Ten years after a group of European political, business and opinion leaders called for “a new European Renaissance” and outlined a post-Brexit roadmap for the EU, the bloc again finds itself at a decisive juncture. The question is no longer whether the EU should become a global power — certainly it must — but whether it can do so democratically and in time to shape, rather than endure, the new world order that is emerging.
Of course, such a transformation would be easier if Europe did not have spoilers in its own ranks — such as former Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban — but even without internal challenges to collective decisionmaking and the rule of law, the transformation Europe needs would be possible only if citizens are fully engaged. That is why we agreed to cochair the Europa Power Initiative, launched last year, and why we are calling for many more transnational civic organizing efforts at the national and EU levels.
The stakes for Europe are existential. Nearly half a billion Europeans face a geopolitical environment that is increasingly structured by the rivalry between the US and China. While both countries operate at a civilizational scale, projecting power through technology, finance, security and ideology, Europe risks drifting into strategic dependence — valued for its market, talent and data, yet constrained in its ability to act politically.
Illustration: Mountain People
This outcome is not inevitable, but reversing it requires more than policy adjustments or institutional fine-tuning. It demands a civic revolution.
That term should not be misunderstood. What Europe needs is not a rupture, but a self-directed transformation: A reassertion of democratic agency at the European level to align institutions, citizens and member states around a shared political project, otherwise the EU would continue adapting to external pressures rather than shaping them.
The warning signs are already visible. Foreign powers are increasingly deploying economic leverage and political, technological and cultural tools to influence what happens in Europe. They are interfering in democratic processes, pursuing extraterritorial regulations, and amassing strategic control of critical infrastructure and data. Faced with such pressures, European fragmentation becomes a threat to European sovereignty. When great powers compete unchecked, spheres of influence harden and autonomy erodes. For Europe, the danger is not only geopolitical marginalization, but a gradual weakening of its defining principles — pluralism, rights and the rule of law.
European citizens are increasingly aware of what is at stake. Over the past decade, public opinion has consistently pointed in the same direction. Europeans want a union capable of defending itself, securing peace and acting coherently on the world stage. They expect protection without isolation, prosperity without dependency, and leadership grounded in sustainability and democratic values. These commitments offer a foundation for a civic transformation.
Such citizen engagement has already been visible in moments of crisis. It sustained European unity after Brexit, enabled an unprecedented collective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and continues to underpin support for Ukraine. Each time that Europe is confronted with necessity, it has acted together in ways that would have seemed politically unattainable only years or even months before.
These episodes signal the gradual emergence of a European political consciousness that transcends national boundaries. The next step is to translate this shared worldview into durable, decisive action. A civic revolution would mean strengthening the democratic legitimacy of European policymaking and elevating EU institutions as the primary arena for making decisions that no member state can make alone. It would require fostering genuinely transnational political debates, empowering citizens to shape European priorities directly and building a sense of shared sovereignty that complements national identities.
Such a transformation is not only necessary but unavoidable. The forces driving it are structural. Climate change, digitalization, security threats and economic interdependence all operate beyond national borders. The younger generations already live, work and think across national borders, experiencing a day-to-day reality that European politics has yet to fully reflect.
Maintaining the “status quo” is no longer a neutral position, but a vote for decline. Without deeper integration and democratic renewal, Europe could be pulled into the orbit of other powers — relying on US technological infrastructure or accommodating Chinese economic influence.
A civic revolution offers a different path, one from which Europe emerges as a global democratic power, redefining rather than imitating traditional models of sovereignty. An EU capable of combining economic openness with social cohesion, ethical technological innovation, and diversity with political unity would offer a distinct model for the 21st century. It would not be squeezed between the US and China, because it would stand as an equal power alongside them — cooperating where possible, resisting where necessary and shaping global norms in line with its values.
To be sure, some would meet this vision with skepticism. Europe’s diversity is often seen as an obstacle to unity, but diversity could be Europe’s greatest asset. A democratic system capable of functioning across languages, cultures and histories would demonstrate that pluralism is not a weakness, but a source of resilience and legitimacy.
The real risk lies in doing nothing. Europe has reached a point where incrementalism is insufficient. The challenges it faces — and the opportunities before it — require a leap from coordination to sovereignty, from technocracy to democracy, and from hesitation to agency.
The task is to ensure that this transformation is deliberate, inclusive and ambitious. Europe must not simply adapt to the world as it is. It must help define the world as it should be. That requires courage on the part of every European.
We invite all who wish to contribute to this transformation to join the Europa Power Conference that is taking place in October in Strasbourg, France. This forward-looking conference would gather stakeholders from Europe and beyond, representing politics, business, academia, science, culture and the arts, and civil society more broadly.
Margrethe Vestager, a former vice president of the European Commission, is co-chair of the Europa Power Initiative. Guillaume Klossa, a former AI special adviser to the president of the European Commission and co-chair of the Europa Power Initiative, is the author of Fierte europeenne, manifeste pour une civilisation d’avenir. Slavoj Zizek, professor of philosophy at the European Graduate School, is the author of Christian Atheism: How to Be a Real Materialist and a co-chair of the Europa Power Initiative.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS