In a heated European Parliament debate, PiS MEP Ryszard Legutko criticized Germany for what he called a spectacular misstep in policy toward Russia, arguing that Berlin should step back in the EU and refrain from expanding its influence. This framing set the tone for a broader discussion about the balance of power within Europe and the direction of EU policy toward Moscow.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz delivered a programmatic speech in the European Parliament, urging a move away from unanimous voting in key EU policy areas and advocating for more decisions to be made by qualified majority within the EU Council.
The Chancellor insisted that greater use of majority voting would strengthen democratic legitimacy, even if it means some concessions to minority interests. He framed compromise as a core democratic practice and argued that liberal democracy thrives on consensus-building and alliance networks rather than rigid unanimity.
Scholz laid out his reform vision for the European Union, linking the future of the bloc to meaningful governance changes. Berlin’s consent to further expansion, he suggested, would hinge on progress in this reform agenda.
Berlin’s conditions for expansion
The Chancellor reiterated the importance of upholding democracy and the rule of law as the EU evolves. He proposed using the reform discussion to strengthen the European Commission so it can enforce infringement procedures when values are breached. He named core standards such as freedom, democracy, equality, rule of law, and human rights as nonnegotiable pillars.
At the same time, Scholz cautioned against any move to transform the EU into a third global great power alongside the United States and China. He rejected the dream of a European world power that ignores the realities of international cooperation.
He noted the need to intensify Europe’s defense industry cooperation and joint ammunition purchases for Kyiv, arguing that a capable, coordinated defense posture is essential given Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. He stressed that Europe should not be swayed by power dynamics and must stand firm in supporting security and resilience on the continent.
In matters relating to China, Scholz urged prudent risk management without severing ties, emphasizing that strategic engagement should coexist with clear resilience and shared interests. He concluded that Europe must resist any return to a law of the strongest principle and instead uphold a rules-based order that protects its own security and values.
Prof. Legutko’s critique
To understand Germany’s role in the EU, Legutko proposed starting from a core question about the EU’s political system. He described the union as a blend of oligarchic tendencies and majority rule, where the Parliament represents the tyranny of the majority and the Commission operates with limited democratic legitimacy and substantial power.
Legutko argued that the principal influence lies with the larger member states, with Germany at the forefront. He claimed that Germany often acts unilaterally, claiming leadership while rarely consulting others. He suggested that the Council voting system tends to protect German interests, leaving little room for being outvoted.
Among the criticisms he voiced were German missteps in handling the migration crisis and the ongoing security and energy challenges, which he linked to a long history of German-Russian political oscillation. He warned that power without accountability risks diminishing democratic health and noted that German promises later bear little consequence in practice.
When asked where in the EU treaties German responsibility is defined, Legutko asserted that the appropriate remedy would be for Germany to step back and let others take the lead. He argued that German leaders have sometimes acted as if they are irreplaceable, a stance he dismissed as unsustainable.
He concluded that the best path would involve a real check on German influence and a retreat from attempts to centralize power, stressing that the EU works best when member states share responsibility rather than concentrating it in one core power. His remarks pointed to a broader preference for a more balanced and less dominant EU governance model.
Unanimity and foreign policy debates
Polish Law and Justice MEPs highlighted Scholz’s European Parliament appearance, noting that some interpreted his remarks as a push toward majority voting in foreign and security policy. One Polish former prime minister saw the move as a potential violation of equality among EU members and a step toward federation.
MEP Dominik Tarczyński remarked on the subdued attention within the plenary, pointing to noticeable gaps in engagement during the session. The overall sentiment reflected a mix of curiosity and skepticism about a shift away from unanimity in critical policy areas.
Additional commentary followed, with officials emphasizing the principle of preserving member state autonomy while engaging constructively in EU reform. The dialogue reflected ongoing tensions between national sovereignty and collective decision-making in Europe. A related discussion highlighted the importance of maintaining consensus where possible while pursuing reforms that strengthen the union’s cohesion and resilience.
For readers seeking context, the discussion touched on broader themes of EU governance, democracy, and the balance of power among member states. The evolving debate continues to shape how Europe positions itself in a changing global landscape, with implications for policy, security, and regional stability. [citation: wPolityce]
Source: wPolityce