When Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni attended her first European leaders’ summit in Brussels in December 2022, few would have expected her to become one of the most effective politicians sitting around the table four years later.   In fact, few would have expected that she’d still be there at all, as Italian leaders are famously short-lived. Remarkably, her right-wing Brothers of Italy party looks as rock solid in polls as it did four years ago, and she now has her eye on the record longest term for an Italian premier — a feat she is due to accomplish in September. A loss in what is set to be a nail-biting referendum on the bitter and complex issue of judicial reform on March 22 and 23 would be her first major set back — and would puncture the air of political invincibility that she exudes not only in Rome but also in Brussels. Meloni has thrived on the European stage, and has become adept at using the EU machinery to her advantage. Only in recent months, she has made decisive interventions on the EU’s biggest dossiers, such as Russian assets, the Mercosur trade deal and carbon markets, leveraging Italy’s heavyweight status to win concessions in areas like farm subsidies. Profiting from France’s weakness, Meloni is also establishing a strong partnership with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz — a double act between the EU’s No. 1 and No. 3 economies — to mold the bloc’s policies to favor manufacturing and free trade. CRASHING DOWN TO EARTH For a few more days, at least, Meloni looks like a uniquely stable and influential Italian leader. Nicola Procaccini, a Brothers of Italy MEP very close to Meloni and co-chair of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group, called the government’s longevity a “real novelty” in the European political landscape. “Until recently, Italy couldn’t insert itself into the dynamics of those that shape the European Union — essentially the Franco-German axis — because it lacked governments capable of lasting even a year,” said the MEP. “Giorgia Meloni is not just a leader who endures; she is a leader who shapes decisions and influences the direction to be taken.” But critics of the prime minister said a failure in the referendum would mark a critical turning point. Her rivals would finally detect a chink in her armor and move to attack her record, particularly on economic weaknesses at home. The unexpected, new message to other EU leaders would be clear: She won’t be here for ever. Brando Benifei, an MEP in Italy’s center-left opposition Democratic Party, conceded that other EU leaders saw her as the leader of a “ultra-stable government.” But, if she were to lose the referendum, he argued “she would inevitably lose that aura.” “Everyone remembers how it ended for Renzi’s coalition after he lost his referendum,” Benifei added, in reference to former Democratic Party Prime Minister Matteo Renzi who resigned after his own failed referendum in 2016. MACHIAVELLIAN MELONI Meloni owes much of her success on the EU stage to canny opportunism. At the beginning of the year, she slyly spotted an opportunity — suddenly wavering on the Mercosur trade deal, which Rome has long supported — to win extra cash for farmers that would please her powerful farm unions at home. She held off from actually killing the agreement, something that would have lost her friends among other capitals. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni at a signing ceremony during an Italy-Germany Intergovernmental Summit in Rome on Jan. 23, 2026. | Pool photo by Michael Kappeler/AFP via Getty Images The Italian leader “knows how to read the room very well,” said one European diplomat, who was granted anonymity to discuss European Council dynamics.   Teresa Coratella, deputy head of the Rome office at the think tank European Council on Foreign Relations, said Meloni had  “a political cunning” that allowed her to build “variable geometries,” allying with different European leaders by turn based on the subject under discussion. One of her first victories came on migration in 2023. She was able to elevate the issue to the top level of the European Council, and even managed to secure a visit by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to Tunisia, eventually resulting in the signing of a pact on the issue. Others wins followed.  Last December, with impeccable timing, Meloni unexpectedly threw her lot in with Belgium’s Prime Minister Bart De Wever at the last minute, scuppering a plan to fund Ukraine’s defenses with Russian frozen assets, instead pushing for more EU joint debt. Italian diplomats said that Meloni is a careful student, showing up to summits always having read the relevant documents, and having asking the apposite questions. That wasn’t always the case with former Italian prime ministers.  They said her choice of functionaries — rewarding competence over and above political affiliation — also helps. These include her chief diplomatic consigliere Fabrizio Saggio and Vincenzo Celeste, ambassador to the EU. Neither is considered close politically to Meloni.   Her biggest coup, though, has been shunting aside France as Germany’s main European partner on key files, with her partnership with Merz even being dubbed “Merzoni.” ROLLING THE DICE Meloni’s strength partly explains why she dared call the referendum. Italy’s right has for decades complained that the judiciary is biased to the left. It’s a feud that goes back to the Mani Pulite (Clean Hands) anti-corruption drive in the 1990s that pulverized the political elite of that time, and the constant court cases against playboy premier and media tycoon Silvio Berlusconi, father of the modern center-right. The proposal in the plebiscite is to restructure the judiciary. But it’s a high-stakes gamble, and why she called it seems something of a puzzle. The reforms themselves are highly technical — and by the government’s own admission won’t actually speed up Italy’s notoriously long court cases.    Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni attends the European Council meeting on June 26, 2025 in Brussels. | Pier Marco Tacca/Getty Images Instead, the vote has turned into a more general vote of confidence in Meloni and her government. The timing is tough as Italians widely dislike her ally U.S. President Donald Trump and fear the war in Iran will drive up their already high power prices. Still, she is determined not to suffer Renzi’s fate and insists she will not step down even if she loses the referendum.  Asked at a conference on Thursday whether a loss would make Rome appear less stable in its dealings with other European capitals, Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani was adamant that the referendum has “absolutely nothing to do with the stability of the government.” “This government will last until the day of the next national elections,” he added. A victory on Monday will put the wind in her sails before the next general elections, which have to be held by the end of 2027. It would also set the stage for other reforms that Meloni wants to enact: a move to a more presidential system, with a direct election of the prime minister, making the role more like the French presidency.  But a loss would galvanize the opposition — split between the populist 5Star Movement, and the traditional center-left Democratic Party. The danger is her rivals would round on her particularly over the economy. Even counting for the fact Italy has benefitted from the largest tranche of the Covid-era recovery package — growth has been sluggish, consistently below 1 percent, falling to 0.5 percent in 2025.  “We have a situation in which the country is increasingly heading toward stagnation and we have to ask ourselves what would have happened if we had not had the boost of the Recovery Fund,” said Enrico Borghi, a senator from Italia Viva, Renzi’s party. Procaccini, however, defended her, both on employment and growth. “It could be better,” he conceded. “But we are still talking about growth, unlike countries that in this historical phase are recording a decline, as in the case of Germany.”

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Der EU-Handelsausschuss hat für den Zolldeal mit den USA gestimmt, doch das Tauziehen ist noch nicht vorbei: Zwei Abgeordnete kämpfen als Delegation aus Brüssel in Washington um letzte Garantien. Joana Lehner und Jürgen Klöckner sprechen über das Finale und beleuchten zusammen mit einem US-Kollegen, ob Donald Trump den Deal als politischen Sieg im Inland verkaufen kann oder ob die deutsche Industrie weiterhin Milliarden an Zöllen verliert. Im Policy Talk begrüßen die beiden VDA-Präsidentin Hildegard Müller. Sie spricht über das „weinende und lachende Auge“ der Branche, die aktuelle Milliardenbelastung durch US-Zölle und die schwindende Wettbewerbsfähigkeit des Standorts Deutschland. Müller warnt: Wenn Europa wirtschaftlich schwach wird, verliert es im Spiel der Großmächte an Relevanz. In Berlin tobt derweil ein Ökonomen-Streit: Neue Studien vom ifo-Institut und dem IW Köln werfen der Regierung vor, große Teile des bisher eingesetzten Sondervermögens für Haushaltslöcher statt für neue Investitionen zu nutzen. Rasmus Buchsteiner berichtet Off the Record über das anfängliche Kommunikationsdebakel im Finanzministerium und die Frage, warum die versprochenen Bagger in den Kommunen noch immer nicht rollen. „Power & Policy“ zeigt jede Woche, wo und wie die Entscheidungen in der Wirtschaftspolitik fallen. ⁠Jürgen Klöckner⁠ und ⁠Joana Lehner⁠ von POLITICO sprechen mit Top-Entscheidern und liefern Off-the-Record-Einblicke aus der Redaktion und Machtzentren. Präzise Analysen, lange bevor Gesetze beschlossen sind. Der Podcast für alle in Wirtschaft und Politik, die einen Wissensvorsprung brauchen — immer donnerstags. Für Policy-Profis: Abonnieren und die Pro-Newsletter ⁠Industrie & Handel⁠, ⁠Energie & Klima ⁠und ⁠Gesundheit⁠. Jetzt kostenlos testen. Fragen und Feedback gern an ⁠powerandpolicy@politico.eu⁠ POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

BRUSSELS — The European Commission has set in motion the process to provisionally implement the EU’s trade deal with the South American countries of Mercosur, likely from the start of May. The College of Commissioners this week “agreed on the necessary procedural steps enabling the Commission to complete the remaining legal and procedural formalities,” Deputy Chief Spokesperson Olof Gill said.  The EU executive will now prepare and send a note verbale to Paraguay, the legal guardian of the treaties, that allows the agreement to take provisional effect on the first day of the second month after the exchange of notes. “We cannot confirm the exact date for this yet,” Gill told POLITICO. It is however likely that this exchange of notes will still take place in March — allowing the EU and Mercosur to remove tariffs on a series of goods as of May.  Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced at the end of February that Brussels would provisionally implement the controversial agreement with the bloc that comprises Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. The accord, more than 25 years in the making, will create a free-trade area of 720 million people. The move sparked a backlash from critics who said the step short-circuited the deal’s formal approval by EU lawmakers. The European Parliament in January sent it for review by the Court of Justice of the European Union, effectively freezing its final ratification for up to two years. But the step is procedurally possible after EU member countries voted in January to authorize von der Leyen to go ahead. Opponents of the deal, led by France and Poland, opposed the deal but failed to muster the requisite blocking minority to stop it. Von der Leyen then signed the deal in Paraguay, and Uruguay, Argentina and Brazil have since ratified the agreement. Under the interim agreement, Mercosur would remove tariffs on more than 90 percent of European exports. Some would be abolished immediately, while others such as for autos, would be reduced gradually. EU exporters would save €4 billion per year, the Commission estimates. The interim agreement would remain in effect until final ratification, after which it would be replaced by a comprehensive trade deal and investment agreement.

Ireland officially nominated former EU agriculture and trade commissioner Phil Hogan to the top job at the U.N.’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the government said today. Hogan’s name emerged last week as a potential contender for the role of FAO director, with Ireland’s Department of Agriculture signaling him as their preferred candidate. The Irish politician played a significant role pushing forward the Mercosur agreement during his time as the EU’s farm chief under under Jean-Claude Juncker, before briefly serving as trade commissioner in Ursula von der Leyen’s first Commission. He resigned in 2020, after he attended a dinner that breached Ireland’s coronavirus restrictions in the so-called Golfgate scandal. Currently leading the Rome-based U.N. agency is Qu Dongyu, a Chinese politician whose term will end in mid-2027. Italy has formally nominated former farm minister and current FAO deputy director-general Maurizio Martina.

