BullsEye Magazine, 90th Edition

YOUNG LEADERS IN THE AGE OF AI

Letter from Chief Editor Charlie Crumpton

Dear Readers,

It is with great excitement that I welcome you to the latest edition of BullsEye, the flagship publication of European Democrat Students.

At EDS, our mission has always been to amplify the voices of young Europeans, championing democratic principles, fostering inclusivity, and inspiring progress. BullsEye is a reflection of that mission—a platform where ideas come alive, dialogue flourishes, and the strength of our community shines through.

This magazine continues to be a space for exploring the issues that matter most to students today. From political challenges and social transformations to cultural trends and technological innovation, our aim is to present a rich tapestry of perspectives that resonate with the diverse experiences and aspirations of European students. Whether you’re passionate about shaping policy, navigating the complexities of modern society, or celebrating creativity, there is something here for everyone.

In this edition, you’ll find a dynamic collection of thought-provoking articles, impactful interviews, and insightful opinion pieces. These contributions come from fellow students and leaders who are driving meaningful change across Europe, offering their unique insights and perspectives on topics shaping our world.

As Chief Editor, I am incredibly proud of the values we uphold as an organization—encouraging openness, respect, and critical thought. BullsEye reflects these principles by promoting constructive dialogue, fostering collaboration, and celebrating the diversity that makes our continent so vibrant. It’s a space where ideas can be freely exchanged and rigorously debated, united by our shared vision for a better future.

This edition is the result of the exceptional talent and dedication of our editorial team and designers, who have worked tirelessly to ensure that every page of BullsEye informs, inspires, and engages. Their hard work and creativity make this publication not just a magazine but a cornerstone of our community.

I invite each of you to dive into the pages of BullsEye, to engage with the content, and to share your thoughts and perspectives. Your voice is vital to our collective journey, and your participation will shape the direction of our community and the continent we call home.

Let’s continue this journey of growth, empathy, and unity together. Thank you for joining us, and I eagerly await your feedback as we shape the future of BullsEye and EDS in the months and years to come.

With warm regards, Charlie Crumpton Chief Editor, BullsEye

Letter from Secretary General Vladimir Kljajic

As we celebrate over six decades as the largest student political organisation in Europe, I am honoured to welcome you to the latest edition of our in-house magazine. This issue not only reflects on our rich history but also charts the way forward as we tackle the challenges and opportunities of 2024 and beyond.

Since the establishment of our new Bureau, we have worked tirelessly to represent students’ voices and contribute meaningfully to European policies within the EPP framework. Together with our dedicated Secretariat and Executive Director, we have set ambitious goals, combining political advocacy with organisational growth to ensure EDS remains at the forefront of student engagement in Europe.

This year, we continue to focus on the key issues shaping the future of Europe. Our Working Group on the Future of Europe has become a vital platform for dialogue, inviting members to propose innovative ideas to make Europe a more prosperous, inclusive, and sustainable place for all. The challenges our continent faces—climate change, digital transformation, and the evolving geopolitical landscape—demand bold solutions, and we are eager to see our members rise to the occasion.

Communication remains central to our mission. We have strengthened our external outreach, leveraging modern platforms to amplify our message, while maintaining strong internal connections with our member organisations. The return to in-person events has been invigorating, and we are committed to delivering hybrid experiences that ensure maximum participation and accessibility.

Our recent events have been highlights of the year. In [recent city or event], we engaged with the broader EPP family, discussing policies and strategies to address the most pressing issues of our time. In the months ahead, we are planning impactful gatherings across Europe, offering opportunities for collaboration, learning, and advocacy. These events reflect our shared commitment to building a Europe that is innovative, resilient, and united.

EDS remains steadfast in monitoring developments across Europe, particularly in regions where student rights or fundamental freedoms are at risk. In this edition of our magazine, our editors tackle critical issues such as [insert examples of timely topics, e.g., the rise of AI, student mental health, or the war in Ukraine], ensuring our readers stay informed and engaged.

As we look to the future, we recognize that our strength lies in our members. It is your ideas, energy, and dedication that make EDS the vibrant community it is today. On behalf of the Bureau, I invite you to join us in shaping the next chapter of EDS. Together, we can make a lasting impact on Europe and beyond.

With warm regards and high hopes for the year ahead, Vladimir Kljajic Secretary General, European Democrat Students

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Why

Does the Left Always Turn a Blind Eye to Hamas’

Violence?

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long remained a central point of the world’s political debate, but 7th October 2023 marked a turning point. On this date, Hamas and other militant groups carried out the deadliest attack on Israel in recent years, killing, kidnapping, and torturing thousands of people. Following the attack, Israel initiated a military response in Gaza aimed at dismantling Hamas, which has since evolved into a broader conflict, resulting in a severe humanitarian crisis across the Middle East.

In this context, the narrative coming from many left-wing political groups follows a pattern: the condemnation of Israel’s actions while remaining silent on the brutal attacks that provoked them.

Left-Wing Responses: Focus on Israel’s Military Actions

The reaction from left-wing parties, especially in Europe and Spain, has focused almost exclusively on denouncing Israel’s military operations while ignoring or minimising Hamas’ terrorist acts. This not only undermines Israel’s right to self-defence but also raises the question of whether there is a deeper problem with the left’s approach to Israel.

One of the clearest examples comes from Spain, where political figures such as Pablo Echenique and Pablo Iglesias, leaders of Podemos (far left party in Spain), have characterised Israel’s defensive actions as “genocide.” They ignore

the fact that Hamas, a terrorist organisation, initiated the violence by attacking Israeli civilians indiscriminately.

The response from international institutions has been troubling in the same way. Josep Borrell, European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Vice-President of the European Commission, has been criticised for his persistent condemnation of Israel, while rarely addressing the

María FERRER ARGENTE

violence perpetrated by Hamas. In the aftermath of the deadly October 2023 attacks, Borrell’s failure to unequivocally denounce Hamas, coupled with his critique of Israel’s military response, has led to accusations of anti-Semitism.

Historical Context

For years, Israeli citizens have witnessed an ongoing climate of violence, with frequent terrorist threats and attacks that target civilians. Daily life is often disrupted by the imminent risk of incoming missiles and infiltration attempts. This reality is exacerbated by Hamas’ tactics inside civilian areas, actually using the people of Gaza as human shields.

Israel’s geographical reality increases its vulnerability. With borders shared with nations that have historically posed security challenges, Israel is surrounded on nearly all sides by territories

where militant groups operate, creating a constant strain on the country’s security system.

The Overlooked Brutality of Hamas: A Distorted Narrative?

This tendency to overlook the complexities of the conflict is reflected in the actions of other political leaders as well. UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, faced significant negative reactions for his failure to condemn Hamas explicitly. His criticism of Israel’s military response, without addressing the context of Hamas’s aggression, led to his being declared persona non grata in Israel.

Similarly, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has shown his support for Guterres while refraining from a balanced condemnation of violence from both sides, which has led to accusations of impartiality against Israel.

In Spain, this anti-Israeli discourse has continued to manifest itself in disturbing ways. On the anniversary of the 7 October attacks, left-wing groups organised a demonstration seen by some as a celebration of Hamas’ brutal assault. The role of propaganda in this narrative is crucial. Much of the left’s anti-Semitism is fed by lies about Israel, with the worst being the claim that Israel is committing genocide. This rhetoric, echoed by leaders such as Yolanda Díaz (from Sumar, another extreme left party in Spain), twists the reality of the conflict. Israel, as Roni Kaplan (spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)) and others have pointed out, is doing its best to avoid civilian casualties, in clear contrast to Hamas, whose strategy is based on deliberately targeting civilians and using human shields.

Another example is France’s far-left party, La France Insoumise, led by Jean-Luc Mélenchon, which refuses to condemn Hamas’ violent attacks on Israel. Mélenchon has repeatedly redirected blame for the violence of Hamas, pointing instead

to Israeli leaders for provoking the conflict. His party’s description of Hamas as “Palestinian forces”, rather than acknowledging its designation by the EU as a terrorist organisation, reflects an unwillingness to confront the group’s brutality. This narrative not only misplaces responsibility but also risks reinforcing hostility towards Israel.

Undermining The Peace Process

In short, by failing to acknowledge the violence and terrorism perpetrated by Hamas, these parties contribute to a biased discourse that demonises Israel while minimising or ignoring the actions of its enemies. This tendency reveals anti-Semitic tendencies, not only within the far left but also among more moderate factions of the left. Ultimately, this not only harms Israel but also undermines genuine efforts towards peace and justice in the Middle East. It raises crucial questions about the left’s moral compass and their responsibility to confront the realities of terrorism rather than justify it.

Nasrallah’s Departure and Power Shift in the Region: What’s Next for Hezbollah and Iran’s Role in Lebanon?

Andrea Mghames

The day after the Hamas-led attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, which initiated the ongoing conflict, Lebanese Hezbollah began launching rockets and missiles across the border into Israel as a demonstration of solidarity with Hamas. In the following weeks and months, both Hezbollah and Israel engaged in repeated exchanges of fire along the border, leading to the evacuation of approximately 60,000 Israeli residents and 95,000 Lebanese residents from the border area.

Iran has long regarded Hezbollah as its most formidable partner in its “axis of resistance” against Israel. After several weeks of intensifying hostilities, Israel dealt significant blows to Hezbollah’s leadership and military capabilities in September 2024, followed by ground operations and an intensified air campaign in October. Despite these setbacks, Hezbollah continued and still continues to launch missiles into Israel. Since October 2023, the conflict has reportedly claimed the lives of over 2,000 people in Lebanon.

Lebanon now faces a humanitarian crisis on top of existing political and economic fragility. To date, the conflict has displaced more than one million people in the country, with over 300,000 apparently fleeing to neighboring countries.

Escalation of Conflict

In July and August 2024, hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel intensified. A Hezbollahattributed rocket strike killed 12 young people in

the Golan Heights, prompting Israel to retaliate by killing Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr. This led to a major exchange of fire between the two sides. In September, a series of Israeli operations severely impacted Hezbollah’s leadership, showcasing Israel’s intelligence and military capabilities. On September 16, Israel’s cabinet added the return of evacuated Israelis to its official war objectives.

