During the febrile, topsy-turvy days after Britain voted to leave the EU, there were plenty of tough messages from European leaders. However, few sounded more uncompromising than the EU trade commissioner.
A week after the result, Cecilia Malmstrom, Europe’s lead trade negotiator, said that the UK could not even begin discussing a trade deal until it had left the bloc.
“First you exit and then you negotiate the terms of the relationship,” she told Newsnight, opening up the prospect of the world’s sixth-largest economy being left dangling for years.
Illustration: Mountain People
When the BBC interviewer suggested this would damage businesses in Britain and on the continent, her response was straightforward: “Yes, but the vote was very clear.”
Such plain speaking provoked fury among leading Brexiters.
Conservative MP Liam Fox condemned her remarks as “bizarre and stupid.”
While legally correct that Britain cannot sign a trade deal before it has left, by taking such a tough line against early negotiations, she walked into a political minefield.
In a few months’ time, Fox, who has since been appointed Britain’s secretary of state for international trade, might find himself sitting opposite Malmstrom. Nobody knows exactly how big a role the 48-year-old Swede will play in Brussels’ team Brexit.
Former French minister of foreign affairs Michel Barnier has been given the task of leading Brexit talks by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. Belgian diplomat Didier Seeuws is handling Brexit for his boss, European Council President Donald Tusk. Another EU president, Martin Schulz of the European Parliament, is unlikely to stay quiet, as parliamentary members have a vote on the UK divorce and any subsequent trade deal.
If the cooks are in Brussels, the master chefs are in Berlin, Paris and other national capitals. Anyone negotiating a future EU-UK trade deal is going to find many political leaders looking over their shoulders, European Centre for International Political Economy director Fredrik Erixon said.
The British deal will not be a normal trade negotiation, akin to Vietnam or Canada, he said.
“Member states are going to play a far more prominent role in defining the ambitions or the objectives of where these negotiations land,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Swedish commissioner has plenty more on her plate: She wants to conclude a deal on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the most controversial trade deal the EU has ever negotiated. Talks are to reach a moment of truth in the autumn as both sides strive for an agreement before US President Barack Obama leaves office.
However, doubts are mounting about whether a deal is possible. To critics, the TTIP is a charter for deregulation that threatens the UK National Health Service. EU and US officials say the reality has become buried under myths and strenuously reject charges of secret negotiations.
“She is very open and transparent in what we are doing,” said one EU source close to the commissioner, who cites Malmstrom’s decision to publish EU negotiating positions after the talks.
Although not exactly unusual, the volume of criticism is a far cry from Malmstrom’s early political days. As a member of the European Parliament from 1999 and 2006, Malmstrom was a hero of the liberal left, known for taking a firm stance against sweeping data-retention proposals.
She was one of the “warrior parliamentarians” in the parliament’s liberal group, said Teresa Kuchler, a reporter at Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet.
“When she became a commissioner, everyone thought she shut up very quickly,” she said, noting how carefully Malmstrom avoided criticizing decisions taken by EU governments.
Cautious maybe. However, not a dry-as-dust technocrat who floats above politics.
“She is known for being a liberal, above all, with not a drop of conservatism in her,” Kuchler added.
Swedish Institute of International Affairs director Mats Karlsson describes her outlook as the politics of the “decent middle,” the big tent of Swedish Labor and centrists who came of age during “the golden age of globalization and Europeanization.”
Malmstrom is also a true European. She was born in Gothenburg, Sweden’s earthier second city, home to Volvo and Swedish manufacturing. Swedes can hear this in her accent, the Gothenburg lilt associated with banter and down-to-earth common sense.
“Even if she had been a politician for 100 years, she still comes across as a local, clever woman that we can be proud of,” said Kuchler, a fellow Gothenburger.
Like so many Swedes, Malmstrom speaks impeccable English. She is fluent in French and Spanish, comfortable in German and Italian. She spent part of her childhood in France and completed a doctorate in Catalan and Italian regional politics. She studied literature at the Sorbonne in Paris and is as likely to have the latest Elena Ferrante novel in her bag as she is reading the TTIP text on public procurement rules.
After stints as a Gothenburg town hall official and political science lecturer, she was soon climbing the ladder of Swedish politics, elected to the European parliament in 1999, aged 31.
Like her friend and fellow liberal Nick Clegg, a career in the European Parliament was a springboard into national politics. However, in Malmstrom’s case, not for long. After four years as Europe minister in Sweden’s liberal center-right coalition, she returned to Brussels as Sweden’s European commissioner. She was put in charge of home affairs, a demanding portfolio covering asylum and terrorism that makes, but mostly breaks, reputations.
This was a difficult job. Every year, more people were setting off in rickety boats from north Africa hoping to reach the Italian island of Lampedusa. Every year, more were dying.
In October 2013, disaster struck. At least 366 people drowned less than half a kilometer from Lampedusa when their overcrowded fishing boat capsized. As EU commissioner, Malmstrom urged governments to do more. Italy set up the Mare Nostrum search-and-rescue operation, which was credited with saving 400 lives a day, although operations were later drastically scaled down.
However, she was far less successful in persuading EU countries to share responsibility for refugees, a divisive issue that has only grown more rancorous.
Malmstrom returned to Brussels for a second term, under Juncker, and took over EU trade policy, amid growing skepticism about big corporations in the wake of the economic crisis.
Karlsson said his compatriot would be clearly focused on European interest when it comes to Brexit.
“I think she will be a very hard negotiator in that we did not create this problem, this was a problem created by Britain,” he said.
Reflecting a fairly widespread view among pro-European Swedes and beyond, he said: “Britain can only get a bad deal, a very bad deal, or a catastrophic deal. I think that she will be very clear about what is required.”
Apart from the first arms sales approval for Taiwan since US President Donald Trump took office, last month also witnessed another milestone for Taiwan-US relations. Trump signed the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act into law on Tuesday. Its passing without objection in the US Senate underscores how bipartisan US support for Taiwan has evolved. The new law would further help normalize exchanges between Taiwanese and US government officials. We have already seen a flurry of visits to Washington earlier this summer, not only with Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍), but also delegations led by National Security Council Secretary-General Joseph Wu
When the towers of Wang Fuk Court turned into a seven-building inferno on Wednesday last week, killing 128 people, including a firefighter, Hong Kong officials promised investigations, pledged to review regulations and within hours issued a plan to replace bamboo scaffolding with steel. It sounded decisive. It was not. The gestures are about political optics, not accountability. The tragedy was not caused by bamboo or by outdated laws. Flame-retardant netting is already required. Under Hong Kong’s Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme — which requires buildings more than 30 years old to undergo inspection every decade and compulsory repairs — the framework for
President William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday last week announced a plan to invest an additional NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.8 billion) in military spending to procure advanced defense systems over the next eight years, and outlined two major plans and concrete steps to defend democratic Taiwan in the face of China’s intensifying threat. While Lai’s plans for boosting the country’s national security have been praised by many US lawmakers, former defense officials, academics and the American Institute in Taiwan, the US’ de facto embassy in Taiwan, they were not equally welcomed by all Taiwanese, particularly among the opposition parties. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman
President William Lai’s (賴清德) historic announcement on Wednesday, Nov. 26, of a supplemental defense budget valued in excess of US$40 billion is a testament to the seriousness with which Taiwan is responding to the relentless expansionist ambitions of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the Chinese Communist Party and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Lai is responding to the threat posed to Taiwan sovereignty along with US President Donald Trump’s insistence that American partners in good standing must take on more responsibility for their own defense. The supplemental defense budget will be broken into three main parts. The first and largest piece
RSS