The EU is perhaps facing the most critical challenges since its creation. Certainly, it has to make major choices which will eventually determine its future path. These include vital economic, political and security issues.

I divide the historic path of the EU into three parts. First, from the 1950’s until the end of the Cold War and the reunification of Germany. Second, from the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992 until the introduction of the Euro. Third, from the beginning of the 21st century until today. In the first part the objectives of the EEC/EC were met: these revolved around reconciliation, peace, economic development, prosperity and the containment of the Soviet Union which eventually dissolved. At the same time the EEC/EC began to modestly project itself as a world player.

The second part was marked by the major objective of economic and monetary integration following the Treaty of Maastricht. The record was rather mixed. More specifically, as the process of economic integration progressed there were serious incidents of social disintegration in several countries. For example, the welfare state was seriously affected.

In the third part, which is still not over, the EU has been facing multiple challenges, and its record has not been satisfactory. There could have been better ways to address the Eurocrisis and the Covid-19 pandemic. And when Europe and the world expected to move on in the future with some optimism, there was a new major crisis – the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. I would say that with a strong European leadership the war could have been avoided.

Be that as it may the EU has to address critical challenges today; and in order to do so it has to make choices. It is essential to have in mind that the existing socioeconomic paradigm of the EU has not been delivering satisfactory results. Economic growth in the EU has been much lower than that of the US and China. Indeed, the EU has been facing very low growth rates which have been accompanied by high prices for some time now. Stagflation seems to have reappeared and may haunt the European economies in the years to come.

Furthermore, inequality has been growing. And the younger generations face multiple challenges, including high housing costs. Europe today has on average higher energy prices than the US, China, India and Japan. Consequently, Europe is facing the risk of deindustrialisation.

Europe has to reconsider its economic model. It also must reassess its objectives for the green transition/green development. Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the sanctions, several experts expressed the view that the green transition as envisioned and planned entailed a huge socioeconomic cost. President Trump of the US has already dismissed it altogether. The EU cannot ignore this issue, and it has to readjust its objectives. While the protection of the environment is of utmost importance it is also essential that the green development is promoted in a way that will entail a lower socioeconomic cost.

We cannot also ignore the existing socioeconomic and political differences between the North and South and West and East Europe. There are different economic structures, social norms and political priorities. In addition, there seems to be polarisation within most member states.

The EU has to work in ways to regain its credibility as well as its raison d’etre. For example, if one compares the stance of the EU in the cases of Ukraine and Cyprus it can be observed that there have been double standards. Such an approach cannot be sustained indefinitely.

The EU should also critically reassess its foreign policy and security challenges. Inevitably, it has to build a new equilibrium in its relations with the US. The Euro-Atlantic Partnership was instrumental for European security and prosperity in the past. There is no reason why this cannot continue to be the case despite the current turbulence.

Obviously, the Trump administration has different perspectives and positions than former President Biden on multiple issues. Trump considers China to be the major antagonistic power of the US. Consequently, in addition to trying to modify the rules of the game in relation to international trade, Trump would not like to see Russia close to China. So, there seems to be a rapprochement between the US and Russia. The EU cannot ignore this development. And irrespective of the US stance, it is essential to keep in mind that geography does not change. A new European security architecture should also entail an agreement involving the US and Russia (like in the past). Furthermore, while the EU can become a major conventional military power, it cannot become a nuclear power. This should be kept in mind as well, while trying to formulate a common foreign and security policy.

At this stage the EU considers that Turkey should play an important role in its security architecture. But one cannot disregard the fact that Turkey occupies 37 per cent of the Republic of Cyprus, a member state of the EU, while, at the same time, it threatens Greece. These issues cannot be overlooked. In addition, the Turkish government is blocking the project of the Great Sea Interconnector power grid, which would connect the electricity networks of Cyprus with Greece and the EU. The position of Turkey in this regard is violating the norms of international law and puts in question its reliability as a partner of the EU.

Besides that, the serious democratic deficits in Turkey, with which we are reminded again after the arrest of the opposition’s presidential candidate, the Mayor of Istanbul (also known as Constantinople) Ekrem Imamoglu (and many others), have caused widespread discussions about the possibility of Turkish eligibility for the European grants for its military industry and its participation in the EU Preparedness 2030 program.

In sum, the EU has to reconsider its socioeconomic paradigm, define its security challenges and follow up accordingly. In addition, it is important to pay attention to its own value system and reduce the gap between the rhetoric and the reality. Last but not least, the EU must further encourage its own institutions as well as all member states to advance both in theory and practice the principle of solidarity.

Professor Andreas Theophanous is the President of the Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs which is affiliated with the University of Nicosia.