Key operations following this decision included:

■ On September 17-18, explosions of hundreds of electronic devices believed to be used by Hezbollah killed dozens and injured thousands, including some civilians.

■ Israeli airstrikes on Hezbollah leadership and military targets across Lebanon followed, killing over 500 people, including civilians. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Israel aimed to “change the security balance” by targeting senior leaders, terrorists, and missiles.

■

On September 27, Israeli airstrikes in Beirut targeted Hezbollah’s headquarters, killing Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah and other senior leaders. Nasrallah, who had led Hezbollah for 32 years, was a key figure in Middle Eastern politics. His death raises significant questions regarding Hezbollah’s future capabilities and potential responses from Iran. His successor, Hashem Safieddine, also has been killed in an Israeli strike on October 3.

In the wake of Nasrallah’s death, three important questions come to the forefront.

First, how severely has Hezbollah been weakened? Recent Israeli covert actions and overt strikes have inflicted major damage on Hezbollah’s command structure and weapons caches. However, it’s still unclear whether Hezbollah retains the capability for the large-scale attacks—utilizing thousands of precision-guided rockets, missiles, and drones against Israel—that have long been feared. Israel will likely continue using military force to prevent any attempt by Hezbollah to use its remaining long-range weaponry.

The second question is whether Israel will launch a ground invasion. If Hezbollah and its Iranian backers refuse to accept a diplomatic solution proposed by the U.S. and its allies to de-escalate the conflict and ensure the safe return of border communities, the likelihood of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) crossing the border to establish a buffer zone militarily will increase. A ground incursion would be a high-risk move, potentially

leading to significant losses for both the IDF and Hezbollah. However, some factions within both Israel and Hezbollah might still push for or welcome such an action. In Israel, it could be viewed as the only viable way to secure the border, while within Hezbollah, there may be those who hope to entangle Israel in a prolonged and costly conflict.

The final question is how Iran will respond. Tehran created Hezbollah as its forward retaliatory force along Israel’s border, designed to deter or respond to any large-scale Israeli attack on Iran. Iran has a significant interest in preventing the total destruction of Hezbollah. Iranian leaders also likely fear that failing to react strongly to Nasrallah’s assassination could weaken Tehran’s influence over the remaining Hezbollah leadership and other proxy groups in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. However, despite Hezbollah’s weakened state, Iran is not eager for an all-out war with Israel, especially

“

Iran has long regarded Hezbollah as its most formidable partner in its “axis of resistance” against Israel.

given the substantial U.S. military reinforcements sent to the region by President Joe Biden, which have strengthened deterrence. While missteps are always possible, the most probable outcome is that Iran will provide symbolic support, encourage Hezbollah to avoid a full-scale confrontation, and focus on gradually rebuilding the organization for the future.

Another related issue is Iran’s nuclear program. Since former U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew from the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran nuclear deal), Iran has made significant nuclear advancements, reaching a point where it could produce the fissile material for a nuclear weapon in just a few weeks. The severe weakening of Hezbollah may reignite discussions in Tehran about weaponizing its near-nuclear capabilities. At this critical moment, it will be crucial for the Biden administration to reinforce its commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, while subtly signaling that all parties would benefit from choosing a deescalatory path.

In conclusion, the death of Hezbollah’s long-time leader, Hassan Nasrallah, and the severe blows to the group’s leadership and military capacity mark a significant turning point for both Hezbollah and Iran’s influence in Lebanon. While Hezbollah has been weakened, its ability to launch further attacks against Israel remains a pressing concern. Israel’s continued military actions, alongside the possibility of a ground invasion, point to an ongoing cycle of escalation. For Iran, the loss of Hezbollah as a fully capable proxy raises critical questions about its future strategy in the region. Tehran is likely to avoid a full-scale conflict, opting instead

for symbolic support and a long-term approach to rebuilding Hezbollah’s capabilities. At the same time, the evolving nuclear issue adds another layer of complexity, with Iran potentially weighing its next steps as both Hezbollah and its regional power are tested. The coming months will likely see a delicate balancing act as all sides navigate a fraught and rapidly changing situation.

“

Israel’s continued military actions, alongside the possibility of a ground invasion, point to an ongoing cycle of escalation

TherAIpy for Everyone

Lara Ghanoudi

This decade has gone from one pandemic to the next, from COVID-19 to artificial intelligence and ChatGPT. Both have affected our daily lives, our businesses, our education, our politics, and even our health. The latter was affected for obvious reasons by COVID-19, but what about AI? Artificial Intelligence has been indirectly in our lives for a couple of years; however, when ChatGPT was released in 2022, it came in like a wrecking ball, rather like COVID-19. Both pandemics have individually had one crucial benefit: improving mental health resources.

Imagine what could happen if we combine what we’ve learned from them separately. What if we harnessed AI to enhance and even deliver mental health resources? Could we create the key to unlocking psychotherapy for everyone?

Mental Health in the COVID-19 Era: A Shift in Priorities

Since the COVID-19 lockdown began, society has turned its attention to mental health, particularly among the youth. But what exactly is mental health? According to the World Health Organisation, it’s “a

state of well-being where individuals can cope with stress, realise their potential, and contribute to their communities”. Lockdowns severed essential social interactions, crucial for teenagers and young adults during their formative years, stalling their development and well-being. This disruption harmed everyone’s mental health, leaving those with access to therapy as the “privileged” few who could seek professional help. Unfortunately, despite increased awareness, public mental health resources in many European countries are overwhelmed, while private options remain unaffordable for many—especially the vulnerable youth. We must address these disparities to ensure that all young people can access the support they need to thrive.

In over seven EU countries, people often wait more than a month for a psychologist appointment, leading to a surge in untreated mental health issues. This is compounded by long waits for psychiatrist evaluations, straining an already overloaded system. While private therapy can be prohibitively expensive, at least nine EU countries impose extra fees for public psychological services, leaving many, especially youth, unable to access help. For those who can’t afford private care, navigating the bureaucratic maze for a single appointment can feel overwhelming, causing them to neglect their mental health needs. The COVID-19 pandemic has intensified these challenges, introducing isolation, economic pressures, and health anxieties that disproportionately impact young people. With over

84 million Europeans grappling with mental health issues—resulting in 3.6% of fatalities in 2021—the urgency for change has never been clearer. How can we ensure that no one has to navigate these struggles alone?

The Promise of AI: Can Technology Bridge the Gap?

As we embrace the transformative potential of AI in mental health care, particularly with innovations like ChatGPT, our youth stand at a pivotal moment in tackling Europe’s urgent mental health crisis. Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT and BERT can generate coherent text and help identify patterns in therapy sessions, but it’s crucial to recognise their limitations regarding biases and accuracy. When harnessed thoughtfully, AI offers tools like Leora, which facilitate immediate support through chat or voice, making mental health care more accessible than ever. Yet, while AI can enhance diagnosis and treatment, it cannot

replace the essential nuances of human empathy and understanding in therapy. Mental health professionals remain indispensable for interpreting AI findings and personalising care, ensuring that the warmth of human connection endures. AI should complement, not substitute, the therapist’s role. Clinicians are needed for guidance, to navigate complex cases, and to provide the compassionate touch that technology simply cannot replicate. By breaking down barriers to access while valuing human interaction, we can leverage AI innovations to empower young people to take charge of their mental well-being, paving the way for a healthier, brighter future for all.

Revolutionising mental health care across Europe with AI as an ally, which can predict and prevent issues before they escalate. Advanced models like T-C4.5 and fitness-based logistic regression analysis can detect early signs of mental health challenges through speech patterns and various data indicators, particularly among young people. By identifying at-risk individuals, these systems can facilitate timely interventions, offering proactive support before a crisis unfolds. Studies indicate that AI may achieve high accuracy in diagnosing conditions such as depression, leading to improved outcomes for many. Countries embracing these tools could see significant advancements in mental health support, transforming care from reactive to proactive. We could develop AI with the help of mental health professionals to provide a support service which relieves the saturation of public mental healthcare systems.

Balancing Innovation with Responsibility

However, fully harnessing AI’s potential requires prioritising responsible development and regulation. Establishing ethical guidelines ensures that AI tools are used safely and effectively, respecting patient rights. Policies must advocate for AI to complement traditional care, enhancing rather than replacing the human element of therapy. Fostering public trust is equally important; initiatives to educate communities about AI’s capabilities can alleviate fears and misconceptions.

As we look to the future of mental healthcare across Europe, we find ourselves on the cusp of a remarkable transformation—one where integrating AI into a patient-centred framework can truly change lives. Imagine a world where technology becomes a steadfast ally in our journey toward well-being, breaking down the barriers that too often isolate us, especially young people navigating their formative years. We could use AI to complement traditional therapeutic approaches, weaving together the best human insight and technological innovation. Using it could help those weary of seeking help by offering discreet, on-demand support even providing a safe space where they won’t fear being judged. Its culturally adaptive features can bridge language gaps, ensuring that mental health resources resonate with Europe’s vibrant tapestry of communities. By embracing AI’s potential, we can unlock the door to accessible, empathetic psychotherapy for everyone, ensuring that no young person in Europe has to navigate their mental health journey alone. Together, we stand at the brink of a new era — which promises accessibility, inclusivity, and proper TherAIpy for everyone.

AI should complement, not substitute, the therapist’s role. “

The Green Deal Gamble: Is Europe’s Path to Climate Neutrality Sustainable?

Introduction

In a world grappling with increasingly severe climate crises and environmental degradation, the European Union’s Green Deal emerges as both a beacon of hope and a formidable challenge. Spearheaded by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the Green Deal aspires to position Europe as the world’s first climate-neutral continent by 2050. With the urgency for action magnified by the recent global climate discourse, this initiative transcends mere policy; it is a solemn commitment to future generations who demand accountability and proactive engagement on climate issues. As Thomas Pellerin-Carlin, a member of the European Parliament, aptly

articulates, the Green Deal represents a promise that must not falter.

The European Green Deal: Goals and Aspirations

At its core, the European Green Deal is anchored by a legally binding commitment to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, aligning with the European Parliament’s declaration of a climate emergency in November 2019. This declaration urgently called for immediate action to limit global warming to 1.5 °C. The EU Climate Law, enacted in June 2021, enshrines a bold target of reducing emissions by 55% by 2030, setting the stage for a sustainable future.

Andia Homata

Implications of the Green Deal

The transformative agenda of the Green Deal holds far-reaching implications:

■ Healthier Communities: Cleaner air, water, and soil promise significant improvements in public health, enhancing the quality of life for millions across the continent.

■ Economic Revitalization: The transition to sustainable industries is poised to create millions of jobs, particularly in renewable energy sectors and energy-efficient construction, effectively reimagining the European job landscape.

■ Enhanced Industrial Competitiveness: By investing in domestic renewable energy, Europe can diminish its dependency on external powers like China and the US, fortifying its industrial base and ensuring longterm economic stability.

The Need for a Long-Term Climate Investment Plan

To fulfill the ambitious objectives of the Green Deal, establishing a comprehensive long-term climate investment plan is paramount. This plan must not only tackle environmental challenges but also guarantee that all regions and demographics benefit from this transition.

The EU Climate Law, enacted in June 2021, enshrines a bold target of reducing emissions by 55% by 2030, setting the stage for a sustainable future.

Challenges on the Horizon

Despite a prevailing sense of optimism regarding the Green Deal, numerous challenges lie ahead. The political climate in the European Parliament is crucial, particularly with Hungary’s presidency potentially undermining the EU’s foundational principles. A united pro-European majority is essential to advance critical legislation effectively.

Additionally, discrepancies in national energy and climate plans reveal that several EU member states are not on track to meet climate neutrality targets. Should these targets remain unmet, the European Commission must take decisive action by initiating infringement procedures against noncompliant states, holding them accountable for their commitments.

Balancing Competitiveness with Climate Transition

The EU stands at a pivotal crossroads, where balancing industrial competitiveness with the imperative of climate action is of utmost importance. As Pellerin-Carlin notes, investing in the climate transition is essential to enhancing Europe’s industrial competitiveness, particularly in the rapidly evolving clean technology sector. With countries like China and the US making significant strides in renewable technologies, Europe cannot afford to lag behind.

The Clean Industrial Plan

A Clean Industrial Plan is critical for marrying economic growth with sustainability. This plan should prioritise investments in renewable energy sources that align with the EU’s climate objectives, fostering a robust green economy capable of thriving in the global market.

Conclusion

As the European Union navigates the complexities of implementing the Green Deal, the stakes have never been higher. The ambitious commitment to climate neutrality by 2050 is not merely an environmental objective; it represents a fundamental shift in how Europe views its role on the global stage. The Green Deal is poised to redefine the continent’s economic landscape, prioritising sustainability while fostering innovation and resilience.

However, the path forward is fraught with challenges. The political climate within the EU, marked by diverging national interests and potential resistance from member states, could jeopardise the progress made thus far. For the Green Deal to succeed, a united pro-European front is essential—one that transcends political affiliations and prioritises the collective well-being of both the planet and its inhabitants.

Moreover, the implementation of a comprehensive long-term climate investment plan is critical. This plan must not only address immediate environmental concerns but also ensure equitable benefits for all regions and demographics. As public sentiment increasingly favours proactive climate action, the EU must capitalise on this momentum to solidify support for transformative policies.

The Clean Industrial Plan stands as a crucial component of this strategy, marrying economic growth with sustainability. By prioritising investments in renewable energy and innovative technologies, Europe can enhance its industrial competitiveness, thereby reducing dependence on external powers and ensuring long-term economic stability.

Ultimately, the European Green Deal is a bold promise to future generations—a call to action that

urges all stakeholders to engage collaboratively in crafting a sustainable future. It is not simply a response to the climate crisis; it is a visionary framework that challenges us to rethink our priorities, transform our economies, and create a resilient society.

As Europe stands on the precipice of a new era, the question remains: Can the Green Deal withstand the tests of political change and public scrutiny? The answer lies in the collective resolve of its people and policymakers to embrace this challenge head-on. The journey towards a climate-neutral future is not just a necessity; it is an opportunity for Europe to lead by example, inspiring global action and proving that a sustainable, equitable world is within reach. The time for decisive action is now, and the Green Deal must remain at the forefront of Europe’s agenda, illuminating the path to a brighter, greener future for all.

EU Defense Policy: Need for Swift Reforms in a Multi Challenging Environment

Demetris Naziris

EU DEFENSE POLICY INTO SPOTLIGHT

After a series of unprecedented events in the EU Neighborhood with an illegal and unjustified invasion of Russia into the Ukrainian territory and a new round of bloodshed in the Middle East triggered by the Oct 7 terrorist attack in Israel, the European Union is at crossroads with its history and its purpose. Strategic competition in a multipolar geopolitical environment brings Europe’s defense capabilities and readiness into the spotlight. New asymmetric threats such as climate change, AI, cyberattacks and also disinformation make the environment even more complex and the EU needs to reaffirm its presence not only to its allies and foes, but also its own citizens. Recent positive

policy announcements after the 2024 EU elections by EU Commission President von der Leyen, have given us the opportunity to discuss about the Union’s Defense and Foreign Policy and how it could be more resilient, effective and visible on the global stage.

FROM A SHATTERED POST WAR EUROPE TO DEFENSE INTEGRATION

Before we begin our analysis, we need to look first at how the EU developed its Foreign and Defense Policy, champion its successes and remember its weaknesses. After a devastating Second World War and fear of an increasing Soviet sphere of influence, the democratic States of Western Europe saw what was unthinkable at the moment,

which was the structured cooperation of European States for their own selfdefense. The creation of the Western European Union as enshrined in the Treaty of Brussels in 1948 (and amended in 1954), was a huge milestone for Europe’s defense integration. It was at the right time, as the Cold War with its 2 main players, the US and the Soviet Union started antagonizing for geopolitical predominance. Europe, a strategic partner of the US, had to affirm its presence, regardless of the bloodshed of the past. Disagreements between European states throughout the years did not affect significantly the further development of either the Western European Union, or the European Communities as a whole. Although Europe’s defense structure was merely based on cooperation of European states and NATO, peace, cooperation and economic development led to further EU integration. After

the fall of the Berlin Wall with the subsequent dissolution of the Soviet Union, the international stage saw tectonic changes and Europe was tested with profound challenges. Failure to prevent and respond effectively to the Yugoslav Wars resulted in the empowerment of the Western European Union with the Petersberg Declaration and the creation of the EU with the 1993 Maastricht Treaty. While the 2003 European Security Strategy (replaced by the 2016 European Global Security Strategy) included comprehensively the EU’s common objectives and threats, it was until the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon that Europe finally shaped its Common Security Defense Policy (CSDP) with a mutual defense clause and a structured military cooperation between Member States through PESCO.

WHERE WE STAND TODAY

The 2 invasions of Russia into Ukraine in 2014 and 2022, but also non-compatible threats such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects of the migrant crisis, have led the EU to accelerate its efforts for a comprehensive Defense Policy with more efficient defense bodies and institutions. The creation of the European Defense Fund in 2016 incentivized research and development in the area of Defense. Major geopolitical shifts after 2020 and the 2022 Russian invasion, led the EU for the first time to constitute a procedure for a collective threat assessment as a security provider. The 2022 EU Strategic Compass includes the EU’s vision and goals for the international stage and also promises to create in 2025 a Rapid Deployment Capacity, a small military force of 5000 troops that would be used for nonpermissive environments for multiple types of crises. Furthermore, the new Commission for Defense Industry and Space, which was announced by Commission President von der Leyen just after her reelection, would further promote the Union’s efforts for financial commitment and greater coherence by the Member States in defense spending over the next decades. Surveillance and monitoring of the EU Defense policy reforms must be done regularly based on 3 basic pillars: the political strategic level, the economic investment in Defense and the operability of EU Member States’ forces as a whole or in structured cooperations.

CONSENSUS IN DECISION MAKING PROCESS AND EU NEIGHBOURHOOD

As in every state, we know that the Defense Policy is formulated by the country’s interests and Foreign Policy. The EU Defense Policy in

the context of CSDP is formulated by the EU Council and the High Representative is the main coordinator according to the command-andcontrol structure (C2). Decision making as stated in the EU Functioning Treaties generally requires unanimous approval by the EU Member States. Of course, this has proven to present the conflicting interests of the EU Member States, and it has brought decision making into stalemate. But how could the EU provide an efficient Defense strategy, especially in emergency crises that require urgent management?

First, we have to make clear that EU solidarity and respect to the Member States’ sovereignty is of pivotal importance and a cornerstone of the EU’s existence. The veto power in the EU Council gives not only the opportunity to Member States to discuss and resolve any conflicts on the matters of Foreign and Defense Policy, but it also promotes the necessary solidarity that must be present between the Member States. On the other side, Handlungsfähigkeit must be ensured and what could be agreed between the Member States is that the veto of Member States should be applied in Foreign and Defense Policy matters, which do not affect directly the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the EU Member States.

Another thing that could facilitate EU decision making process in the context of Defense Policy matters is the intense cooperation with States in the EU Neighbourhood and resolution of conflicts, wherever possible. The EU has multiple Cooperation Agreements with states of the Western Balkans, Caucasus, Turkey and Ukraine and many of these states cooperate through NATO and have an open negotiation process for

EU Accession. It is imperative that a more efficient EU Defense Policy (or a possible EU Accession) would require resolution of any outstanding issues, especially if those include specific Member States and third States. Resolution of matters such as the Cyprus/Turkey dispute, Transnistria/Moldova matters and of course the end of Russian invasion into Ukraine should be prioritized, as they would reduce the possibilities of frictions between EU Member States in the EU Council.

