World
Will the EU take a step backwards in evidence-based policymaking?
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.
Uncertainty and ‘polycrisis’ call for more use of foresight methods, not less. Being guided by the wealth of evidence available is the best way for the EU to set an agenda for a secure, prosperous, and sustainable future, Elizabeth Dirth and Jonas Gissel Mikkelsen write.
Responsible policymakers are informed by evidence, especially in times of uncertainty. To navigate complex trade-offs, deal with unpredictability, and balance the interests of the present, the near- and the far-future, evidence-based strategic foresight is a powerful compass to guide decisions.
Used well, Europe’s advanced foresight tools can give it a long-term competitive edge.
That’s why it’s so alarming that EU heads of state and government appear to be ready to ignore the wealth of evidence at their disposal, if the leaked priority-setting document for the next five years of the EU institutions – the Strategic Agenda – does not change.
The provisional priorities, which have been drafted through a series of consultations with European leaders led by European Council President Charles Michel, are not coherent with the EU’s own foresight intelligence.
The most glaring discrepancy is the absence of sustainability. Shifting towards sustainability has been a consistent pillar of future-focused policymaking recommendations, but this does not appear in the draft priorities for 2024-2029.
One leap forward, two steps back?
The evidence at leaders’ disposal has been meticulously assembled. Over the last five years the EU has taken leaps forward in “future thinking” and equipped itself with a vast quantity of information and insights about the possible “futures” we face, summarised in the annual Strategic Foresight reports. Strategic foresight is a serious discipline; a systemic way to help prepare for future shocks and opportunities.
In 2019, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen created, for the first time, a position dedicated to the task of embedding strategic foresight in the heart of EU policymaking. Executive Vice-President and European Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič has been the face of foresight since then.
Under his tenure the capacity to deliver future intelligence has been strengthened in the Commission’s in-house science unit, the Joint Research Centre, and in the central Secretariat General which reports directly to von der Leyen.
In parallel, an internal network of foresight practitioners has been built-up, and a group of Ministers for the Future from the national level has been convened.
All this has fed into robust annual reports which provide a body of evidence on the threats and trends Europe needs to prepare for and identify “key action areas” to inform the European Commission’s work and the direction of the bloc.
Resilience, sustainability and wellbeing have been constant themes over recent years. As have security and defence, democracy and the rule of law.
But whilst the latter group are well catered for in the new Strategic Agenda, environment and climate considerations and sustainable wellbeing are practically non-existent.
EU leaders ignoring the evidence
Looking at the leaked draft of EU leaders’ top priorities side-by-side with the most recent strategic foresight report, it appears that the insights which the European Commission has invested the last five years in building up are being ignored.
Last year’s foresight communication was titled “Sustainability and people’s wellbeing at the heart of Europe’s Open Strategic Autonomy”.
The 21-page document names “sustainable” or “sustainability” no fewer than 80 times. Of its 10 priority areas for action, six are actions about delivering a sustainable transition – through a net-zero economy, shifts in production and consumption, financial flows, public budgets, indicators, and by making sure all Europeans can contribute to the transition.
The draft five-year agenda relegates resilience, a goal for which the current Commission mobilised €648 billion, to one narrow reference in relation to resource-use. Climate is mentioned only two times – once in connection to innovation, and once in the bullet point: “Prepare for the new realities stemming from climate change”.
Neither decarbonisation nor net-zero were worthy of mention by heads of state, despite the binding goal of a net-zero Europe by 2050.
In other words, key priorities from the EU’s official unit for future-preparedness are largely missing from guidance issued by EU heads of state.
And whilst the leaked Strategic Agenda overlooks key aspects of the EU’s own research and evidence, neither is it informed by public opinion.
Recent EU Barometer polls tell us 85% of EU citizens think climate action leads to greater wellbeing and more jobs, 78% think climate action will help the economy, and 83% agree that the EU should invest massively in renewable energies. (The EU Barometers are another rich source of evidence – this one focused on public attitudes and citizens’ support for policies – which EU leaders appear to be opting to disregard.)
We need a foresight-based strategy for Europe
Aligning the EU priorities 2024-2029 with foresight and public opinion is crucial, and still possible. The key areas of action flowing from the foresight reports can complete the draft Strategic Agenda with missing elements, primarily sustainability.
Uncertainty and “polycrisis” call for more use of foresight methods, not less, for example via a “chief foresighter” at EU level to embed the practice across policy areas and institutions.
Being guided by the wealth of evidence available is the best way for the EU to set an agenda for a secure, prosperous, sustainable future.
Elizabeth Dirth is Managing Director at the ZOE Institute for Future-fit Economies, and Jonas Gissel Mikkelsen is Director and Futurist at the Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies.
Contact us at view@euronews.com to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.
