Articles Archive

While transport poverty does not affect the majority of the population, available data shows that it impacts a significant and growing portion of Czech society, making it a serious issue that cannot be overlooked or expected to resolve itself over time. This policy paper by research fellow Rebeka Hengalová and head of Green Europe programme Jana Abíková details the experiences of transport-poor citizens, outlines good practice of measures from abroad and explains the potential utilisation of the Social Climate Fund in alleviating transport poverty.

The Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) is the EU's key instrument for determining the expenditure and revenue components of the common European budget. The negotiations on the long-term budget are among the most important and lengthy at European level. It decides on overall spending in traditional areas such as agriculture and cohesion, but also on new priorities such as defence and competitiveness. The European Commission is expected to present its proposal for the 2028-2034 financial framework by mid-2025, but informal discussions on the shape of the proposal are already taking place at both working and political level - the new European Commissioner for Budgets is now touring Member States and the Commission has launched a public consultation on the subject. The Commission has already presented the broad outlines of the next MFF, including a greater focus on efficiency, added value and simplification. It has also stressed the need for more flexibility to make the budget more responsive to crises. The number of (old) new priorities, including defence, climate and competitiveness, also raises the question of the size of the next European budget and new own resources. The current debate on the Czech priorities for the next MFF is therefore more than appropriate and the Czech Republic should actively enter into negotiations at the European level. The background paper for the round table of the National Convention on the EU was prepared by Josef Bič (FSV VŠE) and Filip Křenek (EUROPEUM).

In 2019, the green agenda became the flagship of the European Commission’s politics in the face of the European Green Deal. Five years later, the re-elected Ursula von der Leyen would like to keep this agenda as the number one priority for the next political cycle, expressing this goal also in her political guidelines. Meanwhile, major geopolitical events during the last couple of years have led to an unprecedented interest in the security of energy and raw material supplies. These topics started to gain significant attention during the Covid-19 pandemic, then surged further in the following energy crises, and finally peaked after the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war. Even though the question of energy and supply security has global implications and is being discussed globally, Europe was particularly affected by these aforementioned events, writes Gábor Papp, a Research Fellow at the Hungarian Institute of International Affairs, in his policy brief.

The first-ever European Defence Industrial Strategy (EDIS) was introduced by the European Commission and the High Representative/Vice-President for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR/VP) in March 2024, addressing key challenges in the European defence industry. The strategy aims to increase European defence industrial readiness, encourage Member States to invest in the European defence industry, and reinforce joint European defence procurement and ownership. EU Member States from Central Europe have played a crucial role in supporting Ukraine after the start of the Russian unprovoked and illegal full-scale invasion in February 2022. They also stressed the need to focus the EU's efforts on new initiatives in the field of defence and the defence industry, such as the Act in Support of Ammunition Production or enhancing the European Defence Fund. Writes Timotej Kováčik, Junior Researcher/Analyst focusing on security and defense issues, the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy, and energy security at the Slovak Foreign Policy Association.

For over two decades, there have been numerous attempts to define and frame the relations between the EU and NATO. Three joint declarations and significant steps ahead have been taken and yet, there is no clear vision of how these two organisations should work together more efficiently. The commonly accepted idea of cooperation sees “NATO pulling the strings and the EU pushing the funds” in accordance with their respective nature and scope. Is this unbalanced relation the most suitable strategy to counter current geopolitical threats? No. But can this cooperation be upgraded? Possibly, yet this appears to be easier said than done. Providing the EU with a coherent defence policy and a strong industrial base can be a great additional value for NATO and not just in the extreme case of a possible disengagement of the US. Writes Federica Mangiameli, Programme Manager and Policy Fellow for Defence and Security at GLOBSEC, in her Policy Paper.