PROACTIVITY VS REACTIVITY, A UNIFIED EU DEFENSE MECHANISM

As we look from the EU’s Defense mechanisms throughout history, these were solely based on military cooperation between Member States. Although the C2 structure offers a basic military component, the EU has still no standing permanent military structure as in the case of NATO. Permanent structured military cooperation through PESCO and the Rapid Deployment Capacity, which is about to begin its services in 2025, can be considered as vital steps towards EU Integration, nevertheless they cannot be considered as Europe’s Standing Army. Until and if there is political will in the distant future for the transformation of the EU into a federal or confederal model, the EU must make big steps forward for the development of a credible Defense mechanism.

An EU Defense Union could be an intermediate step towards further EU Integration. In this Union, Member States can participate on a voluntary basis and in no way, it would replace or antagonize NATO or any other alliance, as it is also explained

clearly in the EU Strategic Compass. In last May the proposal by the Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis and the Polish Prime Minister Tusk for the creation of an EU Air Defense Shield is a positive step towards the improvement of EU Security and Defense, as we have seen its effect during the attacks brought against Israel’s Iron Dome during this year.

Today, modern military operations have become increasingly complex, threats are multi-layered and disruptive, emergent technologies have been integrated on a global stage. Investment in new technologies as enshrined in the Strategic Compass and inclusion of non-state actors is pivotal for a modern EU Defense system. Furthermore, live large scale military exercises of Member States should be promoted and incentivized by the EU institutions, as readiness and interoperability are important in emergent crises.

An EU Defense Union could be an intermediate step towards further EU Integration. “

An important thing for the EU Defense integration is the compartmentalization of the elements of the EU’s toolbox into the different EU regions and Member States. Intelligence Services, Anti-cyberattack centers, Climate Protection Coordination Centers and also a new Defense Innovation Hub (as described in the Strategic Compass) can be distributed to Member States, giving a sense of expertise and effective participation inEurope’s Defense structures.

MORE INVESTMENT, LESS FRAGMENTATION

The European Defense Fund created in 2016 was the first step towards the creation of an EU Defense mechanism. After the COVID-19 outbreak and the 2022 Russian invasion, the EU and its Member States have increased defense spending swiftly. The European Defense Industrial Strategy (EDIS) as it was announced in the 2023 State of the Union shall be a key component for a robust and strong EU Defense Policy. The participation of think tanks and academics, and also military experts from EU Member States in the formulation of the EDIS shall improve the readiness of the EU Defense Industry

and also mainstream a defense readiness culture overall. For the next 10 years, the EU shall be ready to combat a major obstacle in the investment of EU Defense and that is fragmentation. The European Defense market is heterogeneous, and capability gaps could be wider resulting in gaps of EU security apparatus. Conflicting interests between Member States could emerge about their share in the EU Defense market, but an equitable distribution of elements could be agreed in good faith.

BIG LEAP FORWARD TO DEVELOP A EUROPEAN SECURITY AND FUTURE

Europe is surrounded by conflicts and instability created by state and non-state actors. In these uncertain times, the EU and all Member States have a once in a lifetime opportunity to promote swift reforms for a secure European future for their citizens. From the ruins of the Second World War until the blood stained regions of eastern Ukraine, the European Union owes to its history and people, that the most successful project of the 20th century remains a pillar of stability and peace in the 21st century on the global stage.

Demetris Naziris General Secretary of FPK Protoporia, Cyprus

Interview with the President of LGBT Alliance Helge Ytterøy L’orange

Vladimir Kljajic

Could you tell us more about the mission and goals of the LGBT Alliance? What are the organisation’s main activities in promoting LGBT rights across Europe? And how did you get involved?

We have a double focus in all our work; the internal focus in our political family to raise awareness for diversity and inclusion in the EPP and member parties. Externally we are developing centreright policies for the LGBT+ community. We have developed a political platform that is partly a political agenda for our work on the European level and partly recommendations for solutions on LGBT+ related matters for national parties around Europe.

To raise awareness we also conduct digital seminars on various themes, like earlier this autumn we had a very interesting seminar og the situation for LGBT+persons in Russia, and we had a physical seminar on LGBT+issues in cooperation with the Martens Centre in Brussels.

How do you assess the current position of the LGBT community in Europe? What are the most pressing challenges they face, both socially and politically?

It is a very divided picture. We see positive development I several countries, like same-sex marriage in Estonia, Greece, and the election of an openly gay President in Latvia. Also, on other issues like adoption rights we see a positive development.

On the other hand, we are very worried about the rapid change in attitude in many countries. In Ukraine, the Motherland Party has started arguing against LGBT+ rights, and strong forces are doing the same in Serbia. In Georgia, the pro-Russian government recently introduced Russian-inspired laws to attack the LGBT community.

It is alarming, and sad, that such attitudes and laws also gained a foothold within the EU. Hungary decided on anti-LGBT+ legislation in 2021, and processes against this is going on in Brussels. Forces working to restrict basic rights for LGBT persons are strong in Slovakia, and we see the same tendencies in Czech Republic and Lithuania. In Bulgaria the situation is very volatile after decisions in parliament in August.

Basically the common factor is the far-right’s fear of diversity in society, that we need to realise and fight.

As a European People’s Party member, how do you navigate the sometimes differing views on LGBT rights within the party? How do you work with other EPP members to foster more inclusive policies?

In our political family we participate in all EPP-fora. We took part in developing the election manifesto for the European election in June, and are pleased that we got in important issues like

■ The fight against all forms of discrimination and, while fighting racism, intolerance, violence, hate crime, and anti-Semitism.

■ Protecting LGBTQ+ rights and those of minorities

■ The best conditions to everyone for starting a family

We also follow the work of the EPP parliamentary group, and have meetings with the LGBT+ Intergroup in the parliament. We have also had a

good dialogue with the outgoing commissioner for Equality, Helena Dalli, and look forward to establishing relations with the new, Hadja Lahbib.

We also serve as a support for national parties on issues regarding the LGBT+ community and can be helpful in both finding solutions on political matters and opening dialogue with LGBT+organisations.

What steps is the LGBT Alliance taking to expand its reach across Europe? Are there any plans to broaden the alliance, and if so, what strategies are you employing to build support, especially in countries where LGBT rights face greater resistance?

Our Alliance was established in 2013 with 3 founding organisations. Today we consist of 11 organisations from 10 countries. We became an official part of the EPP-family, as an associated entity, in 2023. We are very happy that we after our Annual Meeting in November will formally visualise our political affiliation by changing name to EPPride.

We grow by making contact with the EPP member parties that we see raise LGBT+ issues and/or if there are LGBT+ matters coming up in their country. Recently we have established contacts with Nea Demokratia in Greece and GERB in Bulgaria. We also reach out to different parties to see if they have LGBT+networks or LGBT+persons that can participate and become members of our Alliance.

Both EPP-related LGBT+networks and persons can become members of our Alliance.

How does the LGBT Alliance engage with younger generations, especially considering the varying attitudes towards LGBT rights among young conservatives? Have you noticed a shift in attitudes from more conservative youth on these issues?

On the national level several of our member organisations have very close co-operations with their parties youth organisations and student organisations, as well as women’s organisations, related to running politics as well as developing new party programs.

On alliance level we exchange political ideas and experiences, so that our member organisations

can both reuse arguments and memos in their national work.

So far, it seems like the most alarming tendencies come from the far-right, not internally in large EPPmember parties.

What role do you believe education and awareness play in changing societal views on LGBT rights? Can you share any examples of successful campaigns or initiatives your organisation has undertaken?

Education, visibility and awareness is the key to prevent prejudice regarding LGBT+ as well as other minorities. In our political platform we advise all countries to implement adapted measures to build knowledge about sexuality, gender, selfunderstanding and boundary setting at all levels in the education system.

Research from US states that have implemented prohibition of LGBT-information in schools shows a tripling of hate speech and exclusion of young LGBT+ persons. That really visualises the effect of deliberate action to make a minority group invisible.

Of our own activities, I will mention the work on prohibition of conversion therapy: A CDUlead government in Germany implemented a prohibition in 2016. Our Norwegian member organisation overtook memos and background, reused in their national work and a prohibition was suggested by the conservative coalition in 2021. Then the Swedish member organisation took all the Norwegian material, adapted to Swedish, and made the Moderate party the first party in Sweden to decide on prohibition. Now new legislation on this important issue is on its way from the conservative coalition government in Sweden.

How does your organisation collaborate with policymakers, and what specific policies are you currently advocating for at the European level?

We have good cooperation with both the Pride organisation EPOA as well as ILGA Europe and also the LGBT+ intergroup in the European Parliament. We have regular meetings with the other political networks, from the Liberals, the Socialists, and less active the Socialdemocrats, just to see if there are common matters we can work on.

We strongly reject the notion that being LGBTI+ is some form of an ideology. To see and recognize the whole individual it is important to recognize the multitude of characteristics, of which sexual orientation and/or gender identity is as important as other characteristics. This is and must continue to be the base we build our politics on.

For us politics to ensure Rainbow families is a priority. Modern family policies need to aim at supporting the well-being of all families and family situations. All families, and children in particular, must have the same legal and social rights, regardless of what their family looks like.

Implementing concrete measures for mutual recognition of (registered) partnerships and same-

sex marriages for EU citizens and their children (rainbow families. Also, a clear stand against removing children’s rights to parents by denying parenthood due to gender definition is very important.

“

Education, visibility and awareness is the key to prevent prejudice regarding LGBT+ as well as other minorities.

Work to improve legislation is another important area. Awareness regarding hate-crimes and further initiatives to make hate-speech and hate-crimes a European crime is a priority as well as a European ban on so-called ‘Conversion therapy’.

We are open for cooperation with both EPP side organisations, like EDS, and national political member organisations to work on developing a more inclusive politics seen from the centre-right perspective.

What advice would you give to young LGBT individuals who may feel marginalised, particularly in more conservative or less accepting communities?