World
Mexico pyramid shooter who took hostages and killed 1 is identified
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A gunman who fatally shot a Canadian tourist and wounded more than a dozen others atop a historic pyramid in Mexico on Monday has been identified, according to officials.
Authorities identified the gunman as 27-year-old Julio Cesar Jasso, a Mexican national, according to a state official who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to discuss the case publicly.
Jasso later died by suicide after turning the gun on himself, and security officials found a gun, a knife and ammunition. Authorities said he acted alone, with the State of Mexico government confirming he was the sole assailant on Monday night.
Officials said seven of the victims were struck by gunfire, while others were hurt in the chaos as people scrambled to get down from the pyramids, with some falling during the panic.
EX-TV REPORTER ALLEGEDLY TURNED ROADSIDE GUNMAN, GRILLED VICTIMS ON ETHNICITY BEFORE OPENING FIRE
The Pyramid of the Moon and the Pyramid of the Sun are seen along with smaller structures lining the Avenue of the Dead in Teotihuacan, Mexico, on March 19, 2020. A gunman killed a Canadian tourist and injured several others before taking his own life at the popular site, authorities said Monday. (Rebecca Blackwell/AP)
Those hospitalized included tourists from several countries, among them the United States, Colombia, Russia, Brazil and Canada, authorities said. The victims ranged in age from 6 to 61.
Footage circulating in local media appears to show the suspect positioned atop the structure as visitors rushed for safety below, with gunfire echoing across the site.
Police and forensic workers stand on a pyramid after authorities said a gunman opened fire in Teotihuacan, Mexico, Monday, April 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Eduardo Verdugo)
The Teotihuacan complex, located just outside Mexico City, is one of the country’s most visited archaeological landmarks, drawing millions of international visitors each year to its towering pre-Hispanic structures.
MOSCOW-BORN GUNMAN DEAD AFTER KYIV SHOOTING RAMPAGE LEAVES AT LEAST 6 DEAD, 14 WOUNDED: ZELENSKYY
The shooting took place shortly after 11:30 a.m. when dozens of tourists were at the top of the Pyramid of the Moon.
Security measures at the site have changed in recent years, with routine entry screenings no longer consistently in place, according to a local guide.
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum wrote on social media that the shooting would be investigated and that she was in touch with the Canadian Embassy.
SUSPECTED BLUE CITY GUNMEN KILL INNOCENT GIRL IN REVENGE SHOOTING AT HOME: SHERIFF
“What happened today in Teotihuacán deeply pains us. I express my most sincere solidarity with the affected individuals and their families,” she wrote.
Anita Anand, Canada’s foreign affairs minister, said on X that as a “result of a horrific act of gun violence, a Canadian was killed and another wounded in Teotihuacán” and that her “thoughts are with their family and loved ones.”
People visit the Pyramid of the Sun in the pre-Hispanic city of Teotihuacan near Mexico City, Mexico, on March 21, 2024, following the spring equinox. (Henry Romero/Reuters)
Later in the evening, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Ronald Johnson also expressed “deep concern” and sadness over the deaths and numerous injuries, and said in a post on X that the U.S. is “ready to provide support as needed while Mexican authorities continue their investigation.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The National Institute of Anthropology and History said in a statement that the Teotihuacán archaeological site will remain closed until further notice.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
World
Appetite among NATO members to join Iran war ‘very limited’, says Eide
Norway has pushed back against criticism from US President Donald Trump over what he described as “zero” European support in the conflict with Iran.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
“NATO is a defensive alliance. It is not an attack alliance,” Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide told Euronews’ Europe Today flagship morning show.
Eide said NATO members are focused on safeguarding key global trade routes, including keeping the Strait of Hormuz open. “NATO countries are doing something, but it’s not as a party to a conflict,” he added.
Trump has repeatedly criticised NATO allies for not backing Washington in the Iran conflict. He raised the issue again during a White House meeting earlier this month with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.
Eide argued that there had been no prior preparation or consensus within the alliance. As a result, there is “very limited appetite” among member states to join the war.
He said that while both the US and Iran may have reasons to end the conflict, “the sides are far apart”, with negotiations hindered by opposing demands.
On Monday, Trump said the United States would maintain its blockade of Iranian ports until Tehran agrees to a peace deal.
Still, Eide pointed to signs of “some progress”, noting the broader global impact of the conflict. “This is not only an issue for the two sides, but it affects the whole world economy,” he said.
Addressing a European diplomatic push to establish a Palestinian state, Eide reiterated support for a two-state solution based on long-standing United Nations principles. However, he acknowledged that such an outcome is “not around the corner”.
He added that a two-state solution is also in Israel’s interest, describing it as “the only viable solution for real peace in a very troubled region”.
Norway, alongside Spain and Ireland, recognised the State of Palestine in 2024.
