Connect with us

World

In the upcoming European elections, peace and security matter the most

Published

on

In the upcoming European elections, peace and security matter the most

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

With so many threats on the horizon, we need a union that can navigate the turbulent seas of the future and protect the European dream of peace and prosperity for its people and global neighbours, Alexander Borum writes.

ADVERTISEMENT

As the European elections approach, a new group of Members of the European Parliament will soon take office, tasked with navigating the turbulent waters of global volatility and the immense challenges Europe is currently grappling with. 

In this shifting geopolitical landscape, uncertainty and conflict threaten European values and way of life, underscoring the urgent need to bolster the continent’s security and adopt a strong stance in the bloc’s foreign and security policy. 

EU voters must remember the significance of collective security when they cast their votes in early June, considering the broader implications of their choices for our future. 

As voters, we must make informed decisions that will ensure the stability and prosperity of the union.

Advertisement

Like the rest of the world, the EU is currently grappling with a multitude of issues that are directly impacting the lives and future of its citizens. 

From a deteriorating climate to a cost-of-living crisis, energy insecurity, migration pressures, and a surge of conflicts both within and outside Europe. 

While all these issues are important, it is unrealistic to expect that we can address them all at once. As voters, we must ask ourselves, where should we direct our attention and energy for the most effective long-term impact?

War keeps knocking on our door

Looking back at our shared history can give us a clue. Here, we must acknowledge the European Union’s roots as a peace and economic development project. 

The EU has, in this regard, been a successful endeavour. Through increased cooperation and burden sharing, we have witnessed a period of unity and progress never seen before on the continent. 

Advertisement

While the EU was never without faults, we must reflect on the challenges faced by our British brothers and sisters in the wake of Brexit. It is clear to see that member states are stronger and better off standing together.

As EU voters, we must stand together as we look towards the future, recognising that while the EU peace project has been successful, not everyone agrees with the union’s approach. 

War is knocking on our door, and as the Ukrainian people pay the ultimate price for resisting the aggression they face, we must acknowledge that the very same threat is encroaching on our external borders. 

This war threatens the organic and consensual growth of the union. As such, EU voters must reflect on their role in European security and the need to embrace collective security responsibilities with a sense of urgency.

Being complacent and disinterested won’t do it any more

After enjoying decades of peace under the EU umbrella, European voters have grown complacent and disinterested in security policy and defence spending. 

Advertisement

However, in light of the current reality, if EU voters genuinely desire peace and economic prosperity, they must collectively shoulder the responsibility for security and defence in the EU. 

This implies making tough choices in the coming years, as matching up to Russia’s projected defence spending of 8% of GDP in 2024 will require sacrifices. It’s time for the EU, where most member states still fall short of the 2% NATO commitment, to embrace collective security responsibilities.

For decades, Europe has relied on others for its collective security. Still, with the horrors of war returning to European soil and Trumpian cracks emerging in the close-knit alliance with our US cousins, it is evident that the status quo is broken. 

It is increasingly clear that EU voters must once again look to the age-old Latin adage _si vis parcem para bellum_— “if you want peace, prepare for war” — to better position the European Union in the world. 

ADVERTISEMENT

For a brighter future, the EU must take on a concerted effort to advance European security and defence, deter aggression, and safeguard our shared values and heritage.

For all EU citizens, it is crucial to ensure that security and defence are a clear priority in the European elections in June, ensuring that we collectively push for the continent’s strategic autonomy and further enable it to protect not only itself, its values, and its interests, but also its neighbours from hostile actors. 

Advertisement

While strategic autonomy for Europe is a long-term ambition, we must face the fact that our inability to provide the support required for Ukraine to defend itself against an existential threat could easily define the fate of European security for all of us.

No more empty lip service, please

Guiding Europe towards a future of credible deterrence, a more balanced transatlantic partnership in NATO, and the ability to respond to critical threats to the union is crucial. 

EU voters must strive for a future where threats to our borders, our near-abroad, or even the vital global supply lines we rely on can be addressed with a combination of cohesive diplomacy and credible deterrence. 

ADVERTISEMENT

With this in mind, voters must cast their ballots with determination, fully understanding the need and urgency for a robust European Union. 

Come June, citizens must elect European lawmakers who will not pay lip service to our collective security needs and are not afraid to push uncomfortable yet necessary policies. 

With so many threats on the horizon, we need a union that can navigate the turbulent seas of the future and protect the European dream of peace and prosperity for its people and global neighbours. 

Advertisement

Without a vote in favour of our security, we cannot hope to continue our lives in peace, further progress and development. 

Alexander Borum is Policy Leader Fellow at the European University Institute in Florence, focusing on the European Union Common Security and Defence Policy.

ADVERTISEMENT

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at view@euronews.com to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

World

Appetite among NATO members to join Iran war ‘very limited’, says Eide

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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”.

Advertisement

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.

Continue Reading

World

Iran War Live Updates: Trump Officials and Iran Plan New Talks Despite Mixed Messages

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

“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.

A state-organized rally in support of the supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei in Tehran on Friday.Credit…Arash Khamooshi for The New York Times

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

“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.”

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Deadly shooting at historic tourist site leaves one dead, several injured as motive unclear

Published

on

Deadly shooting at historic tourist site leaves one dead, several injured as motive unclear

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A Canadian woman was shot and killed Monday, and several others were injured, before a gunman took his own life at Mexico’s popular Teotihuacan pyramids. 

Mexican officials said that four people were wounded by gunfire and two others sustained injuries from falls. Among the injured were tourists from Colombia, Russia, and Canada, according to local government reports via The Associated Press.

A firearm, a bladed weapon, and live cartridges were found at the scene, Mexico’s Security Cabinet confirmed on social media.

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 other before taking his own life at the popular site, authorities said Monday. (Rebecca Blackwell/AP)

Advertisement

“Our thoughts are with their family and loved ones, and consular officials are in touch to provide assistance,” Canada’s foreign ministry said in a social media post. 

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum wrote on social media that the shooting would be thoroughly investigated and that she was in contact with the Canadian Embassy.

TOURISTS TRAPPED IN PUERTO VALLARTA RECOUNT CARTEL RETALIATION AFTER EL MENCHO KILLED

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum speaks during her morning press conference at the National Palace in Mexico City on Jan. 5, 2026. (Raquel Cunha/Reuters)

“What happened today in Teotihuacan deeply pains us,” she wrote. “I express my most sincere solidarity with the affected individuals and their families.”

Advertisement

MAJOR DRUG LORD ‘EL MENCHO’ KILLED IN MEXICAN MILITARY OPERATION WITH U.S. INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT

Sheinbaum said she has instructed the Security Cabinet to investigate the events and provide all necessary support to the victims.

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)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Personnel from the Secretariat of the Interior and the Secretariat of Culture are already heading to the site to provide assistance and accompaniment, along with local authorities,” she said. “I am closely following the situation, and we will continue to provide timely updates through the Security Cabinet.”

Advertisement

The pre-Hispanic city, located just outside Mexico City, was once one of the most significant cultural centers in Mesoamerica.

Fox News Digital has reached out to Canada’s foreign ministry for comment.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending