This year's State of the Union Address disappointed many observers. The President of the Commission relied on success stories and a few catchy slogans, but there was little real politics in it. Unlike previous years, when, beyond the declarations of principle, there was a clear political agenda and strategic vision.
Suffice it to say that the headline announcement was Canada becoming an "associate member" of the European Union. Yet this means very little in practice, because such a status does not exist under the Treaties. The concrete content of this new label remains entirely undefined. For the time being, "associate member" is a blank sheet of paper, a term devoid of substantive meaning.
The real question is: why?
I do not believe that this SOTEU reflects a lack of ideas or vision on the part of Ursula von der Leyen, who has demonstrated both in the past. Rather, it is the result of the fact that the two majorities on which her legitimacy and capacity to implement her political programme depend, namely the majority in Parliament and the majority in the Council, currently provide few points of consensus on which meaningful progress can be built.
Despite the numerous proposals and initiatives launched by this Commission, ranging from the Savings and Investment Union to defence policy and the completion of the Single Market, many reform pathways now appear blocked precisely at the moment when the political programme should be moving from design to implementation.
The European political landscape is currently deadlocked at an especially delicate moment. Here again, we must ask why.
I believe there are two main reasons.
First, the European Parliament is experiencing what might be called a "non-parliamentarised" majority crisis. In recent years, a growing gap has emerged between the political direction endorsed by the parliamentary majority that elected Von der Leyen II and the political direction, increasingly shifted to the right, being driven by the Council. In particular, the S&D Group is struggling to recognise the ideological foundations that originally led it to support the current Commission President in 2024.
As a result, it finds itself facing a difficult choice: either formally withdraw from the majority, effectively handing the Commission over to a PPE-ECR axis, or even trigger a political crisis through a motion of censure; or continue the parliamentary battle in an attempt to preserve at least a minimal set of policy priorities. All of this takes place while the EPP pursues a sophisticated strategy of keeping multiple political options open.
Second, the Council is weak because it is currently unable to take clear positions regarding the coming years. Many governments are waiting to see the outcome of the crucial national elections scheduled for 2027 in countries such as Italy, France, Spain, Poland and Greece.
This problem has been aptly described by Nicola Lupo through the concept of the "arrhythmias" of European democracy. Misaligned electoral cycles create only limited windows of stable political consensus in which meaningful reforms can be undertaken.
I would add that the political divide between the Council and the Parliament over the next Multiannual Financial Framework is becoming increasingly pronounced. The Parliament, by a broad majority, advocates an increase in both own resources and the overall EU budget. One need only look at today's criticism by Manfred Weber of his own national government. At the same time, groups of Member States, acting in an increasingly fragmented manner, seek to reduce the size of the budget while rejecting new own resources. A compromise between these positions appears distant.
At a complex moment such as the present, when the entire European Union as a political organism faces increasingly severe external threats, democratic arrhythmia can easily turn into a political heart attack.
The way forward is far from straightforward. Yet between now and the end of 2027, the decisive moment will arrive. Either the reform processes launched by the Commission will be unlocked, with political actors identifying areas of consensus and agreeing on a Multiannual Financial Framework commensurate with the challenges Europe faces; or the European Union will emerge even weaker on the global stage.
With threats coming both from the East and from the West, where Donald Trump appears determined to undermine the integrity of the midterm elections, Europe's prospects look increasingly bleak.