World
Iran War Live Updates: Trump Officials and Iran Plan New Talks Despite Mixed Messages
The United States military last week extended its blockade on vessels coming in and out of Iranian ports to the waters of the wider world, declaring that it would pursue any ship aiding Iran, regardless of location on the high seas or flag.
The U.S. “will actively pursue any Iranian-flagged vessel or any vessel attempting to provide material support to Iran,” Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday, noting that the American troops beyond the Middle East will engage in operations to thwart Iranian shipping.
The extension of the blockade comes as the economically vital Strait of Hormuz remains all but closed to commercial traffic and the two-week cease-fire between the United States and Iran nears an end. The move aligns longstanding American economic policies targeting Iran with the current military campaign against it, maritime and military law experts say.
But it raises a host of legal and practical questions.
“War is a messy thing not just on the combat side but under national and international law,” said James R. Holmes, chair of maritime strategy at the Naval War College.
“From a legal standpoint, a blockade is an act of war, so the blockade probably is legal to the extent Operation Epic Fury is,” he said using the name of the U.S. military campaign against Iran.
Since Congress has not declared war against Iran, no formal state of war exists between the United States and the Islamic Republic. But Mr. Holmes noted that “undeclared wars are more the rule than the exception in U.S. history,” with joint resolutions of Congress, United Nations Security Council resolutions and NATO decisions invoked to justify fighting.
“This campaign may be more unilateral than most, but it is not without precedent,” he said.
Under international law, the legality of the blockade is “more ambiguous,” said Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a foreign policy think tank in Washington.
For a blockade to be legal, Ms. Kavanagh said, it must be “effective,” meaning that it is both enforceable and enforced. Some would argue that a “‘global blockade’ is not permissible in conception” because it is overly broad, she said.
Still, expansive blockades have taken place throughout history, including during World War II, when states enforced naval blockades worldwide other than in neutral territorial seas. Over the centuries before that, the British blockaded France throughout the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, and during the War of American Independence, the colonies and their allies raided British shipping as far away as the Indian Ocean.
Enforcing expansive blockades is difficult, however.
“The seven seas are a big place, and the largest navy or coast guard is tiny by comparison,” Mr. Holmes said. Whether the U.S. blockade ultimately is deemed “effective,” legally speaking, will depend on whether the U.S. has enough assets like ships, aircraft, boarding crews and intelligence gathering to enforce it.
The blockade does not have to be “airtight” to meet the legal test, Mr. Holmes said, and assessing its effectiveness will be tough for outside observers in any case.
Enforcement may also have to be somewhat selective, he suggested.
“Now, it is possible our leadership might quietly let a ship proceed when it suits the national interest,” Mr. Holmes said. “For instance, with a summit coming up between President Trump and General Secretary Xi” — Mr. Trump is to meet with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, in May — “Washington might not want to ruffle feathers by obstructing China’s oil imports.”
The expanded blockade is part of a longstanding economic campaign against Iran, but it represents something of a tactical change for the Trump administration.
Earlier in the war, the United States temporarily lifted sanctions on Iranian oil at sea to ease the pressure on global energy prices. And before imposing a blockade on Iranian ports last week, the U.S. allowed Iranian tankers to transit the Strait of Hormuz for the same reason.
Now Washington seems to be returning its focus to keeping pressure on Iran.
“The blockade is a wartime extension of existing U.S. economic sanctions against the Iranian regime,” said James Kraska, professor of international maritime law and a visiting professor at Harvard Law School. In peacetime, he said, the sanctions were a “powerful tool to weaken the Iranian economy.” Now, he said, the blockade serves as a “kinetic expansion.”
General Caine’s announcement about the expanded naval blockade came one day after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced “Operation Economic Fury,” an effort he called the “financial equivalent” of a bombing campaign. It includes secondary sanctions on institutions internationally, like banks, that have dealings with Iran.
The expanded blockade “marks a notable escalation by the United States,” said Ms. Kavanagh.
Still, she said, it is unlikely to significantly change Iranian calculations.
“For Iran, this war is existential and it is not going to cave easily or quickly,” she said. “Economic pressure may work over the very long term, but Trump seems too impatient for a deal to wait it out.”
-
Technology9 minutes agoThe Vergecast Vergecast, 2026 edition
-
World15 minutes agoMexico pyramid shooter who took hostages and killed 1 is identified
-
Politics21 minutes agoByron Donalds cracks down on persistent border blind spot leaving US vulnerable to overstays
-
Health27 minutes agoHealthy diets spark lung cancer risk in non-smokers as pesticides loom
-
Sports33 minutes agoPGA Tour signals new era with axing of Hawaii events from schedule
-
Technology39 minutes agoAlexa+ lets you order food like a real conversation
-
Business45 minutes agoNew lawsuit alleges Uber is violating drivers’ rights. Here’s how
-
Entertainment51 minutes agoReview: Trigger warning? ‘For Want of a Horse’ gives new meaning to the term ‘animal lover’