Conference Agenda

Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s claim that she would lead a “geopolitical Commission” is often quoted. Did the EU live up to expectations? The Union did make a strategic decision that reflected the new geopolitical reality: it offered candidate status to Ukraine, which after the 2022 Russian invasion can no longer survive as an independent state unless it is fully embedded in the Western structures. Other decisions, or lack thereof, show less geopolitical awareness, however. Has Brussels really thought through the geopolitical implications of offering the same status to Georgia, which does not border on the EU? And how to explain the lack of urgency in responding to the Houthi threat to commercial shipping in the Red Sea, which is part of Europe’s singly most vital sea lane of communication? This paper will analyse the geopolitical position of the EU, and propose proactive policies for the next European legislature that would turn the Union into a more effective and consistent geopolitical player, which it does indeed need to be in order to safeguard its interests. Those policies include an enhanced military effort in support of Ukraine; a new regional strategy for the Black Sea and the Southern Caucasus; active security engagement in the Middle East, the Gulf and the Indian Ocean; and a new strategy for North Africa.

This research explores three interconnected topics: maritime security in the Black Sea, the challenges posed by the war in Ukraine, and the vulnerabilities and opportunities for the European Union's maritime security.

The conflict in Ukraine has been changing, in the last year and a half, the landscape of international security. Recent studies have explored the war through conventional military competition lenses, leaving limited room for analyses regarding maritime security. Ukraine and Russia are countries facing the Black Sea, a crucial region for this military confrontation. The ongoing conflict would threaten the European Union's security, considering the presence of critical maritime infrastructure and undersea cables, a potential vulnerability.

This research discusses the opportunities to strengthen the Black Sea's maritime security, hypothesising that the primary vulnerability relates to the undersea cables. The convergence of political intentions of allied and neighbouring countries would protect critical communication by securing communication and simultaneously guarantee greater regional and international stability.

This research will involve the current EU's strategies in the Black Sea's security, the Russian involvement in the region, current PESCO and bilateral projects to enhance the security of undersea cables, gas pipelines, port security and maritime surveillance and, finally, interviews with serving and retired civilian and military personnel in the EU and nationally.

This research will inform the academic debate, policymakers, and civil servants of European institutions, and at the national level, the potential implications of the conflict in Ukraine on the Black Sea's maritime security and vulnerabilities and opportunities for the European Union.

Strategic interests, security concerns, and international power dynamics have become more prominent in shaping discussions about trade, all the while being used to underpin both protectionist and liberal rationales. The manner in which this ‘geopoliticization’ affects political groups’ attitudes towards trade with third countries, if at all, remains uncertain. To address this gap, this study looks at debates within the European Parliament in the 8^th and 9^th parliamentary terms, comparing political groups’ positions on trade with third countries when they use a geopolitical framing and when they do not. It argues that the impact of Geopoliticization on EP political groups’ attitudes towards trade is moderated by how they perceive the third country at hand, positing that Geopoliticization should underpin more liberal positions when discussing trading with allies and more protectionist positions when discussing trading with rivals. This study finds that when EP political groups use geopolitical frames in debates about trade, they tend to defend a more liberal position. This effect is particularly marked when they discuss trading with countries that are ‘close’ to the EU, either geographically or politically, and seems to underpin a rationale of strategic opening of the EU’s markets.