The head of the European People’s Party, Manfred Weber, was brimming with satisfaction on Wednesday in Strasbourg, repeating as his great and personal achievement the securing of a broad cross-party majority, which reached even the group of European Conservatives and Reformists (Meloni and others), with which was approved in its entirety by the new European Commission. Whether this majority characterizes the work of this term of the European Parliament remains to be seen. However, the 370 “yes” was not an overwhelming majority, and it was certainly below the 401 that von der Leyen herself had obtained.

So it will be more interesting to see the political imprint on the decisions, which will be approved in the coming months and years, then the undeniable strengthening of forces, which once rejected the idea of ​​a united Europe and now clarify that they just want to give it a different, more ethnocentric orientation.

The conundrum of the Mercosur agreement

As far as the “Commission von der Leyen 2.0” itself is concerned, it is already called to fall into the deep end next week. The first big bet is the Mercosur agreement for EU-Latin American trade cooperation, which should normally be signed on December 6 in Montevideo, Uruguay and then ratified at the December summit. It’s a case that countless community workers have worked on for 25 years, but it looks far from assured.

These days the government of the considered pro-European Donald Tusk, Prime Minister of Poland, has made it clear that he is not going to approve it in its current form. In other words, he sided with the Macron government, which has expressed exactly the same position. This stance takes into account the protests of farmers in both countries, who believe they will not withstand unfair competition from their South American counterparts. Other countries have also expressed objections, without taking a clear position, such as Austria, while the supporters of the agreement include Germany, which is pushing.

Italy’s position remains unclear. It is no coincidence that French Prime Minister Michel Barnier will travel to Rome next week – his first trip abroad since taking office – with this issue dominating his agenda. If he manages to convince the Italians to join him, then the series of postponements may continue. A peculiar European protectionism, in response to national interests?

Alliances with national criteria

The “fronts” that are created in the EU are therefore not that solid. Indeed, they often transcend ideological differences, especially when national interests come before ideological orientations. Not all of the Renew group is for example on the Macron line on the issue, nor is all of the European People’s Party on the Tusk line.

In fact, what many conservative MPs asked of the Commission on Wednesday is happening. “Returning” powers to the national level for a number of sensitive issues. This tendency may not be institutionalized, but it seems to be tolerated by the president of the Commission, who showed that she is more interested in the image, i.e. the numbers and the occasional majorities, and not so much in giving a clear mark of intentions for the directions of the Commission of the new team.

China and fiscal policies

It’s not just trade with Latin America. Corresponding and probably much greater problems may arise in dealing with China. The hard “American” line of punishing Beijing with tariffs, which von der Leyen appears to be adopting, is not only exciting in Berlin. At a time when German industry, especially its most energy-intensive part, is constantly reeling from the consequences of the loss of cheap Russian energy, another loss, that of such an important trading partner as China, would deal it a fatal blow.

The line that the Commission will draw from now on in matters of fiscal policy will also be of great interest. Italy and France already have deficits well above the permissible limits and are already on the “red list”. But at the same time in Berlin even the Christian Democrats seem to understand that between respect for the logic of the “debt brake” and its obsessive, theological treatment, lines should be drawn. So will the Commission choose the role of “Cerberus” or will it pave the way for a more magnanimous approach to the issue?

Opportunity majorities lead to zig zags

The contradictions are many and they don’t stop here, in a landscape that everyone characterizes as not just difficult, but unexplored. Because Europe is once again faced with a Trump president, but not with two wars “running”, the climate crisis seems out of control and societies exhausted by the pandemic, the energy crisis and inflation. All this cannot be dealt with by “opportunity majorities”, which the president of the Commission often seems to bet on, nor by her good public relations with like-minded prime ministers.

What appeared to be missing on Wednesday in the debate leading up to the votes in the European Parliament is a clear “map” for the EU’s path, which will understandably not be able to satisfy everyone.

The illusion that Europe will escape its deadlocks with a la carte deals, sometimes looking to the right and less often to the left, could prove disastrous. Zig-zagging not only wastes valuable time, but you may end up losing your way.