The conclusions of the European Council meeting of March 19 reveal, once again, the profound contradiction between the proclaimed discourse and the effective practice of the European Union (EU), its alignment and complicity with the US, its disregard for the deteriorating living conditions of workers and peoples, and its policy choices in favour of the interests of economic and financial groups and multinational corporations.
1. The appeals for “stability” and “respect for international law” seek to conceal a position that, far from being responsible and not deeply involved, is aligned with and subservient to the interests of the US and its policy of war, instigation of conflicts, and attacks on the sovereignty and rights of peoples.
The absence of condemnation of the US and Israeli military aggression against Iran contrasts sharply with the vehement condemnation of defensive actions in response to that aggression. This position is not new, and lays bare the EU's habitual hypocrisy. Despite growing contradictions, the EU has been oscillating between automatic alignment and active complicity with US foreign policy, as is now seen with the US and Israeli military aggression against Iran – for which, it should be remembered, the Portuguese government shamefully gave access to the use of the Lajes Air Base by the US.
2. The consequences of this aggression by the US and Israel are directly felt in the lives of workers and people. The worsening situation in the Middle East has resulted in a new rise in the prices of fuels and other essential goods. The European Council has not, and does not intend to, provide a fundamental response to these increases, failing to point to any concrete measures to stop them or create any mechanism for their control and regulation through the actions of the Member States.
The consequences of the liberalisation and privatisation policies promoted by the EU are evident today, which remove the direct capacity of States to intervene in strategic sectors, such as the energy sector, and create business and speculation opportunities for economic groups, who increase energy costs that fall on workers, populations, and small and medium-sized companies, while their profits reach record levels.
Instead of acknowledging its mistakes and pointing towards reversing these policies, the European Council insists on deepening them. Examples of this are the proposed measures relating to the emissions trading and carbon market, energy networks and infrastructure, or the Energy Union's 2030 agenda, all aimed at further liberalising the energy sector and favouring the multinational companies operating in it.
The request addressed to the European Commission to "present without delay a set of specific temporary measures to address the recent sharp increases in fuel prices" has, however, resulted in a statement in which the Commission merely urges Member States to take fiscal measures, without mentioning the possibility of price control and price fixing measures.
3. While it fails to provide concrete answers to the significant increases in fuel and energy prices and their consequences for workers, populations, and small and medium-sized companies, the European Council reveals great concern about the “problems” faced by economic and financial groups and multinationals. Thus, it proposes deepening the Single Market, highlighting, due to its impacts and seriousness: the intention to see the completion by the end of 2026 of the veritable federal legal offshore regime of the so-called “28th. legal regime,” a measure favouring the interests of multinationals to the detriment of the sovereignty of the States, workers' rights, and the interests of Micro, Small, and Medium-sized Companies; the intention to quickly complete the assault on Social Security, pensions, and workers' savings through the so-called “Savings and Investments Union,” so that these can be thrown into the roulette of financial speculation; and the development of policies for the merger and concentration of companies.
4. The European Council also insists on prolonging the war in Ukraine and on rearmament, falsely presented as inevitable, which means channelling billions of euros of public resources to the military-industrial complex. Instead of committing to peace and contributing to a political solution to end the conflict that has already lasted 12 years, the EU promotes the continuation of the war and fuels a logic of confrontation that serves as a pretext for the “normalisation” of its militarisation and war economy.
5. The conclusions of this European Council meeting are yet another example of how the EU's neoliberal, militaristic, and federalist tendency is not the answer to the problems of workers and peoples, rather, they are at their root and exacerbate them.
What is needed is an alternative path, a break with these policies. A path of peace and cooperation, of seeking peaceful solutions to international conflicts, respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international law, the sovereignty and independence of States. What is needed are policies that, countering and not being subservient to the interests of economic groups, respond to the degradation of living and working conditions and other problems affecting workers and peoples, that ensure the utilisation and development of the productive capacities and potential of each country, the fight against unemployment and the promotion of full employment, the eradication of poverty, the promotion of rights and social progress.
