Is Europe Too Divided to Become a Superpower?

Why the EU Struggles to Act as a Unified Global Power

The discussion examines why the European Union, despite its population, wealth, and expertise, often struggles to act as a unified global power. Lambertus Robben describes the EU as a political and economic union in which some decisions are shared while others remain with member states. He emphasizes subsidiarity: decisions should be made as close to people as practical, while issues such as trade and foreign policy may be more effectively handled at the European level.

A central obstacle is that the EU has no single, clearly empowered voice abroad. Its 27 national leaders and foreign ministers operate alongside EU institutions and officials, and major foreign-policy decisions often require unanimous agreement. Robben argues that real power remains with member states, particularly through the European Council, but that this arrangement can make coordinated action slow or difficult. The EU’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine showed that agreement is possible, though he considers it insufficiently swift and consistent.

Shared Vision and Decision-Making

The speakers also discuss the absence of a compelling shared vision for Europe’s role in the world. Robben says national politics and identities still dominate, and leaders are wary of promoting deeper integration because they fear strengthening anti-EU and sovereigntist parties. James Ker-Lindsay notes that member states have different histories, security outlooks, and relationships with NATO, making common foreign and security policies politically sensitive.

Robben argues that the EU should move towards qualified majority voting on foreign policy instead of allowing any one country to veto decisions. He believes that some loss of national control to EU institutions—where citizens and governments still have a voice—is preferable to allowing larger outside powers, such as the United States or China, to shape European choices.

Ker-Lindsay highlights the concern that centralization could leave smaller or neutral states feeling overruled. Robben responds that foreign policy is precisely an area where countries acting together can carry more weight.

Communication and European Identity

Both speakers identify weak communication and limited public understanding of the EU as major problems. Robben says EU institutions do a poor job of explaining what they do, while national politicians may blame “Brussels” for decisions they approved themselves. He also argues that Europeans often identify more strongly with their country than with Europe, making it harder to build support for common action.

To strengthen public engagement and European identity, Robben proposes:

• Giving Europe Day greater prominence.
• Teaching more about EU and national politics in schools.
• Simplifying the names and roles of EU institutions.
• Directly electing a European president.
• Creating pan-European electoral lists for some European Parliament seats, so voters can choose representatives campaigning on Europe-wide issues rather than only national party platforms.

Ker-Lindsay notes the tension between calls for a more democratic EU and concerns that a more centralized democratic system could diminish member-state authority.

Populism and Disinformation

The discussion connects public frustration to the rise of far-right populism and disinformation. Robben says anti-EU movements have been more effective at presenting their arguments and using social media. He supports monitoring and enforcement under EU digital legislation, mentions a proposed Democracy Shield, and stresses that regulation alone cannot eliminate foreign disinformation. Governments must also communicate convincingly and improve citizens’ digital literacy.

Robben argues that political education should begin earlier, while acknowledging that education remains largely a national or regional responsibility.

Robben’s Recommendations

Robben’s broader prescription is for European leaders to be bolder, present practical plans, and make EU achievements more visible. He points to cooperation on migration as an example of work whose results may not be credited to the EU, and argues that Europe should project greater confidence in its dealings with the United States.

He also supports further enlargement, provided prospective members are ready. He views new accessions as a way to renew the European project and demonstrate continued momentum.

Presenters and Contributors

• James Ker-Lindsay
• Lambertus Robben