By Cinzia Alcidi

After months of uncertainty and escalating rhetoric, a new EU-US trade deal has finally been announced. Under the deal, a 15% US tariff will apply to most EU imports, including cars, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. This is higher than the 10% rate applied to most imports from the EU since April, but lower than the 30% tariff President Trump had threatened just days earlier. A 50% tariff remains on steel and aluminium, with further negotiations expected in those sectors.

In return, the EU has committed to eliminating existing sectoral tariffs, notably the 10% duty on car imports. The deal also includes an EU pledge to purchase more US gas (USD 750 billion by 2028), along with an unspecified amount of military equipment, and to raise its overall investment in the US by USD 600 billion.

The deal has been widely criticised on the European side, viewed by some as a weak EU capitulating to Trump’s demands, unable to mount an effective response. While that perception is difficult to counter, the reality is much more complex and nuanced.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Stefaan Verhulst

Europe is facing a defining moment in its approach to science, research and innovation. As geopolitical tensions mount and investment in dual-use technologies surges, the EU is being called to reimagine its research policy – not just for strategic autonomy but for lasting societal relevance and real global impact.

At a recent CEPS dialogue on ‘Reimagining EU Research and Innovation Policy,’ this author focused on five asymmetries that policymakers absolutely must address if Europe is to avoid a future of diminished influence, declining trust and squandered opportunity. And the best way to avoid such a future is to build a truly (open) Science Stack.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Antigona Imeri

Since November 2024, Serbia has experienced a huge wave of anti-government protests. As students and citizens continue to pump up the situation by doubling down on their demands, the government’s intimidation attempts continues. By imprisoning students and activists, and cutting professors’ salaries, the regime is effectively punishing anyone who aligns with the pro-democracy movement.

Brussels’ response? In short – not good enough.

It’s mostly carefully worded declarations acknowledging the crisis but without any meaningful action. Despite being attacked by Serbian pro-government media, Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos has tried to echo EU values through a form of dual diplomacy – openly supporting the protesters while avoiding direct criticism of the government.

High Representative Kaja Kallas’s recent visit stood out for its firmer language, urging Serbia to strategically orient itself towards the EU. But what felt like a promising stance ended with a willingness to understand President Aleksander Vučić’s ‘side of the story’.

More troubling was their boss’s position. Just weeks after one of Serbia’s largest protests on 15 March, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, together with Council President Antonio Costa, chose to host Vučić for a dinner. What followed was a tonal shift, from von der Leyen’s praise last October over Serbia’s accession progress to new but vague calls for Serbia to make ‘real progress’ on EU reforms. Not only did this meeting signal the EU’s indifference to the Serbians mobilising in the streets but the empty rhetoric signalled their further abandonment – this time concluded with dessert.

Continuously choosing handshakes over accountability, one might ask why the EU – whose foundation rests on democracy, the rule of law and human rights – remains mostly silent about growing autocracy in a candidate country, all while continuing business as usual.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Sophia Russack

This week’s motion of censure against President Ursula von der Leyen’s Commission was not about vaccines but rather a proxy war over the emerging centre-to-far-right alliances in the European Parliament (EP), with the far right exploiting the tool to destabilise and divide. Many MEPs —particularly from the centre left— also opted to abstain to signal their discontent without formally breaking ranks.

Overall, the debacle reflects a deepening rift between the EPP and the S&D, Renew and the Greens, signalling a new, increasingly polarised, even hostile, dynamic within the EPP. But it also reveals a deeper unease with von der Leyen’s leadership style – never have so many MEPs withheld their support from a Commission President in such a visible way.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Louise Bengtsson and Hampus Holmer

When the Council conclusions on the Global Health Strategy – and disclaimer, one of us helped draft those conclusions – were adopted by ministers in January 2024, it marked a moment of real ambition. For the first time in over a decade, EU Member States endorsed a comprehensive vision for Europe’s role in strengthening global health, rooted in equity, resilience and multilateral cooperation. Going beyond the EU’s role in development cooperation, the strategy clearly established health as an integral part of the EU’s foreign policy and the Global Gateway.

The EU Global Health Strategy underpinning the conclusions was launched in November 2022. Since then, the international landscape has shifted. Geopolitical tensions have intensified, development assistance has declined, multilateralism is under pressure and major global health agreements have stalled or been diluted – except perhaps the Pandemic Agreement adopted in May.

Today, if the EU wants to turn strategy into real-world influence, it needs more than just policy documents – it needs political leadership.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Cinzia Alcidi

In recent weeks, EU leaders have voiced their support for strengthening the euro’s global role. Christine Lagarde has called for a ‘global euro’ moment and recent Council conclusions affirm the EU’s commitment to reinforcing the euro as both a reserve and transaction currency.

Shifting global dynamics, accompanied by the US dollar’s vulnerability, and driven by the current US administration’s erratic foreign policy and deepening fiscal challenges, are creating a favourable environment for elevating the euro’s global standing.

For Europe, this is both an opportunity and a challenge. A stronger global euro could indeed bolster the EU’s strategic autonomy, making it more resilient in an increasingly weaponised international economic landscape. Yet this requires more than just political rhetoric. It demands long overdue and politically sensitive steps towards deeper economic and financial integration, on which progress has stalled for years.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Ceren Ergenc

The second Trump administration has intensified the global reshuffling of geoeconomic alliances following China’s phenomenal industrial growth and its near domination of new technology markets. While it increasingly feels like a new superpower tussle, middle powers and developing countries can still choose from multiple alignments and derisking strategies better aligned with their specific development and security goals.

With the Competitiveness Compass, the EU has recognised that it’s lagging in global competitiveness, meaning that it plans to shift from a development-focused role to ‘open strategic autonomy’, namely prioritising its own re-industrialisation.

Enter the Global Gateway, increasingly the subject of intense debate in Brussels. That’s why the second Global Gateway Forum planned for mid-October 2025 will be fundamental in defining its future trajectory.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

By Apostolos Thomadakis and J. Scott Marcus

The EU’s sustainability reporting rules urgently need to be recalibrated. What began as a bold legislative push to steer markets towards environmental and social goals is now showing signs of regulatory overreach. Companies, especially SMEs, are struggling to navigate three major frameworks: the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the EU Taxonomy Regulation.

The European Commission’s proposed Omnibus Directive is meant to ease this burden. But a CEPS independent analysis, conducted for the European Parliament (EP), finds that the proposal falls short. It focuses too narrowly on reducing the number of companies in scope or the frequency of reporting, while overlooking the deeper challenge – namely the cumulative and interdependent nature of the obligations these frameworks impose in practice.

The real issue isn’t legal duplication but operational convergence. Unless this is addressed through more integrated guidance, coherent standards and clear reporting pathways, Europe risks undermining both its sustainability ambitions and its global competitiveness.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.