Know that you are not alone! Use possibilities to contact LGBT+organisations. Most countries have organisations that work with LGBT+ issues and form an LGBT+ community. ILGA Europe has a very good list covering most of Europe

Thank you for taking the time to do this interview!

Vladimir

Four Years of Struggle: What is Happening in Belarus

Aliaksandr Parshankou and Mikalai Melchanka

In 2024, Belarus marked 30 years of Alexander Lukashenko’s rule. As early as 1995, democratically oriented Belarusians began to fight against, at that time, a young dictator. Belarus’s fight for freedom of speech and human rights has continued for decades. 2020 was a turning point in Belarusian history. On August 9, representatives of all walks of life and professions spoke out against the anti-people regime. The largest anti-authoritarian protests in the history of Belarus have been going on for four years and are sometimes referred to as a revolution. Despite the incredible level of repression, the Belarusian society courageously resists the dictatorship in a partisan struggle.

The Consequences of Repression on Belarusian Society

This struggle against a bloody dictatorship comes with dire consequences. According to the latest data of the human rights activist Leanid Sudalenka, throughout these four years, about 50,000 people were behind bars for political reasons, which is more than 0.5% of the entire population of Belarus. Politically motivated persecution at workplaces is the norm. Repressions have changed the structure of research institutions and universities: faculties and departments have disappeared, and personnel composition has changed significantly. Serious damage was done to the Belarusian economy. It doesn’t seem possible to assess the full scale of what has been happening in the presence of total fear among the population.

Students who had participated in protests were detained on the territory of their educational institutions. Sometimes, security forces broke into universities, colleges, and boarding schools to

arrest the most active protest participants. Many students were expelled for political reasons and deprived of the right to receive education and a future in their homeland. Repressions against young people were not limited to expulsions and arrests. In Belarusian prisons, young people faced terrible conditions of detention: overcrowded cells, lack of food and water, and refusal of medical assistance. Witnesses also report torture.

The Impact of Exile and Forced Emigration

After 2020, several hundreds of thousands of people were forced to leave Belarus, with Lithuania, Poland, and Georgia becoming the main destinations for Belarusians. In this way, the map of social activism changed. Almost all Belarusian organizations, including youth ones, were forced to relocate. In their homeland, they were eliminated, banned, recognized as terrorist and extremist formations.

Struggle and collaboration continue beyond emigration. Within four years, the democratic forces of Belarus have noticeably developed. The leader of the democratic Belarusians, Sviatlana Tsikhanovskaya, has formed her own government (the United Transitional Cabinet). Since August 2024, a youth representation has started its work there. The parliamentary-type structure is the Coordinating Council of three convocations. Democratic forces held electronic elections for this body, as a result of which 80 members of the Belarusian proto-parliament were elected. More than 10% of parliamentarians are young people, and some of them belong to a separate youth faction of the Coordination Council.

The Role of the War in Ukraine and International Relations

The war in Ukraine has had a significant impact on the situation in Belarus. The Belarusian people did not support Lukashenka’s decision to assist Russian troops. From the first days of the war, Belarusians collected aid for the military and supported Ukrainian refugees. Several Belarusian units are in the structure of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, including the regiment named after the hero of the uprising against the Russian Empire in 1863 - Konstantin Kalinovsky (Konstanty Kalinowski).

Lukashenka’s complicity in the war did not go unnoticed by the West. Due to the actions of the illegitimate leader, Belarusians faced incredible visa restrictions, and the situation is only getting worse. Some countries, such as the Czech Republic, have stopped issuing visas altogether (a visa can only be obtained in exceptional cases authorized by the government). The exceptions made for Belarusian students, achieved by Belarusian youth organizations in Prague, were a sure success. Additionally, due to participating in the abduction of Ukrainian children, the Belarusian Red Cross was excluded from the international organization of the Red Cross.

The new iron curtain has been a disaster for Belarusian youth, who are forced to look for opportunities, not in Europe, as they used to, but in Russia. Ordinary students’ isolation from the West has become the reason for the increase of Russian influence in the country. The gap between people in Belarus and those who were forced to emigrate is constantly growing. Despite all the small victories of the democratic movement, getting a visa for an ordinary Belarusian is becoming increasingly difficult.

The struggle of Belarusians for freedom, which is not limited only to the last four years, gives solid hope for a positive future for Belarus. A people with a rich European history and a serious cultural heritage now more than ever requires the support of the entire democratic world. Belarusian youth, who are responsible for the future of their country, deserve special attention. The active work of youth organizations and structures both inside the country and abroad shows that young people understand this responsibility and work together in order to make Belarus free as soon as possible. Free Belarus guarantees a safe and stable future for Europe; therefore, supporting Belarusian youth in its struggle is a common concern of democratic Europe.

Spain’s Open Borders: A Crisis Threatening Europe’s Stability

The Spanish government’s open-border policies are not just a national concern; they pose a significant threat to the stability and security of Europe as a whole.

Spain, the only European country bordering Africa, is often a gateway to Europe and has been grappling with a surge in illegal immigration. The government’s approach to this crisis has been controversial, to say the least. Instead of implementing stringent measures to control the influx, the authorities seem to be promoting illegal immigration—a move that is damaging for both the migrants and the European nations affected by this policy.

The Role of NGOs: Humanitarian Aid or Human Trafficking?

One of the most alarming aspects is the alleged collaboration between the Spanish government and certain non-governmental organizations (NGOs). These NGOs, under the guise of humanitarian

aid, are accused of facilitating human trafficking operations. They provide resources and support to migrants attempting to cross into Spain illegally, effectively acting as people-smuggling mafias. This not only undermines legal immigration processes but also endangers the lives of migrants, who are often subjected to perilous journeys.

Integration Challenges: A Strain on Public Resources

Furthermore, the Spanish government appears to lack any substantial integration policies for these migrants. Without proper support systems in place, immigrants struggle to assimilate into Spanish society. This neglect leads to social fragmentation, increased unemployment rates, and strains on public services such as healthcare and education. The absence of integration strategies not only hinders migrants’ ability to contribute positively to their new communities but also fuels tensions between locals and newcomers.

Ignacio Dancausa

In a controversial move, PM Pedro Sánchez extended an offer of 250,000 jobs to African immigrants in Mauritania. This decision has raised eyebrows, especially considering Spain’s own unemployment challenges, as it has both the highest overall unemployment and youth unemployment rates in Europe.

Offering jobs to foreign nationals while a significant portion of the Spanish population remains unemployed is a policy that is inexplicable and detrimental to the nation’s socio-economic fabric, likely increasing unemployment and lowering salaries.

A Population Shift: Demographic Changes and Their Impacts

The open-border stance has profound implications for Spain’s demographics. According to recent reports, under PM Sánchez’s leadership, Spain has experienced a significant demographic shift involving a change of around 4.5 million people between Spanish nationals and foreigners—10% of the population in only six years. Specifically, the country has seen an influx of approximately 3.3 million foreign residents, while the number of Spanish nationals has decreased by about 1.2 million.

This substantial population shift underscores the challenges of integrating a large influx of immigrants without effective planning. While a diverse population can enrich a nation culturally and economically, uncontrolled immigration without effective management can lead to negative consequences, such as resource depletion and infrastructural strain. This unsustainable trend highlights the urgent need for effective management and integration policies to address the significant demographic changes affecting Spain.

The ramifications of Spain’s policies could extend beyond its borders. Other European nations could be affected by the spillover of migrants who, after entering Spain, move freely across the Schengen

Area. This uncontrolled movement will strain relations between European countries, complicate border management, and potentially heighten security risks.

A Call for Comprehensive Reform

Moreover, the situation endangers the migrants themselves. Encouraging illegal immigration exposes them to human traffickers, dangerous travel conditions, and the risk of exploitation upon arrival. Without proper legal channels and support systems, migrants become vulnerable to abuse and neglect, contradicting the humanitarian principles that should guide immigration policies.

Addressing this crisis requires a fundamental shift in both Europe and Spain’s approach. Firstly, the government must strengthen border controls to prevent illegal crossings while ensuring that asylum seekers and refugees can apply through legitimate means. Collaborating with European partners to enhance security measures can help manage the influx more effectively.

Secondly, there must be a crackdown on organizations that facilitate illegal immigration under the pretense of humanitarian work. Genuine NGOs play a crucial role in providing aid and support, but those involved in human trafficking must be held accountable. Transparency and stringent oversight are essential to distinguish

between legitimate humanitarian efforts and illicit activities.

Lastly, the development and implementation of comprehensive integration policies are imperative. Providing language classes, employment opportunities, and cultural orientation programs can help migrants assimilate and contribute positively to society. This not only benefits the immigrants but also promotes social cohesion and reduces the potential for conflict.

In conclusion, Spain’s current immigration policies are not only unsustainable but potentially harmful to both the nation and the broader European community. The government’s actions, whether intentional or misguided, are leading the country towards a crisis that could have been avoided with responsible leadership and strategic planning.

Europe watches as Spain stands at a crossroads. Will it choose a path that safeguards its people and honors its commitments, or will it continue down a road that jeopardizes the future of the nation and the stability of the continent?

“

Without proper support systems in place, immigrants struggle to assimilate into Spanish society.

The solution lies in immediate and decisive action to change course, prioritizing the well-being of citizens and the humane treatment of migrants within a framework of law and order. Only then can Spain hope to overcome this crisis and set a positive example for Europe and the world.

Ignacio

Dancausa. Chairman NNGG Madrid.

Can AI Help us Build Trust in Election Campaigns?

Alex Gunter

Most reporting on the impact of AI on elections has been very negative. Many articles express fear over large-scale dark disinformation campaigns. While these are legitimate concerns, the hype often overshadows the myriad of potential benefits AI might have on election campaigns in Europe. Careful implementation of AI can potentially build more resonance and trust in politics.

AI is already prevalent.

AI is reshaping all industries from healthcare and finance to education and public safety. Its impact is profound, enhancing productivity, revolutionising the job market, and introducing new forms of civic and social engagement. This includes the political industry as well. In the aftermath of the US elections, it will no doubt be revealed that one of the main tools used by campaign professionals were AI Large Language Models (LLMs) like OpenAI’s ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini.