The European Union should not be pressured into admitting new members based on pressure from Russia, the United States or any foreign power, France’s Europe minister told POLITICO. “No power outside the EU should decide on enlargement in place of the Member States,” said Benjamin Haddad, who represents France at meetings on enlargement with other EU countries. Haddad’s comments coincide with a push by the European Commission and some EU states to bring Ukraine into the bloc on a much shorter timeline than has been normal for countries seeking membership in the bloc.  The push from Brussels is partly motivated by the fact that EU membership is a bargaining chip in ongoing U.S.-led peace talks between Ukraine and Russia, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy seeking EU membership by 2027. Accession is a carrot for Ukrainians who may be called upon to accept difficult compromises in any peace deal. But Haddad’s comments suggest that France does not want the EU’s enlargement schedule to be dictated by foreign powers or geopolitical circumstances. “Neither the United States nor Russia” should have any influence over EU enlargement policy, he added. Paris is in favor of Ukraine joining the bloc. Ukraine, Moldova and Western Balkan countries — widely seen as part of a future enlargement wave — should not be left “in a gray zone, vulnerable to foreign influence and aggression,” added the centrist minister, whose office sits in the foreign ministry. However, France is less favorable to proposals to change the way Europe admits new members, for example by granting them fewer privileges upon entry and then building them up in a phased accession process. “This enlargement must remain demanding and merit-based to ensure its success and credibility,” said Haddad. BUY EUROPEAN The 40-year-old minister also weighed into a debate about how the EU should allocate resources as part of a push to bolster competitiveness, endorsing the idea of a “European preference” for future investments in the EU’s long-term budget, known as the Multiannual Financial Framework. “Why should we be more naive than the Americans, who have long implemented Buy American policies?” he asked. “European preference should be a cross-cutting rule of the MFF.” He also threw his weight behind the idea of EU countries borrowing money jointly to support innovation and back industrial champions — a subject of disagreement with so-called “frugal” countries, including Germany, which argue that investment needs can be met via the MFF. “We must … consider a new targeted common borrowing capacity focused on investment in disruptive innovation, in particular in defense or AI/quantum capabilities,” Haddad said, adding that joint borrowing would be an ideal way to get around fiscal constraints facing many EU states. “In a constrained budgetary context, this is a way to invest without immediately increasing national contributions,” he added, recalling that a landmark report by former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi called for €800 billion per year in public and private investment to help Europe catch up with technologically-advanced rivals. Haddad also criticized European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen for moving ahead with the Mercosur trade deal, which is opposed by France. “This move disregards the members of the European Parliament and the interinstitutional agreement,” he said. “This is a bad signal from the Commission for both our farmers and European citizens at large.” 

Ursula von der Leyen’s decision to provisionally implement the EU-Mercosur trade deal has unleashed a wave of outrage in Paris. It has also shown the European Commission president is increasingly prepared to take decisions without factoring France into the equation, with the end of French President Emmanuel Macron’s term at the Elysée only 14 months away. Von der Leyen announced Friday that the EU would provisionally implement its trade deal with the South American Mercosur bloc, even after the European Parliament voted last month to send the accord for review by the Court of Justice of the European Union, effectively freezing its final ratification for up to two years. The Commission chief said she consulted widely with countries and lawmakers. However, shortly after the announcement, Macron said that “for France, it’s a surprise, and an unpleasant one.” A chorus of French ministers and lawmakers also slammed the decision, accusing officials in Brussels of ignoring the will of EU citizens. Two French officials confirmed to POLITICO that the government in Paris was not informed in advance of von der Leyen’s decision to force through a deal that France has been fighting against for years, amid an overwhelming backlash from the country’s political parties, influential farmers and public opinion. Diplomats and officials from other EU members, who were granted anonymity to speak candidly on a sensitive issue, were quick to draw the conclusion that France’s influence in Brussels is fading and that the European Commission chief now thinks she can deliberately ignore the opposition of a French president who will leave power next year. “I don’t know which of the two is worse for the French: not having been informed or not having been able to block the Commission. I think the former,” said one EU government official. “Macron must have been the only person in Europe to be surprised,” joked one EU diplomat. While von der Leyen had long made clear that she wanted the deal to enter into force soon, uncertainty loomed over whether the Commission was ready to sideline the European Parliament and go for an early implementation of an agreement that would create a free-trade area among between the EU and Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, spanning 720 million people. “French officials were confident this would not happen,” said a second EU diplomat. TRADE TENSIONS French Trade Minister Nicolas Forissier, in an interview with POLITICO on Thursday, said France was aiming to use the time of the judicial review to obtain reassurances from the Commission on French requests to protect farmers. Forissier vowed “to use the additional time granted by the European Court of Justice to continue discussions with the Commission and arrive at specific answers on all issues, particularly on the question of mirror measures and [sanitary] checks.” But things went differently as von der Leyen decided there was no need to wait for the court verdict. Von der Leyen had already raised tensions with Macron in January, when she signed the Mercosur trade deal in Paraguay after a majority of EU countries backed it against France, Poland, Austria, Ireland and Hungary. Political instability at home and the rise of transatlantic trade tensions hindered French efforts to block or to substantially change the deal during years-long negotiations with the Commission. The EU executive received the go-ahead from EU countries to implement the deal once Mercosur countries complete their own approvals. Both Argentina and Uruguay ratified the agreement Thursday. To become final, after the court review the agreement still needs the final nod of the Parliament, which might now be harder to get after the European Commission skirted EU lawmakers. Von der Leyen didn’t want to waste time. She announced the provisional application the following day, ignoring once again the French call to wait until the end of the judicial review. In return Macron, who cannot run for a third consecutive term and is set to leave the Elysée in spring 2027, slammed von der Leyen’s Commission, saying “European citizens and their representatives [had] not been duly respected.” The dispute marks an unprecedented clash between the two. “I will never defend an agreement that is lax on imports and tough on domestic production, because it is inconsistent for European consumers and criminal for European sovereignty,” Macron said.