Russia’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine in February 2022 has brought EU enlargement back as a priority of the EU policy towards the neighbourhood and as a geopolitical tool to ensure peace, stability and prosperity on the entire continent. That resulted in the EU recognising the aspiration of the Associated Trio countries to join the EU and granting membership candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova in 2022 and to Georgia in 2023. In record time, the former two countries also started the EU accession process in June 2024. The accession process of the candidates from the Western Balkans also accelerated. Bosnia and Hercegovina was granted the candidacy status and accession talks with Albania and North Macedonia started in 2022. However, despite the general consensus that enlargement is a geopolitical necessity, the question posed by French President Emmanuel Macron in Bratislava in 2023 – How should we do it? – still remains unanswered. Writes Marta Szpala, a Senior Fellow in the Central European Department at the Center for Eastern Studies.

Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has led to significant changes in the Ukrainian transport sector due to disruptions in supply chains, cargo flows, and damage of the country’s infrastructure. The Ukrainian transport system has undergone significant transformations. The country's borders with Russia and Belarus and its airspace have been closed. In the first months of the full-scale war, the temporary blockage on the operation of Black Sea ports forced Ukraine to develop land transport corridors to the EU countries and neighboring Moldova to enable both export and import of goods needed for the economy. Despite the ongoing war, Ukraine has accelerated a long-planned reform of the country's transport system to adapt its infrastructure to the EU standards and integrate it with the European transport network. Writes Sandra Baniak, a Research Fellow at the Centre for Eastern Studies in the Connectivity and Regional Integration Programme.

The war between Israel and Hezbollah, after a phase of full-scale confrontation, was halted by an armistice concluded at the end of 2024. The situation, however, remains far from stable, and the effects of the crisis are long-term. The surprise caused by the 7 October attack was shared by the European Union. The new iteration of the crisis in the Middle East represented another major political challenge for the European community, overlapping with those related to the Russia-Ukraine war, the migration crisis and other pressing issues requiring Union’s involvement. The EU's policies towards Israel and Palestine came under scrutiny, and the situation once again highlighted the extensive level of divisions among the EU states, affecting the potency and perception of its actions. Writes Michał Wojnarowicz, an Israel and Palestine analyst in the Middle East and Africa program at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, in his policy paper.

On March 17th, the Brussels Office of EUROPEUM representing the Think Visegrad Platform co-organised with IRSEM Europe (The Institute for Strategic Research at the Military School) a public event entitled ‘European Defence at a Crossroads: Can the EU Build a Stronger Defence Industry?’ The event took place at IRSEM-Europe Offices, 73 Rue de Namur, with a participation of thirtyseven leading experts, policymakers, and civil society actors. The aim of the discussion was to examine the fundamental transformation in Europe’s security architecture, and to consider the challenges and opportunities in developing a more independent European defence and security framework.

On March 5th, the Brussels Office of EUROPEUM representing the Think Visegrad Platform co-organised with SWP Brussels – Stiftung Wissenchaft und Politik organised a roundtable discussion entitled, Navigating Uncertainty: The EU’s Economic Security in an Era of Geopolitical Rivalry. The event took place at the Résidence Palace, Rue de la Loi, with a participation of 16 experts. The aim of the discussion was to explore how the new European Commission can develop a cohesive and proactive economic security strategy to enhance the EU's resilience and competitiveness amidst intensifying geopolitical and economic challenges.

This blog addresses the current challenges that have their origin in the social and political climate and are the root cause of the low representation of women in the Slovak and Czech diplomatic environment, despite repeated initiatives, European political agendas and other efforts, which have failed to improve this disbalance. Writes Kristína Gerová, an intern at the Brussels Office.

Ukraine has been trying to become part of the European Union since the Orange Revolution in 2004, while European decision-makers lacked the political will to continue the enlargement, and the process has been stagnating for many years. All this changed suddenly after the Russian aggression in 2022, after which the accession process accelerated, but now it turned to another extreme: the statements on Ukraine’s quick EU accession became too unrealistic, creating false hopes. Writes Anton Bendarzsevszkij, Director of Oeconomus Economic Research Institute, in his Policy Brief.