Governments in Europe, positioning themselves as global technology leaders, face both the pressure and opportunity to navigate AI’s integration responsibly. This opportunity and responsibility in politics has yet to come to fruition.

I was privileged to host the Westminster Technology Forum’s private lunch on AI in late October. It offered Parliamentarians an exclusive, off-the-record setting to engage directly with prominent technology sector leaders, discussing the implications of AI on society. It

was a groundbreaking assembly of politicians and industry leaders that provided an in-depth knowledge exchange, especially regarding AI regulation, privacy, ethics, and societal impact. The resulting discussions highlighted how critical AI innovation in political campaigns will be.

Shortcomings of AI LLM

AI’s impact should not be overestimated, however. Representatives from one of the most advanced AI large language models at the Westminster Technology Forum were the first to admit AI’s limitations. One of the biggest limitations is its lack of emotional understanding. AI struggles to make human common-sense judgements, only able to imitate the style and tone of characters. For example AI LLMs have been trained to talk and speak like Sherlock Holmes, but they can’t solve crimes like he could.

This ability to imitate, however, is a serious danger in itself. Bad actors and rogue states can leverage AI to create convincing but misleading content, flooding media with targeted disinformation. With its capacity to tailor messages, AI could generate highly persuasive, personalised ads that manipulate voter sentiment, enabling largescale, automated campaigns that undermine transparency. These risks emphasise the need for balanced regulation, ensuring AI use aligns with democratic principles without stifling innovation.

European citizens are very concerned about AI in elections already. A survey of over 3,000 people across ten countries by IE University in Spain

found that more than 30% felt that AI has already influenced their choices in an election. The public, out of fear, will demand action to preserve election integrity. AI’s use in elections needs to be managed carefully.

AI & Trust

If AI is not regulated properly then trust in politics will only decline. However, while these fears are valid, fear must not blind Europe’s approach to AI. Europeans must recognise the potential that AI has to actually rebuild trust in politics which is at an all time low.

Trust, for example, in UK politicians has reached a historic low, with record numbers expressing

scepticism about politicians’ integrity and intentions. The National Centre for Social Research revealed earlier in 2024 that 45% of voters “almost never” trust the government to prioritise the country over party interests, and 58% doubt politicians’ honesty under pressure. Brexit has intensified distrust, especially among Leave voters who feel let down by unfulfilled promises. Financial hardship and political scandals also contribute to widespread disillusionment, with many voters now questioning the efficacy of Britain’s electoral system and governance structure.

The situation is similar across many other European countries. This is why if AI can help rebuild trust we need to utilise it.

How can AI help rebuild trust?

Politicians exist almost entirely in transmit mode. They publish news articles, speak on the television, and give speeches in grand halls. There are few opportunities for voters to interact and learn about the issues that affect them personally. This is especially true for our many minority communities within Europe whose needs are often forgotten.

Advances in AI-powered data analysis enable campaigns to better understand voter concerns, allowing them to craft messages that genuinely connect with individual values and interests.

This personalised approach means each voter receives information on issues that matter most to them and reflect their lived experiences, fostering engagement and encouraging active participation in the election process.

Technological advances now allow for tailored oneon-one communication, providing candidates with tools to reach voters in a way that feels relevant and resonant. With generative AI, campaigns can now deliver messages in a tone and style that reflects each person’s unique interests, whether that’s support for the arts, a commitment to social causes, or dedication to community values.

When politicians can talk to people in their own language about their own issues, it will build trust through engagement.

Naturally, AI can’t be given free rein to create policy and slogans on its own. A human in the loop approach will likely be the way AI LLMs will need to operate in campaigns. This means everything will be reviewed by human eyes before being released into the public domain. But the speed at which variations of content can be created will enable a much more personalised approach to campaigning.

Traditional Campaigning in the Loop

This becomes even more exciting when combined with the tried-and-tested political approaches that have worked for decades. This is especially true for door-to-door campaigning. By using new technologies to record key information points from doorstep campaigning, more relevant material can be developed and pushed out.

This will also allow campaigners to have more relevant doorstep conversations about topics voters actually care about and are likely to base their vote on.

AI in election campaigns can be as much a friend as it is a foe, similar to early fears around television and later social media. AI comes with dangers and opportunities.

European political campaigns have a choice to make: embrace AI and build more relevant personalised campaigns that improve voter engagement, or stay fearful of AI, hoping that their opposition doesn’t adopt it, whether from the farleft or the far-right.

While AI has risks, such as disinformation, it also offers Europe an opportunity to foster a more engaged, trusted political landscape if integrated responsibly.

We Should Start Taking the ICC Seriously

Sotiris Paphitis

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is the first and only permanent international tribunal with the authority to prosecute individuals for crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The ICC was created with the adoption of the Rome Statute in 1998, which entered into force in 2002, after it was ratified by 60 countries, officially bringing the ICC into existence.

Before its creation, the application of international criminal law was applied through ad hoc tribunals that were established when needed. The most notable examples are the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals (1945-1946), which were established after World War II and were responsible for prosecuting major war criminals from Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. More recently, we had the examples of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) (1993) and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) (1994). These were also ad hoc tribunals set up by the United Nations to prosecute crimes committed during the Yugoslav Wars and the Rwandan Genocide, respectively. Like the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals, these courts were created to deal with specific conflicts and were not permanent. Other examples include the Special Court for Sierra Leone which was set up to prosecute those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law committed during the Sierra Leone Civil War (1991–2002) and the Khmer Rouge Tribunal, was created to prosecute senior leaders of the communist Khmer Rouge regime

responsible for crimes committed between 1975 and 1979 during Cambodia’s brutal genocide. The regime, led by Pol Pot, caused the deaths of an estimated 1.7 to 2 million people through forced labor, starvation, mass executions, and other inhumane acts.

This commitment to justice is crucial for upholding the rule of law internationally, something that should be close to the heart of every European.

The importance of the ICC

The ICC in particular is crucial for several reasons, both as an institution of justice and as a mechanism for maintaining international peace and order. Though it might seem obvious, it must be recognized that the ICC is responsible for fighting impunity for the most serious crimes of global concern (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression). These crimes often go unpunished at the national level, particularly when states are unable or unwilling to

prosecute their own leaders or powerful individuals. The ICC ensures that perpetrators of these crimes can still be held accountable. Historically, this was not the case as many leaders or high-ranking officials responsible for mass atrocities were able to act with impunity. To the contrary, now, the ICC seeks to close this gap by holding these individuals accountable, regardless of their position or status. This commitment to justice is crucial for upholding the rule of law internationally, something that should be close to the heart of every European.

Additionally, the ICC has been as a means of deterrence of future atrocities, whilst also providing justice for victims, who would otherwise be left with no means to secure their rights. On that matter, it is important to note that beyond punishment, the ICC can also order reparations for victims, helping them recover and rebuild after the trauma of violence. This aspect of the Court’s mandate is especially important in helping to heal communities torn apart by conflict.

On a wider level, the ICC is responsible for strengthening International Law by developing and clarifying it, particularly around complex concepts like genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Its rulings set important legal precedents for future cases and contribute to the evolution of international criminal law. By doing so, the ICC helps address the underlying causes of conflict by targeting those responsible for atrocities, thus promoting international peace and stability. By removing war criminals and holding them accountable, the ICC can contribute to long-term peace in regions affected by violence and instability. Moreover, by prosecuting the key perpetrators of violence, the ICC can help pave the way for reconciliation in post-conflict societies. Its trials help to ensure that the truth is told, and justice is served, which can aid in the healing process for societies emerging from conflict.

Where it gets problematic

If the ICC was a perfectly running organ, there would not be a need for an article. To the contrary, the ICC

has one great weakness. It relies on cooperation from states and international organizations for its investigations, arrests, and enforcement of rulings. Though this cooperation should have fostered a global sense of shared responsibility to uphold human rights and combat impunity, practice has shown differently.

The reason is that the ICC operates on the principle of complementarity, meaning it only steps in when national courts are unable or unwilling to prosecute. This principle was set out in the Rome Statute so that it would be ensured that the ICC respects the sovereignty of states and encourages domestic legal systems to take responsibility for prosecuting serious crimes. Accordingly, the ICC was created to serve as a last resort, ensuring accountability when local justice fails.

Today 124 states are parties to the Rome Statute. Notable absentees from the ICC include the United States, Russia, China, and India. The absence of these giants of the international stage from the ICC inevitably affect its efficiency to a significant level, given that the enforcement of all of the Court’s decision is dependent upon its member states.

However, this is not a novel problem. During his first address to the UN General Assembly, as president of the ICTY, Judge Cassese

characterised the Tribunal as a ‘giant without limbs’, entirely dependent on state authorities to work. This comparison applies to all international criminal tribunals, including the ICC. Nevertheless, the ICTY has been more successful in harnessing state support when contrasted to the ICC.

At the same time, it must be noted that the obligation of states to cooperate is twofold, there is the general commitment to cooperate with the Court and the obligation of states to amend their national legislations in order to facilitate cooperation. For a State to be compelled to cooperate with an international court, there needs to be a legal basis upon which the obligation can be based. For the ICTY, this was the UN Charter. Establishing the Court through a UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolution, which was based on the Charter had the effect of bringing the provisions of the ad hoc Tribunal into force immediately and being applicable upon all states.

Contrastingly, as we mentioned already, the ICC was established through the Rome Statute, an international treaty which each State Party (SP) had to sign and ratify to be bound by its provisions. This is one of the key distinctions between the two Courts. While for the ICTY, all states in the world were bound to cooperate under Art.29 of its Statute, simply by being members to the UN,

this was not the case for the ICC. The use of an international treaty meant that only SPs are obliged to cooperate with the Court’s requests. The dichotomy among SPs and non-SPs means that the ICC has a smaller pool of states which are under an obligation to assist it, hence making its cooperation regime less effective. Add this to the fact that important states have chosen to leave themselves out of the ICC framework, and we get an international court that struggles to enforce every decision it takes.