BRUSSELS — The EU will provisionally implement its trade deal with the South American Mercosur bloc, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced Friday, in a move that is likely to trigger a major backlash from European capitals and lawmakers opposed to the deal. The deal, to create a free-trade area spanning 720 million people, is controversial because it hasn’t yet been officially blessed by the European Parliament. Lawmakers voted last month to send it for review by the Court of Justice of the European Union, effectively freezing its final ratification for up to two years. Implementation could harden opposition in the European Parliament, antagonize skeptical countries led by France and Poland, and potentially sink the agreement when it comes to a final consent vote later. The European Commission received the go-head from EU countries in January to implement the deal once Mercosur countries complete their own approvals. Both Argentina and Uruguay ratified the agreement on Thursday. This is a developing story.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has decided a showdown with Brussels is exactly what his flagging election campaign needs.  Orbán is on the back foot at home — trailing his rival Péter Magyar by some 8 percentage points in polls ahead of the April 12 election. So he’s gone on the attack against two of his favorite bogeymen abroad: Brussels and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.  In doing so he’s trying to set a trap for Magyar, the 44-year-old member of the European Parliament who is on track to beat him.   Magyar has built his poll lead through a laser-focus on the corruption, mismanagement and cronyism that he says has defined Orbán’s 15 years in power. The last thing he wants is an election race in which he is typecast as the pro-EU or pro-Ukrainian candidate.   But that’s exactly where Orbán is now trying to shift the campaign. On the international stage, Orbán’s government has taken the highly confrontational step of blocking the EU’s €90 billion financial lifeline to Ukraine — agreed at a European Council meeting in December — accusing Kyiv of slow-walking repairs to the Druzhba pipeline that supplies oil to Hungary.  The timing of Orbán’s move is hardly coincidental, given his troubles in the election race. Having engineered a conflagration with Brussels over Ukraine, he upped the ante this week by accusing Magyar’s Tisza party of being traitors, of taking the side of the EU and Zelenskyy in the standoff.   ORBÁN ON THE ATTACK It’s Orbán himself who is leading the offensive. He is styling his clash with Brussels and Kyiv as one and the same as his fight with the Tisza party, which he accused of remaining “shamefully silent” about the problems with the oil supply from Ukraine.  “In line with Brussels and Kyiv, instead of a national government, they [Tisza] want to bring a pro-Ukrainian government to power in Hungary. That is why they are not standing up for the interests of Hungarian people and Hungary,” Orbán argued in a Facebook post on Monday.  He followed up with another post saying Tisza would wreck the country’s energy sector, and insisted his ruling Fidesz party was “the safe choice in April.”  “[The opposition’s] goal is chaos, fuel shortages, and gasoline price increases before the elections. That is why they have sided with Zelenskyy, against the Hungarian people,” Orbán said.   Sidestepping the trap, Magyar hit back against Orbán’s accusations — not by defending the EU or Zelenskyy, but by claiming economic mismanagement by the prime minister was stoking the high prices and insisting fuel was cheaper in Poland, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria.  Péter Magyar has built his poll lead through a laser-focus on the corruption, mismanagement and cronyism that he says has defined Orbán’s 15 years in power. | Bállint Szentgallay/NurPhoto via Getty Images “Orbán does not govern effectively and shows no interest in the continuously deteriorating situation of Hungarian citizens or businesses. Instead, he chooses to lie, incite hatred, and burden the country with some of the highest taxes in Europe,” Magyar said. Tisza declined to comment.   HOW PRO-EU IS MAGYAR, REALLY? For the EU, the big concern is how long Orbán, the EU leader closest to the Kremlin, will drag out this fight. Kyiv desperately needs the now-blocked €90 billion cash injection, and six weeks of uncertainty due to the Hungarian election would inflame geopolitical tensions over the war in Ukraine.   