Peace and stability have largely prevailed across the EU in recent decades, but its current generation of leaders now face a critical test of resilience.
Civil society organizations throughout Europe are not taking authoritarian encroachment sitting down. Instead, they are finding creative ways to fight back.
In order to survive, authoritarian regimes undergo processes to adapt and reinvent themselves. Putin’s constitutional reform ensures that he will remain the key figure in Russian politics after 2024.
A striking feature of democracy in the European Union is the sheer variation in political trends. To rebuild democratic citizenship, the EU must address three common, broad concerns across Europe.
While several post-Soviet countries such as Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine now routinely hold free and fair elections, another democratic pillar—rule of law—has proved much more difficult to achieve.
It’s too late to defeat the Assad regime, but a humanitarian intervention by the EU and NATO could prevent countless deaths and another massive refugee crisis.
The EU’s traditional business model is not fit for a world of power politics. Whether the EU can protect its interests and values in this new situation will depend on stronger and more decisive leadership.
No matter who wins in November, turning back the clock to 2016 will not be possible. European trust in U.S. leadership has been irreparably damaged.
China and the EU face enormous challenges in 2020: human rights, Huawei, and beyond. The EU is taking a tougher stand—what does this mean for the EU-China relationship?
The EU’s assistance for civil society partners in Turkey, the Western Balkans, and Eastern Europe needs to evolve in response to the more challenging environments activists in these countries now face.
In February 1945, the leaders of the United States, the Soviet Union, and the UK hammered out the fate of postwar Europe in a bombed-out resort on the Black Sea. Seventy-five years later, how have their decisions held up?
The EU earned international recognition for its role in the Iran deal negotiations. Now, Europeans must raise their game with continuous high-level diplomacy—while preparing for further escalation in the Middle East.
The liberal order has always been under pressure but managed to survive and flourish. Now, the attraction of other models of governing is increasing despite their negative impact on individual freedoms and rights.
Today’s Turkey is more nationalist and more inclined to assert its political and military power than in recent years. To deal with Ankara, NATO and the EU must be firm, resolute, and yet cooperative.
The EU could benefit from tapping into the smart ideas behind its many successful local projects, and then adapting them to benefit other member states.
Without corrective action, the United States and Europe will drift further apart over the 2020s, regardless of who sits in the Oval Office.
Europe has a vested interest in Middle East stability as well as in the welfare of its people.
The divergence between Europe and the United States is structural, not just personal, and it won’t simply disappear with the departure of Donald Trump.
The dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan remains the most dangerous conflict in the post-Soviet space. Even if political tensions have eased since 2018, the region remains dangerously militarized.
NATO must prepare for the threats of tomorrow, when dynamics may be more complex than those between superpowers in the twentieth century. To plan for such a world will signal that the alliance is far from brain dead.