Nevertheless, even when states are obliged to cooperate this does not guarantee that they actually will. Therefore, international courts need to find ways to deal with uncooperative states. In the case of the ICTY, its Rules of Procedure allow the Court to refer an uncooperative state to the UN Security Council. The Council then had a range of political and legal tools in its disposal which could be utilised against states refusing to cooperate with the Court.

The ICC on the other hand, is empowered under Art.87(7) of its Statute to refer non-cooperative SPs to the Assembly of SPs or the UNSC. The availability of more ways to deal with such states to

the ICC should have meant that SPs would be more incentivised to cooperate. Yet, a 2014 University of Nottingham Report has noted that no formal measures have been adopted thus far as a result of a referral. The Report note that these records incentivise SPs not to cooperate, without risking any serious consequences. In other words, states do not bother taking the ICC seriously enough as they will not be facing any consequences if they choose to ignore its decisions.

The example of Omar al-Bashir

The case of the Sudanese dictator, Al-Bashir exemplifies the ineffectiveness of the referral system. The former Sudanese dictator was able to travel to a number of SPs in spite of an international arrest warrant being issued against him. Nonetheless, the ICC has not dealt with the host states in a consistent manner. While Nigeria was not referred for its omission to arrest Al-Bashir, the Democratic Republic of the Congo was referred to both available organs. This application of Art.87(7) is not only selective but most importantly arbitrary since the ICC did not have to refer the DRC to both the ASP and the UNSC. The Report notes that such incidents make cooperation in the future even more unlikely. However, there are cases in which

the referral system has managed to encourage cooperation. The example of Malawi for the case of Al-Bashir where the accused managed to travel without getting arrested led to another referral. This prompted the state to commit that it would arrest the accused if he visited ever again, leading to a cancelation of an African Union summit there. Yet, this tool needs to be used cautiously, balancing fostering good relationships with SPs while confronting them for their mistakes.

The US soldiers’ case

Another instance when the ICC was, unfortunately, not taken seriously enough was when it investigated violations of the Rome Statute due to the actions of US soldiers in Afghanistan. The ICC, began investigating alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Afghanistan, focusing on multiple actors, including the Taliban, Afghan national security forces, and US military personnel, as well as CIA operatives.

The allegations against US forces primarily stemmed from reports of mistreatment of detainees in facilities operated by the CIA and the military during the global war on terror. These accusations include torture, cruel treatment, and other violations of international law. The ICC’s inquiry into US actions during the war in Afghanistan marked a significant moment, as it represented one of the first times that a major international tribunal sought to hold US personnel accountable for actions in a conflict zone.

However, the US has consistently rejected the ICC’s jurisdiction over its citizens. As mentioned already, the United States is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, and successive US administrations have maintained that the court lacks the authority to prosecute American citizens. When the ICC prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, initially signaled her intent to investigate US actions in Afghanistan, it sparked a strong backlash from Washington. Under the Trump administration, the US took an unprecedented step, imposing sanctions on Bensouda and other ICC officials in 2020. These

sanctions included travel bans and asset freezes, with the administration justifying the move by claiming that the ICC’s investigation was politically motivated and outside its legitimate authority.

The sanctions drew widespread criticism from the international community, as many saw it as a direct attack on the independence of the court. The US argued that the ICC’s focus on US personnel was a violation of its sovereignty and that its justice system was capable of handling any allegations without the need for international intervention.

This hardline stance softened under the Biden administration. In April 2021, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that the US would lift the sanctions on ICC officials. This move was seen as an effort to repair the US relationship with international institutions, though Blinken made clear that the US still did not recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction over its citizens. The removal of sanctions marked a return to a more traditional diplomatic approach, but it did not signal a full embrace of the ICC’s investigation.

As of 2023, the ICC investigation into war crimes in Afghanistan remained ongoing, but it has shifted its focus. In September 2021, Karim Khan, the new chief prosecutor of the ICC, indicated that the court would prioritize crimes committed by the Taliban and ISIS-K, the Islamic State’s affiliate in Afghanistan. This shift has been met with criticism from human rights organizations, which argue that crimes committed by US forces and Afghan government troops should not be deprioritized. The move also raised concerns that the court was backing away from holding powerful nations accountable in favor of prosecuting non-state actors and insurgent groups.

The situation regarding US soldiers in Afghanistan highlights a troubling inconsistency in how major powers engage with the ICC and underscores a broader reluctance to take the court seriously. This is particularly evident when juxtaposed with the case of al-Bashir, who was indicted by

the ICC for war crimes and genocide in Darfur. Despite the US initially insisting on respecting the court’s authority and encouraging international cooperation in holding al-Bashir accountable, the US government has since adopted a dismissive stance toward the ICC when its own personnel are implicated. This duality reflects a troubling trend where powerful nations, while advocating for accountability in other contexts, are unwilling to subject themselves to the same standards of justice they promote. The lack of consistent support for the ICC undermines its credibility and effectiveness, suggesting that international justice is often contingent upon national interests rather than a genuine commitment to upholding human rights and the rule of law.

Turning to Putin

Just like most geopolitical conversations these days, we are forced to turn our attention to Russian President, Vladimir Putin. The relationship between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the ICC has reached a critical juncture, particularly following the court’s decision in March 2023 to issue an arrest warrant for him. The ICC charged Putin with war crimes related to the unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children from occupied territories in Ukraine to Russia, a situation that arose amidst the conflict that escalated with Russia’s invasion in February 2022. The court’s warrant specifically accused Putin of bearing individual criminal responsibility for these actions, which are viewed as serious violations of international humanitarian law.

In response to the ICC’s announcement, the Russian government vehemently rejected the charges, declaring the arrest warrant as “null and void.” This stance is consistent with Russia’s broader refusal to acknowledge the ICC’s jurisdiction, as the country is not a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the court. Russian officials characterized the warrant as politically motivated and biased, reflecting a deep-seated skepticism towards international legal institutions.

The issuance of the arrest warrant garnered significant international attention and condemnation of Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Many countries, particularly those in the European Union and NATO, expressed strong support for the ICC’s decision, emphasizing the necessity of accountability for war crimes in the context of the ongoing conflict.

The issuance of an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin over war crimes in Ukraine was a bold move by the ICC, but it also highlights the court’s limitations and the international community’s inconsistent stance toward justice. While European and NATO countries have voiced strong support for the ICC’s decision, the reality is that similar support has been conspicuously absent in other cases, such as the investigation of US soldiers in Afghanistan or the failure to arrest Omar al-Bashir. This selective application of justice raises questions about the sincerity of the commitment to the ICC’s principles. If the world truly valued the court’s role in upholding human rights and international law, such selective enforcement and politicization of justice would not be tolerated. The hypocrisy in how the ICC is supported or dismissed based on political interests severely undermines its legitimacy and effectiveness, leaving us to wonder: do we genuinely believe in the mission of the ICC, or are we only willing to take it seriously when it suits our geopolitical agendas?

However, the US has consistently rejected the ICC’s jurisdiction over its citizens

Beyond the Lecture Hall: How AI Disruption is Shaping the Future of Higher Education

Ema Jašková, Alex Zamborský

Education based on humanistic values, enlightenment ideas, and culture is one of the most important pillars of common European heritage. Since the establishment of the first universities on the European continent in the 11th and 12th centuries, the scholastic tradition and proper research methods have been passed down from generation to generation. Some of the parallels between past and present are captivating. For example, the flagship of the European integration process—the Erasmus Program—has roots in the 17th century. Many young European aristocrats participated

in the so-called Grand Tour, traveling around European countries to gain new worldviews and educational experiences. One of the greatest achievements of past centuries is the accessibility of higher education to broad masses of young Europeans. English scholar John Henry Newman, in his book The Idea of a University, defends the importance of liberal education and its value for society as a whole.

However, what is the idea of a university—its raison d’être—in the age of artificial intelligence and chatbots like ChatGPT?

The AI Challenge to Academic Integrity

The introduction of ChatGPT and other chatbot programs in early 2023 caught universities and academia off guard. Advanced chatbots today possess nearly omnipotent power to generate any text from scratch, drawing on data from approximately two billion websites. Writing academic theses remains a key assessment of research capabilities at most European universities. However, with the rise of artificial intelligence, breaches of academic honesty through plagiarized work have become easier, and plagiarism detection has become more challenging. Universities have had to adopt measures to detect and prevent cheating, including using anti-plagiarism software.

According to a recent survey by the US-based Center for Democracy and Technology, almost twothirds of American university lecturers admitted using detection software, such as Turnitin, to check student work. Some European universities have gone even further. For instance, Prague University of Economics and Business announced it would no longer require bachelor’s theses from newly enrolled students due to widespread AI use, replacing them instead with more practically oriented graduate projects.

The Existential Question for Universities

The Washington Post recently published an opinion piece with the headline “Artificial intelligence is an existential threat to colleges.”

But is the current situation with AI really such an alarming issue and existential threat to centuriesold academic traditions, or does it also offer a brighter vision of the future? Numerous lecturers worldwide have weighed in on the potential impact of artificial intelligence on higher education. The majority of experts, including computer science professors from New Zealand, Finland, the United States, and Ireland, call for “updated pedagogical strategies that focus on new skill sets.” Many university professors interested in integrating AI into education believe that academia will be able to adapt to it more effectively than other industries, potentially enhancing both learning and teaching experiences. Additionally, AI-powered tools can help instructors create engaging activities, assist with grading and feedback, and support curriculum development by analyzing learning outcomes and recommending best practices for instructional design.

Innovations in AI-Enhanced Education

Some universities, such as Arizona State University, have announced collaborations with OpenAI, inviting faculty and staff to submit ideas for enhancing student success, innovating research, and streamlining organizational processes. Numerous Canadian universities are also establishing pilot AI projects, including automating financial auditing and developing new humanities courses. Higher education is currently challenged by overworked lecturers, so increasing

their efficiency with AI tools could provide them with greater autonomy and the ability to focus on more meaningful work. Additionally, AI has the potential to support students in more direct, non-plagiaristic ways, helping those who come to university less prepared by offering targeted education, personalized tutoring, and skill reviews.

