Cliché...2021
It is traditional to try and predict what the new year would bring...based on the unpredictability of 2020, I will not go down that road in this entry. I'll leave that endeavour up to the daring readers. But, here is a bit of everything - looking back a few months and looking ahead a decade.
How it started originally
The current European Commission started work on 1 December 2019 and the table was set to deal with the two biggest topics rolled over from the previous mandate: reaching an agreement on the next EU budget before 1 January 2021 (when the new EU budget cycle was due to commence) and of course Brexit (for a 4th consecutive year). Besides that, you had the usual wave of new proposals in the pipeline in most policy areas that the new Commission leadership wanted to implement during their mandate, while also keeping an eye out for cutting red tape. Prominent proposals were in the making in the areas of climate, digital single market, artificial intelligence, trade, and justice - just to name a few.
How the year took off
As the number of infections rose steadily and rapidly not only in Europe, but all across the world, governments started scrambling about what and how to do in this unprecedented situation. There was very little time for coordination at EU level, leading to regional (or country-wide) lockdowns across Member States, as well as the adoption of national emergency decrees to allow governments to act swiftly in the interest of their citizens.
It took some time for governments, citizens, decision-makers alike to grapple with the new status quo, but by summertime borders opened up again and EU citizens could move around freely without any of the major restrictions previously in place - until the 2nd wave hit at the end of summer. However, by that time everyone appeared to be much better prepared - seemingly at least, as much as you can be prepared for a(nother) situation like this.
How it's going
Without dwelling into all the political, economic and social consequences of Covid-19, let me make a different point.
I believe that a government's role should be following the lines articulated by Abraham Lincoln: 'Government of the people, by the people, for the people'. And this can only be further underlined when a crisis comes that threatens the very existence of people and upsets their daily routines in all areas of their lives.
Negotiations, coordinations, and decisions about handling the coronavirus crisis are no longer purely political in the sense that political discussions are often distant and abstract processes for citizens without direct immediate impacts on their everyday lives. As important as they are, think about the talks on the EU budget: big numbers, negotiations lasting years with tangible results years later. In contrast, decisions on handling the coronavirus crisis and its aftermath probably cut as much to the core of citizens' lives as much as any policy ever can - these decisions directly and almost instantly impact our lives.
The EU's role
And handling the crisis shows exactly how the EU should and can work: for instance, a country alone would probably not have been able to negotiate beneficial terms and agreements with several drug manufacturers to have vaccines available in a particular Member State once they have been approved. By authorising the European Commission to negotiate the deal on their behalf, even smaller Member States were represented at the negotiating table, allowing them to punch above their weights without high financial or political costs.
Of course difficult dilemmas came to the fore over the past months: under what conditions, when and for how long can you (if at all) close down borders unilaterally, and what is more important: maintaining the functioning of a country's economy or ensuring that the virus is contained at all costs. Space is limited to discuss this extraordinary balancing exercise, so let me just say this: in areas that are purely Member State competence, such as health policy, the European Commission (or any other EU institution) has no power to intervene - otherwise it would overreach its competences conferred upon it by the Treaties. But it can for instance 'carry out actions to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of the Member States' (Article 6, TFEU). And this is exactly what gave rise to the often voiced European solidarity, manifested in facilitating sending and distributing masks, respiratory machines, and other products essential to protecting the health of the population.
Where are we headed to?
Without making any bold predictions, I think the contours of the way ahead seems to be paved:
International level
With the Trump administration gone from the White House, multilateralism will be the name of the game again. Think about the US re-joining the Paris (Climate) Agreement, most likely solving the impasse regarding the appointment of judges at the World Trade Organization, more emphasis on (friendly) transatlantic ties. But this new-old norm will not be an old-new norm. I would rather call it a 2.1. version. For instance, the US will most likely continue to advocate for an increase of defense spending to 2% of GDP from all allies - but will not be threatening to withdraw from NATO. And this new modus vivendi will not be bad. I think one of the major lessons from the past 4 years vis-à-vis the US has been that Europe needs to be able to stand alone - which is now set out in its push for ‘strategic autonomy‘.
The new administration in the White House also means no more 'get of jail for free card' for several countries - I am no fan of thinking in terms of ‘what ifs’, but I do believe that a Trump administration would have offered a trade agreement to the UK with relatively favourably conditions, allowing them to confidently walk away from the negotiating table with the EU at any point before 31 December 2020. With this moral Trump card gone (little bit of pun intended), it will be more difficult to conduct policies and actions on the global stage - which do not follow the mainstream thinking of like-minded countries - without repercussions.
And this consistency and relative predictability will be important to tackling the threats of our current decade. These include defeating pandemic(s), ensuring a steady recovery, as well as dealing with the aftermath of our technological and digital proliferation over the past decade: combatting misinformation, fake news, and regulating artificial intelligence, just to name a few.
EU level
The European Union is a community of 450 million EU citizens as of 1 January 2021. The European Commission put forward ambitious proposals to tame digital online platforms (Digital Services Act package), make economies more sustainable through the European Green Deal (and the European Climate Law), managed to forge consensus on an ambitious, forward looking EU budget, Brexit talks were closed successfully (I mean a hard Brexit was avoided) and the EU is at the forefront of leading and helping vaccination efforts in Member States.
It was a slow start to the year, as 3 months into office the College of Commissioners was faced with an unprecedented situation, which required introducing and revamping numerous policy proposals. But the EU has always evolved in times of crises. And this time, it has the chance to show citizens hands-on how it can help them, through tackling an issue that directly impacts all aspects of their everyday lives. If the EU can credibly continue supporting the recovery of Member States, including in the aftermath of this situation, then I hope more citizens will understand that the EU is primarily for them - but it can only help to the extent that Member State governments allow it to.