Ursula von der Leyen pushes for EU to have more power over national governments

Less than 24 hours after Hungary voted to oust Viktor Orban – its anti-European leader in power for 16 years – Ursula von der Leyen has once again argued for the European Union to gain more power over national governments, in order to be able to impose certain foreign policy decisions. Understand: putting an end to the veto right, a historic tool of the EU.

Under Viktor Orban, a close ally of US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Hungary has often blocked foreign policy decisions. Each government can currently veto decisions concerning foreign affairs, enlargement, the EU budget, or even state sovereignty, and therefore block the 26 other members on projects that do not meet its national interests. This complicates, in particular, the adoption of sanctions against Russia and Israel, or additional budgets to support Ukraine.

Ursula von der Leyen’s major battle

In recent years, Ursula von der Leyen has been at the forefront of a controversial struggle within the EU, calling for a major change: getting rid of the veto right and moving to qualified majority voting. Since taking up the position as head of the Commission in 2019, the German leader has urged European nations to “be brave and finally switch to qualified majority voting.” Last September, in her major speech on the State of the European Union, she once again reignited the debate. “It is time to free ourselves from the straitjacket of unanimity,” she urged, garnering strong applause from supporters who still struggle to make themselves heard.

“Moving to qualified majority voting in foreign policy is an important way to avoid systemic blockages, as we have seen in the past,” she argued again on Monday, April 13. And she urged governments to “seize the opportunity now,” that is, the end of Viktor Orban’s reign, the greatest user of the veto right blocking Europe so far.

But even among the most EU-friendly members, few feel ready to push for this internal revolution. Many are reluctant to the idea of losing control over their foreign policy and potentially having to endorse decisions they might oppose.

Divisions

For some small states, the veto is a crucial tool to make their voices heard. On the other hand, powerful European nations with less to lose, such as Germany or France, have already expressed their support for qualified majority voting. Emmanuel Macron, for example, has repeatedly called for the tool to be generalized. “We have let the idea that Europe had become a powerless bureaucracy take hold,” he declared just a few months after his first election in 2017, and has since stated on several occasions that qualified majority voting is the solution to these blockages.

In 2023, Berlin even launched a “Group of Friends of Qualified Majority Voting in Foreign and Common Security Policy.” But the momentum quickly fizzled out: this initiative, which then brought together Belgium, Finland, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain, has since led to nothing. In reality, even among supporters, the vision differs at times, with some wishing to see majority voting generalized, while others only want it applied to certain subjects like taxation, but not foreign policy.

So it is difficult today to know if there is a real momentum for the end of the veto behind Ursula von der Leyen. And even with strong support, there is a problem: to move from unanimity to qualified majority voting, she will first need to garner… unanimity.