Poland in Cyprus

Are we Europeans capable of finding agreement? This is undoubtedly an existential question we Europeans must answer today, especially those of us who bear the responsibility of leaving future generations a strong Europe with a voice of its own; a Europe that remains the project of peace and democracy that our founding fathers, from Schumann to Willy Brandt, left us; a Europe that has a say.

 

War has returned to the European continent. Russia's aggression against Ukraine has shattered long-held assumptions about security in Europe and reminded us that peace cannot be taken for granted. At the same time, authoritarian powers are gaining confidence, economic coercion is increasingly used as an instrument of statecraft, and the rules-based international order faces growing pressure.

 

Those are real threats, but also reasons to move forward with even greater determination. The only way we can move forward is not with more nationalism, but with greater unity. Not just with more rules and procedures, but with greater political will. These are the two driving forces of Europe, and that is why those who want us to be weak, small, and divided – the enemies of Europe both outside and within our borders – target us there. The fact that two countries as geographically distant and with histories as different as Spain and Poland share a vision of a common future is the magic that makes Europe possible.

 

A strong, democratic, and secure Europe, we build on a genuine European sovereignty, should rest on three fundamental pillars:

 

The first one is the economy. As stated in the Letta and Draghi reports, we must complete the single market to boost the competitiveness of our companies, finalize the integration of capital markets, build a true European digital market, and prevent innovation that is generated in Europe from being financed and exploited primarily by external actors. At the same time, however, we must ensure that we complete the process of closing the development gap within the EU. That is why we are working together within the informal group of Friends of Cohesion Policy. We are also open to deepening trade relations with third countries, but at the same time we must protect our industry, strengthen certain sectors and leverage our market advantages.

 

Second, we must underpin the Europe of democracy and values. Our strength does not derive solely from the size of our market or the sophistication of our institutions. It derives from our commitment to democracy, political pluralism, the rule of law, and the protection of individual freedoms. These principles are not abstract aspirations. They are the foundation of European stability, prosperity, and legitimacy, which are facing growing pressure. Russia's war against Ukraine is not merely an attack on a sovereign state; it is an assault on the principle that borders cannot be changed by force and that nations have the right to choose their own future. At the same time, democratic institutions across Europe are being tested by polarization, disinformation, and challenges to the rule of law. We cannot assume that the achievements of previous generations will sustain themselves.

 

In this regard, enlargement constitutes more than just a technical challenge. The European Union already has effective mechanisms in place to ensure the successful integration of new members in areas such as the economy, agriculture, industrial policy, and fiscal stability. However, recent experience shows that it is more difficult to ensure continued respect for democratic values. It is not enough to meet democratic requirements when accession to the European Union takes place. The European Union must have mechanisms in place to address unacceptable democratic backsliding once a country has become a member.

 

The third, refers to security and defense. Russia, as it keeps fighting in Donbas for the thirteenth year, has indeed failed to achieve its objectives and paid a heavy price for its aggression. Europe has stood up and remained consistent. Sanctions have weakened its long-term economic prospects, and the war has exposed serious limitations in its military capabilities. Yet the threat has not disappeared. The outcome of this war will shape the European security order for decades. If aggression is rewarded, it will be repeated. If Ukraine prevails, Europe will reaffirm a fundamental principle: the rule of international law and the UN Charter, which implies that borders cannot be changed by force and sovereign nations are free to choose their own future. Supporting Ukraine is therefore not simply an act of solidarity. It is an investment in Europe's own security. A Europe that, from Africa to the Middle East, plays an active role in promoting peace, security and stability.

 

Both the war in Ukraine and the escalation of the conflict in the Middle East compel us to consider a more ambitious common defense and security policy that would allow us to have our security and our deterrence in our own hands.Strength repels; weakness provokes.

 

Cooperation with the United States remains essential, but the truth is that the Americans themselves are encouraging us Europeans to take on an increasing share of the responsibility for our own defense. To become stronger, we need to develop our European capabilities in harmony with our NATO allies.

 

This seems an enormous challenge, but there are reasons for optimism. We have a magnificent precedent in Airbus, a project that began with a clear technological disadvantage compared to the United States and went on to become a global leader. The European defense industry could follow a similar path.

 

To advance in all these fields – economy, democracy, and security – we do not have to wait for all 27 Member States to be in complete agreement. We can move forward through a system of ambitious projects under the enhanced cooperation mechanism, as was the case with the creation of Schengen or European Prosecutor’s Office. The key is that these leading initiatives remain open so that other States can join later. We recognise the value of consensus in fostering ownership of key EU initiatives but we must reflect on the lessons learnt from the situation where one Member State blocked our key decisions.

 

In this environment, Europe's choice is clear. We can either act together and remain a global actor capable of shaping events, or we can allow ourselves to become spectators of decisions taken elsewhere. The question is who will become the third leg of global power. We know what should be the anwser.