While much of Brussels is holding out for a Magyar win — largely to end Budapest’s obstructionism on Ukraine — the irony of Orbán’s attacks is that Magyar is hardly an unalloyed pro-EU politician, and far less a pro-Ukrainian one. Indeed, he is outdoing Orbán with his some of his more nationalist campaigning. Tisza, for example, voted against the €90 billion loan to Ukraine in the European Parliament and Magyar has strongly opposed plans for Kyiv’s accelerated membership in the European Union.   In an interview with POLITICO in 2024, Magyar said Tisza was pro-EU but was candid about the EU’s shortcomings. He expressed opposition to a European “superstate” and said he didn’t have “friends” in the European Parliament. That followed his first press conference in the Parliament, in which he opposed sending weapons to Ukraine. Earlier this year, Orbán’s Fidesz party sought to corner Magyar over the EU’s giant Mercosur trade deal with South America, which it opposes on the grounds it would harm Hungarian farmers. In Budapest, Orbán accused Magyar of backing the agreement and undermining farmers because Tisza sits with the center-right European People’s Party grouping in the European Parliament, which supported the trade pact.  So Orbán’s gone on the attack against two of his favorite bogeymen abroad: Brussels and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. | Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images Ultimately, however, Tisza voted in January to freeze ratification of the EU-Mercosur accord, breaking with the EPP line — a move that triggered a “shitstorm” against the Hungarian delegation at a subsequent group meeting, according to an official who was present. CALIBRATED MESSAGING Magyar’s awkward relationship with Brussels was on full display at the Munich Security Conference this month. He used the event to initiate a tentative outreach to European heavyweights including Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Vice Chancellor Lars Klingbeil, as well as Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Croatia’s Prime Minister Andrej Plenković, and Finnish President Alexander Stubb.  The messaging was cautiously calibrated. Magyar said he wanted to undo the damage Orbán had done to democratic and judicial norms, but with the chief goal of restoring Hungary’s access to EU funds and standing up “for Hungarian interests.” His language on Ukraine was far cooler.   “The top priority of a future Tisza government will be to secure the EU funds Hungary is entitled to. To achieve this, we will immediately introduce strict anti-corruption measures, restore judicial independence, and safeguard the freedom of the press and higher education,” he said on X after meeting with Merz Feb. 14. While that was music to EU mainstream ears, Magyar also said he had used his talk with Poland’s Tusk to stress he didn’t support a fast-track EU membership for Kyiv.  Conspicuously, Magyar did not meet with any leader of the EU institutions. The optics would admittedly have been hard to navigate given that the Fidesz camp has flooded the streets of Budapest with AI photos of Magyar conspiring against Hungary with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. MYSTERY MAN All in all, Magyar remains an enigma to observers in both the EU and Ukraine. An MEP from the liberal Renew group in the European Parliament said: “We feel anything is better than Orbán but, honestly, I’m not sure what they are, content wise, what are the things they concretely want to do, for example in Europe and geopolitically.” While that was music to EU mainstream ears, Magyar also said he had used his talk with Poland’s Donald Tusk to stress he didn’t support a fast-track EU membership for Kyiv. | Thomas Kienzle/AFP via Getty Images Even inside the ranks of Magyar’s center-right EPP grouping, the jury remains out. “We need to see, if Magyar wins, how he will organize the government and distribute power,” said an EPP official. “But once you are in power the question is whether he will have the strength to overcome temptations or fall [to them] as Orbán did.” On Ukraine, it’s already clear that a Magyar victory would not signal an overnight thaw in ties with Kyiv. But the hope among diplomats from the EU and Kyiv is that he won’t deliberately wreck EU efforts, as Orbán has done.  “We don’t know the consequences [of the election] so we have to be careful,” said a Ukrainian government adviser, who noted they were communicating with Magyar’s team. “But by following his public speeches, it seems he is a little bit more flexible and we will expect this.”  Swedish European Affairs Minister Jessica Rosencrantz told POLITICO she was still holding out hope for a more emphatic change in Budapest’s position.  “I hope for a shift in the Hungarian approach toward Ukraine because we need to stand united for European security. Given Hungary’s own history I think it’s unbelievable that they did not show solidarity,” she said.  Ketrin Jochecová contributed to this report.

