholders in the UK, as we head towards launch of the Scheme by the end of this year. I therefore welcome views from you and your colleagues, and would like to provide some further information and clarify some of the points you raised in turn. The UK Government is equally committed to the interests of UK nationals living and working in the EU, and we would welcome further details on how the administrative procedures will be enacted in other Member States. It is currently unclear what systems other EU Member States are creating to ensure the rights of UK nationals in their countries are protected after the end of the implementation period and we would welcome it if the European Parliament were also willing to focus attention on Member States’ plans.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Members
    Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean Members David Maria SASSOLI Chair Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament Italy Partito Democratico Asim ADEMOV Member Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) Bulgaria Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria Alex AGIUS SALIBA Member Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament Malta Partit Laburista François ALFONSI Member Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance France Régions et Peuples Solidaires Malik AZMANI Member Renew Europe Group Netherlands Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie Nicolas BAY Member Identity and Democracy Group France Rassemblement national Tiziana BEGHIN Member Non-attached Members Italy Movimento 5 Stelle François-Xavier BELLAMY Member Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) France Les Républicains Sergio BERLATO Member European Conservatives and Reformists Group Italy Fratelli d'Italia Manuel BOMPARD Member The Left group in the European Parliament - GUE/NGL France La France Insoumise 24/09/2021 1 Sylvie BRUNET Member Renew Europe Group France Mouvement Démocrate Jorge BUXADÉ VILLALBA Member European Conservatives and Reformists Group Spain VOX Catherine CHABAUD Member Renew Europe Group France Mouvement Démocrate Nathalie COLIN-OESTERLÉ Member Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats) France Les centristes Gilbert COLLARD Member Identity and Democracy Group France Rassemblement national
    [Show full text]
  • Bridging the Gap – the New Cast in Europe Taking Over Brexit Negotiations
    Bridging the Gap – the new cast in Europe taking over Brexit negotiations By Beverley Nielsen, Associate Professor at Birmingham City University’s IDEA Institute and Senior Fellow at BCU’s Centre for Brexit Studies, Liberal Democrat Councillor on Malvern Hills District Council and responsible for the Economic Development & Tourism Portfolio Since the European elections in early May 2019 the European Parliament party groupings have been busy forming a ‘grand’ central coalition bringing together the three largest groups including the centre right European People’s Party (EPP) with 215 MEPs, Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (Socialists) with 154 MEPs, Renew Europe with 108 MEPs (formerly known as Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in Europe, ALDE). Whilst talks have also included the Greens with 71 MEPs , they have so far held back from formally signing up. These Parties have been working together on a joint programme for the Parliament through June, agreeing that key positions in the EU should be shared more equitably given that each of these groups now has around 100-200s MEPs each between them, with Renew seeing the largest increases from 67-108, Socialists the largest falls from 221 to 154, EPP with 215 remaining the largest single grouping and with the Greens also making substantial gains up from 50 to 71 seats. The fact that a woman is now proposed for the top job of President of the Commission seems to have occurred more by accident than design. Following election losses suffered by the Socialists it was felt inappropriate for them to have the nomination for Commission President, and subsequently agreed that the EPP should have the right to propose their candidate for this role, with the Liberals taking the top job at the Council.
    [Show full text]