Potential Pitfalls of AI in Academia

Computer scientist Shlomo Engelson Argamon, however, is keenly aware of the potential downsides of AI in higher education. He warns: “It’s very easy to take these tools and turn this into dystopia.” Argamon identifies three main categories of immediate risks: disinformation, dubious labor practices within AI development, and shifts in the labor market and economy. While there is a common belief that AI will transform rather than eliminate jobs, it is crucial for professors to teach students about AI’s responsible use in their future professions. Preparing students in this way ensures they can participate in the positive, not negative, evolution of their fields.

“ The introduction of ChatGPT and other chatbot programs in early 2023 caught universities and academia off guard.

Trump Win Could Usher Global Stability and Economic Growth

Vladimir Kljajic

Donald J. Trump’s unexpected victory in the 2024 U.S. presidential election highlighted significant support from minority groups and increased the popular vote. His success, bolstered by backing from Hispanic, African American, and Asian American communities, points to a shift in the political landscape, reflecting a broader endorsement of President-elect Trump’s vision for a stable and prosperous America. This new term presents an opportunity to address pressing global and domestic challenges through policies grounded in realism, a principle strongly endorsed by his ally, Vice President-elect J.D. Vance.

Strengthening Diplomatic Success in Foreign Policy

A defining strength of President-elect Trump’s foreign policy has been a commitment to realism, focusing on U.S. interests and pragmatic solutions, especially in the Middle East. His administration’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and the imposition of sanctions limited Iran’s influence in the region. These measures facilitated the Abraham Accords, advancing cooperation between Israel and Arab nations and shifting away from endless interventions. President-elect Trump aims to expand this approach in his upcoming term, promoting collaboration over prolonged conflict.

Urgent Need for Peace in Ukraine

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has impacted European stability and created a humanitarian crisis. Vice President-elect Vance, a key supporter, has been vocal about the need for a realismbased approach, advocating for solutions prioritizing direct diplomacy and de-escalation.

Known as a practical dealmaker, President-elect Trump’s diplomatic style uniquely positions him to encourage direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, balancing security and territorial concerns.

A renewed Trump administration would likely focus on reducing U.S. military involvement while encouraging Europe to pursue financial and security autonomy. This approach could foster greater self-reliance in European nations, aligning with a policy grounded in realism.

Known as a practical dealmaker, President-elect Trump’s diplomatic style uniquely positions him to encourage direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, balancing security and territorial concerns. “

Economic Policies: A Model for Growth

President-elect Trump’s economic policies have already sparked a wave of optimism. Following his election victory, the Dow Jones surged to a historic high, reflecting market confidence in a probusiness administration. This boost, covered by outlets like CNN, underscores the anticipation of robust economic growth under policies focused on tax cuts, deregulation, and energy independence— strategies that led to record-low unemployment rates, especially among minority groups, during Trump’s first term.

This realism-based approach emphasizes reduced government intervention, fostering a competitive business environment. For Europe, these principles offer a counterpoint to stateheavy economic models, providing a roadmap for fostering a balanced economy where businesses thrive independently. The current market response signals potential for a new era of economic resilience and optimism.

Confronting China’s Economic Influence

One of President-elect Trump’s most impactful economic policies has been his firm stance on China’s trade practices. Through tariffs on Chinese goods, his administration sought to protect American industries from the adverse effects of China’s hyperproduction, particularly in sectors like aluminum and lithium, which are essential for automotive and renewable energy industries. China’s large-scale production in these areas has allowed it to dominate global markets, often through practices deemed unfair by many international economists.

Building on this approach, President-elect Trump’s second term is likely to continue and even intensify efforts to counterbalance China’s influence in global supply chains. These policies aim not only to protect American industries but also to support global markets impacted by China’s practices. The U.S., through fair trade measures, can set a precedent, encouraging other nations

to adopt standards that hold China accountable for market manipulation and hyperproduction. By collaborating with trade partners, America has the potential to foster a fairer global economy where smaller nations are less vulnerable to China’s economic leverage.

The recent analysis from Finimize highlights how global markets are increasingly affected by China’s large-scale production and pricing strategies, which have destabilized industries worldwide. A renewed U.S. commitment to curbing China’s overreach could help stabilize these markets, supporting countries that struggle to compete with China’s subsidies and low production costs. President-elect Trump’s approach could set a new standard for international trade practices, promoting innovation and fair competition across regions. This strategy extends beyond economic competition; it represents a broader goal of establishing a more balanced, transparent, and resilient global economy, reducing dependency on China’s supply chains.

Upholding Free Speech Amid New Threats

One of President-elect Trump’s consistent positions has been the defense of free speech, significantly as global pressures toward censorship grow. This stance, supported by Vice President-elect Vance and Elon Musk, resonates with many in Europe who are concerned about restrictive policies on social media and digital platforms. Their commitment to free expression could inspire similar European protections, preserving a core democratic value.

A Personal Perspective on Change

I had the unique opportunity to observe the U.S. election firsthand as part of an international observer mission in California. While there, I spoke with everyday people—Uber drivers, supermarket employees, and volunteers supporting candidates across the political spectrum. Conversations with these individuals underscored a common sentiment: a deep desire for change in America and globally. People from different backgrounds, political affiliations, and career paths shared a

sense of urgency for a new direction and a renewed focus on prosperity, security, and autonomy. This feeling resonated strongly among Republican volunteers as well as others who, despite varied perspectives, expressed hope for a future grounded in pragmatic solutions and mutual respect.

A Vision for Stability, Prosperity, and Freedom

As President-elect Trump and Vice President-elect Vance prepare to take office on January 20th, there is a renewed sense of optimism for the future of America and the world. Their commitment to a realism-based approach promises not only a stronger economy but also a more balanced global order. With a focus on pragmatic diplomacy, economic growth, free speech, and energy independence, the incoming administration offers a path forward that addresses today’s pressing challenges while securing stability and prosperity.

This new era, led by President-elect Trump and Vice President-elect Vance, has the potential to bring both the U.S. and its allies into a future marked by peace, resilience, and opportunity. Their leadership embodies a vision for an America that stands strong and united, grounded in values that benefit not only the U.S. but also the broader global community.

One of Presidentelect Trump’s most impactful economic policies has been his firm stance on China’s trade practices “

“

One of Presidentelect Trump’s consistent positions has been the defense of free speech, significantly as global pressures toward censorship grow.

Editorial Team

Charlie Crumpton is from England, United Kingdom and graduated with a Masters in Political Communication. He has worked in British politics for the last two years and is particularly interested in objectivism and personal responsibility as political philosophies.

Sotiris Paphitis, International Relations Secretary at FPK Protoporia, is a practicing lawyer and Barrister-at-Law from Nicosia, Cyprus. He’s a PhD candidate at the University of Tilburg in the Netherlands, a member of the Young Lawyers Committee of the Cyprus Bar Association, and serves as the National Representative for Cyprus at the YLC of the International Bar Association.

Chairman of NNGG Madrid, City councillor in Las Rozas de Madrid.

Ignacio Dancausa

Charlie Crumpton-Chief Editor

Sotiris Paphitis-Editor

Lara Ghanoudi is a nursing student at the Complutense University of Madrid. She is passionate about international affairs and focuses on the impact of health and religion on the youth.

María Ferrer Argente is from Zaragoza, Spain. She holds a Law Degree from the University of Zaragoza, a Master’s in European Union Studies from the University of Salamanca, and graduated with an LL.M. from the College of Europe in Bruges in 2023. After completing internships in Legal and Home Affairs at the EPP Group in the European Parliament and in communications at the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, she began working as a parliamentary assistant (APA) for a Spanish MEP from the EPP in the European Parliament.

My name is Andrea Mghames, and I represent the Lebanese Forces Party in Lebanon. I hold a master’s degree in International Relations and currently serve as a Regional Program Coordinator and Business Developer (for almost a year and a half now) at Balinca, a company specializing in training services. Our offerings range from finance, leadership, and design thinking to emotional intelligence, and we also provide tailored training solutions to meet client needs across the MENA region, GCC, Europe, and America. In addition to my professional work, I have been a lifelong professional swimmer and offer private swimming lessons for all age groups when my schedule allows.I believe this tells you that I am highly proficient, determined, persistent and hardworking because swimmers do enjoy such traits! My passion lies in making a lasting impact, particularly in my country. Contributing as an editor at Bull’s Eye Magazine gives me hope that we can amplify our voices globally and raise awareness about the significance of our cause and how much Lebanon is in desperate need due to a severe economic collapse, political instability, and widespread corruption. The country is grappling with hyperinflation, unemployment, and a crumbling infrastructure, while the 2020 Beirut port explosion, the Syrian refugee crisis, and now the war between Hezbollah and Israel have added immense pressure to our country. Lebanon’s situation requires urgent international support and reform to address these interconnected crises. Without significant changes and external assistance, the country risks further collapse. This is where we, as Lebanese lobbyists, step in—advocating for international support and meaningful reform to help rebuild our nation, address the political and economic crises, and secure a brighter future for Lebanon.

Lara Ghanoudi

María Ferrer Argente

Andrea Mghames

Executive Bureau

Francesco Sismondini Chairman

Filip Gajic Vice-Chair

Vladimir Kljajić Secretary General

Marina Christaki Vice-Chair

Sotiris Paphitis Vice-Chair

Chayenne Riolo Vice-Chair

Damjan Konjanovski Vice-Chair

Stefan Arsov Vice-Chair

Iryna Shatokhina Vice-Chair

Carlo Giacomo Angrisano Girauta Honorary Chairman

Vassilis S Kessidis Honorary Chairman

Ivan Botoucharov External Relations Director

The publication of this document received financial support from the European Parliament.

Sole liability rests with the author. The European Parliament is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.