BRUSSELS — EU countries are threatening legal action over the amount of power being given to the European Parliament, according to a letter obtained by POLITICO. The letter, the final wording of which will be approved by EU countries on Wednesday, takes issue with an agreement struck between the Parliament and the Commission last year that grants the legislature a greater say in the decision-making process. The Council, representing the national capitals, and the Parliament, composed of lawmakers directly elected by citizens, together shape laws proposed by the Commission, the executive branch of the EU. Often treated as the junior partner, the Parliament has over the years pushed to expand its influence over the legislative process — striking deals with the Commission and forcefully defending its role in court whenever it believes it has been unfairly sidelined. “The Council has repeatedly expressed its strong reservations” about the deal, says the draft letter, as well as “its compatibility with the principles laid down in the Treaties.” The countries are particularly annoyed about a Commission promise to ensure Council and Parliament get “equal treatment” in the legislative process. “This is not the case,” the letter says, as “clearly demonstrated” by the EU’s founding treaties, which give the Council more power than the Parliament. The countries are particularly annoyed about a Commission promise to ensure Council and Parliament get “equal treatment” in the legislative process. | Frederick Florin/AFP via Getty Images Another problem for EU countries is MEPs getting greater influence over international agreements, especially in light of the trade deal with the South American Mercosur group, which the Parliament delayed after capitals had struck a deal 25 years in the making. If the Parliament and Commission do not amend the “problematic” sections of the agreement, “the Council reserves its right to take any appropriate actions to defend its prerogatives, including by bringing the matter to the Court,” a reference to the Court of Justice of the EU, the bloc’s highest judicial body. The Commission did not respond to a request for comment. HEATED RIVALRY In September, Parliament President Roberta Metsola and Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen sealed a so-called framework agreement on the nature of their institutions’ relationship after nine months of arduous negotiations. The text is due to be ratified by the Parliament plenary on March 9-12 and signed off on by the Commission after that. The Parliament’s lead negotiator on the agreement with the Commission, German conservative Sven Simon, who chairs the constitutional affairs committee, pushed back against claims of a power grab. “I am confident in our assessment of competences and institutional balance, and I see no cause for concern whatsoever regarding any potential proceedings before the Court of Justice,” Simon, who is also a professor of EU law at Marburg University, told POLITICO. He added it is “regrettable” that countries appear “increasingly preoccupied with institutional defensiveness, national reflexes and procedural minutiae, rather than focusing on our shared responsibility to move Europe forward decisively.” The Commission-Parliament deal is on the agenda of a meeting of EU ambassadors on Wednesday, said a spokesperson for Cyprus, which holds the rotating Council presidency. “The aim is for the Council to approve a letter to be sent to the Parliament and the Commission, and to hold a discussion on this topic,” they said. “The Council has expressed concerns with regard to the revised framework agreement in connection to its prerogatives and the institutional balance established by the Treaties.” WHAT KEEPS COUNCIL UP AT NIGHT The letter from the Council pushes back against parts of the agreement that would allow the Parliament to be present during international negotiations. The treaties “do not grant the Parliament a right of consultation during the negotiations stage, but only a right of information which does not include, nor justify, the participation of members of Parliament in coordination meetings,” the letter reads. Countries also don’t like a clause that would require the Commission to get approval from Parliament before temporarily putting trade deals into effect while they are still being ratified. Under the treaties, only the Council has a say in allowing a trade deal to be applied on a temporary basis. Included in the deal between Commission and Parliament is the former’s promise to provide a detailed justification if it uses Article 122 of the treaties, which allows the Commission and the Council to bypass the Parliament in emergencies. For example, Article 122 was used when setting up the loans-for-arms program SAFE to boost defence. The Council says this would “interfere with the Council’s prerogatives and therefore alter the institutional balance.” While the treaties grant only the Commission the power to propose or amend legislation, Parliament has increasingly pushed the Commission to draft laws at the request of MEPs. Under the new deal, the Commission pledges to provide a detailed justification if it does not follow through with a Parliament request to draft a law, and it vows to give lawmakers technical and financial support in designing pilot projects to test proposed laws. Countries argue this creates an imbalance at the heart of EU lawmaking, as it risks the Commission straying from its role as a neutral broker, giving Parliament “a more favorable position” over the Council when it comes to initiating laws. MEP Simon dismissed the countries’ concerns, saying the new text follows EU law and simply “strengthens democratic accountability.” “This is not a matter of institutional rivalry, but of making the Union more capable, more transparent and more responsive to citizens,” he added.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission wants to cut almost a year off the time it takes to approve trade deals by giving the English version of agreements a head start, allowing political approval to move ahead before translations into the EU’s two dozen languages are finalized.  The EU is under pressure to raise its trade game as the U.S. and China close faster deals, and President Donald Trump wields tariffs to exert geopolitical leverage. But, as the bloc acts to diversify its trading relationships, the process of checking and translating deals can hold up its own agreements for as long as two years. The EU executive outlined a draft plan to capitals earlier this month that would telescope the time for agreements to enter into force by streamlining their translation, according to an internal presentation seen by POLITICO.  A key element of the pitch for an “accelerated procedure” is completing the legal process with capitals and the European Parliament based only on the negotiated English-language version of a deal — instead of the translated texts in all 24 EU languages.  Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is expected to present the idea when the bloc’s trade ministers meet in Cyprus this Friday.  The lengthy internal process that runs from the conclusion of trade talks until the deal enters into force routinely takes about 23 months. The Commission wants to slash that to 13 months, under a tentative timeline included in the presentation.  That’s a step in the right direction — but not nearly ambitious enough, according to exporters in Germany, Europe’s largest economy. “Reducing the negotiation period from 23 to 13 months is progress, but it is not enough. If Europe truly wants to reduce dependencies and diversify its trading partners, political decisions, legal reviews, and translations must be significantly faster,” said Dirk Jandura, president of the Federation of German Wholesale, Foreign Trade and Services (BGA). “Economic reality is measured in months — not years,” said Jandura.  FRONTLOADED SCRUBBING Legal “scrubbing” — a time-consuming process that ensures both parties agree on the precise meaning of a text and not just the overall commitments — would be “partly frontloaded during negotiations” and take place in parallel with the Commission’s adoption of the text, as well its presentation to the Council. The streamlined procedure reflects an “urgent need to diversify our trade partners” and to reap “the benefits of our trade agreements without delay,” the Commission writes in its seven-page presentation, adding this would only be applied to trade agreements that fall under the exclusive competence of the EU.  The EU’s recent agreements with India and Indonesia would be test cases of this accelerated procedure. “It will be taken up on legal scrubbing on a fast-track basis as we discussed … and translated into 24 languages simultaneously. We do hope that we should be able to celebrate the entry into force of this agreement within calendar 2026,” Indian trade chief Piyush Goyal said after leaders sealed the EU-India trade deal last month.  Prior agreements with New Zealand and, most recently, the Latin American Mercosur bloc, had to be translated into all 24 EU languages before they could be formally signed. The plan, which is still in its early stages, could set up “linguistic difficulties” amongst EU countries, three EU diplomats said, for instance if some large countries insist they require a translation alongside the English one. Thorsten Mumme in Berlin contributed to this report.