That Europe is changing, or is trying to do so in an attempt to strengthen its autonomy as a unitary understanding, is no longer a mystery to anyone: it provides ample and unequivocal proof of this, the still non-definitive series of measures that will allow it to to conquer a decisive role and to have a greater impact in the field of foreign policy.
The mechanisms envisaged and governed by article 24 TEU, in fact, cumbersome and probably obsolete if evaluated in their moment of application, have up to now contributed to gangrenous an intervention system based on the so-called "intergovernmental" method which has recognized, and recognizes the States and to their contentious representatives, a central role within the Council of the Union and the European Council which, in turn, needing unanimous deliberations, have contributed to paralyzing, and effectively paralyzing, external action of the Union.
Let's be clear: this is not an attempt to limit the excessive power of the "Visegrad countries", that is the so-called "Frugal Four", although this, apparently, may appear, among others more or less declared, as the objective to be rather, and surprisingly, and contradictorily, to strengthen its international policies and internal dynamics through the recognition, to the Commission, of the possibility of inserting itself undisturbed into world foreign policy without prejudice to the competences of the institutions provided for in the Treaties.
All this through the elaboration of a document, the "New Anti-coercion Instrument", which, although formally concerns commercial exchanges, and consists of the imposition of duties, import bans, "ad personam" measures, however, it would have the peculiarity of not being subject to the unanimity rule within the Council of the Union. Whether it is a "checkmate" for the great international potentates, or instead of a pure and simple attempt to remove the decision-making mechanisms from the state intervention of some Member States, at present, although I do not believe it to the full, it is complicated support it, and probably the intent wants to be, apparently but not too much, double and ambivalent since the pursuit of the first objective (i.e. that relating to the containment of the powers of international players) inevitably contributes to defining the second (i.e. that relating to simplification of the Union decision-making mechanisms) without however restricting it given the specific matter concerned and the significant interference of the potentially interested Members.
The need, which is anything but veiled, seems to be to regulate the sector of commercial exchanges, which are strategic by their very nature because they are directly and indirectly attributable to globalized political structures and the balance of power between the parties involved in the various operations, without losing view the accurate analysis of the surrounding geopolitical and economic context. The idea would not be erroneous, or rather, ideally, it would not have the characteristics to put itself in terms of absurdity. But are we really sure that it is even only abstractly prosecutable in the context of a territorial context which, however vast, is still heterogeneous in its own state articulations? Are we really sure that this European initiative does not reverberate its “boomerang effect” on itself, helping to radicalize, as anticipated in the epigraph, the most disparate nationalistic instincts? Which Member States will be able to benefit the most from the new one by approving an "instrument of coercion"? And last but not least: will these initiatives have the necessary incident force to be able to act as a deterrent against China, discouraging its initiatives, and / or other very important actors such as the United States and Russia?
I sincerely, and with reference to this last question, would be inclined to risk a decidedly negative answer, if only for the political disarticulation within the community context which, alongside members decidedly "weight" in terms of democratic confrontation and of the internal structure, also includes Members whose internal political conformation still suffers from the lack of a complete "democratization" process and, consequently, they are, or in any case would be, led to experience this by defining intervention, as a real attack to the "system" which can be used, if necessary, to carry out one's claims. Not always every increase in power of the European Union considered as a unitary whole, in fact, translates into a corresponding consolidation of the internal stability and economic freedom of its Members.
If we wanted to say it otherwise, and more briefly, we would be obliged to observe that if China represents the natural objective of such a "predisposing" new commercial weapon, however, there is no shortage of Member States that would be happy to make use of that same weapon at the aim, very clear and not at all hidden, of affirming the European interests, and their own nationalistic ones, against the United States itself, thus hindering the advance towards the east of the Allied par excellence. The geopolitical "misunderstanding" considered is far from being of little tenor, and in many cases, it could contribute to de-contextualizing the Union with respect to its historical "Atlantic" and "Atlantic" position.
Yes, Europe is changing: from now on, if the institutions want to continue to exist and resist, they will necessarily have to make a choice of field. They will have to choose between the reasons of safeguarding the internal statist economies and those of strengthening the community system with respect to external attacks which, understandably, presuppose the very serious limitation of the former to their exclusive prejudice. The time has come to decisively rethink the Union's growth model, trying to get out of the "emergency" mentality to finally enter a "structuralist" dimension. Unfortunately, the times do not seem to be ripe yet. And for this we will be called to pay the price by going through a long period of recession of which the new drafting instrument of anti-coercion appears to be the most immediate reflection.
Giuseppina Di Salvatore