Russia's war in Ukraine means that the European Union must transition to the use of renewable energy sources "at lightning speed," argues the EU's lead architect of the Green Deal, Frans Timmermans.
One of the key tasks is to try to maintain the EU's Green Deal during the conflict, and the second is to persuade other countries to adopt a Green Deal. While war rages in Ukraine, Europe cannot afford any further misunderstandings. The Green Deal should unite countries, not divide them. This is not easy. For EU climate diplomacy to be more effective, it must become less Eurocentric and take more account of the concerns and priorities of other countries.
Incorporating the Green Deal into the international agenda and bilateral relations, using trade and development as well as foreign and security policy and initiatives, is not enough - and could be seen as intrusive.
Inspiring speeches and high-profile "green" partnerships filled with promises can attract attention, but nothing more. The reason is simple: actions "speak" louder than words.
What the EU does domestically regarding its tax system, promoting renewable energy production in Europe, EU agricultural policy, and other environmentally friendly measures affects the global perception of the bloc and its reputation.
If the EU uses one method to solve internal European problems but another for situations occurring in other countries, it may lose influence and be accused of double standards. Furthermore, to become more effective, successful, and inspiring champions of the green cause, European "climate diplomats" must also carefully listen to the concerns of other countries. This means that self-assurance and confidence must be combined with humility. It also means consultation and cooperation, not lecturing and preaching that "Europe knows best."
Lessons from the 90s
For those willing to learn, the experience gained in the 90s and European efforts to build a single market might be useful.
The EU's transformative single market plan certainly made the world sit up and take notice. It also triggered a wave of anxiety, as policymakers outside the EU worried about the external consequences of the plan. Concerns were that the EU was becoming an inward-looking and protectionist "Fortress Europe," which would place internal trade goals above its international trade obligations.
In the end, everything worked out. Europe did not stop trading with other countries, and in fact, foreign investors and exporters embraced the EU's large borderless market.
The concerns were justified
EU officials who had prepared the single market plan had paid little attention to its impact on the outside world. And they—at least initially—had done little to dispel the concerns of other countries.
Today, the world is once again watching the EU's Green Deal with interest and concern. Once again, there are worries about the global consequences of the initiative—both intentional and unintentional. And once again, it seems that EU leaders are too focused on the complex internal machinations of the project to pay sufficient attention to external perceptions.
That is a mistake. If Europe plays its cards right, the EU's plan to reach climate neutrality by 2050 could become a truly inspiring manual for other countries and regions.
However, this means that what the EU preaches abroad will also have to be implemented at home. It will mean consistency in domestic policymaking and messaging, as well as the development of a global Green Deal narrative that, while focused on Europe's complex internal trajectory and challenges, is simultaneously addressed to global problems.
Firstly, the EU's top priority must be to ensure that the Green Deal does not become another excuse for protectionism. The EU will lose all legitimacy—and the Green Deal will lack credibility—if Europeans succumb to the short-term temptation to use the climate crisis to protect and shield certain European agricultural and industrial sectors.
Secondly, geopolitics must be monitored. For years, relations with Southeast Asian countries were strained by the European Parliament's 2018 restriction on the use of palm oil in biofuels, excluding it from renewable energy targets—a move that many Asian countries felt reflected the influence of Europe's competing oilseed growers rather than any scientific or environmental impact assessment of that crop.
Thirdly, transparency is needed regarding plans such as the implementation of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). It is still difficult for countries outside the EU to understand how the tax will be implemented and the extent to which it will affect their trade with the EU.
Fourthly, the EU undoubtedly has the economic influence to shape international standards in line with its environmental and climate goals. However, European climate diplomats must resist the temptation to use a hammer to achieve their goals.
Countries are more likely to agree to EU demands if they are offered cooperation rather than having strict preconditions and restrictions imposed upon them. All of this will require sensitivity and the abandonment of Eurocentric thinking and approaches. It will require a greater willingness to use the EU aid budget, investments, technical assistance, and capacity-building programmes.
While war rages in Ukraine, Europe cannot afford to cause further misunderstandings. The Green Deal must unite countries, not create even greater divides in the world.