The Presidency of the Council of the EU, which is rotated every six months among the 27 member states, is being held from 1 January to 30 June 2025 by Poland.  The speakers share their knowledge and perspectives on the priorities of the Polish Presidency, the EU’s priorities in the Indo-Pacific and how the EU can engage more substantively with ASEAN.  The discussions highlight the Polish Presidency’s motto of security and how it applies to the current situation in Europe and the implications for the Indo-Pacific region.  Amid the actions of Trump 2.0, the speakers assess what these mean for Ukraine and Europe, as well as relations between Asia and Europe.  While Europe will be preoccupied with protecting its security and that of its neighbourhood, this could provide impetus for closer non-military collaboration between the two regions, such as strengthening people-to-people ties through more Track-2 dialogue and civil society engagement.  The speakers also speak about connectivity, a key agenda for the Asia-Europe Meeting process and a priority for the Polish Presidency in its myriad aspects including energy, transport, trade, digital and higher education.  

Introduction

The EU is a complex, highly institutionalised political and economic entity of 27 member states. The key institutions responsible for policy making, for the legislative agenda and for the day-to-day functioning of the EU are the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU. There are also specific institutions, such as the European Central Bank which is responsible for monetary policy and agencies, such as the European External Action Service which is responsible for the EU’s diplomatic relations with third countries.

In this inaugural AIB podcast, we have three distinguished speakers –  Ambassador Witold Sobkόw, Poland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Special Envoy for the Indo-Pacific, Prof Evi Fitriani, Professor of International Relations at Universitas Indonesia and Prof Dr Sven Biscop, Professor at Ghent University and Director of “Europe in the World” programme at the Egmont- Royal Institute – to share with us their knowledge and perspectives on the priorities of Poland’s Presidency of the Council of the EU, the EU’s priorities in the Indo-Pacific and how the EU can engage more substantively with ASEAN.

Priorities of Poland’s Presidency of the Council of the EU and the agenda for the Indo-Pacific

The Presidency of the Council of the EU is rotated every six months among the 27 member states.  For this year, from 1 January to 30 June, Poland is holding the presidency, the second time since it joined the EU in 2004.  In the podcast, Amb Sobkόw highlighted the priorities of the Polish presidency and Poland’s foreign policy. The motto of the Polish presidency is “security”, a broad concept embodying seven dimensions:

• Defence and Security
• Protection of People and Borders
• Resistance to Foreign Interference and Disinformation
• Ensuring Security and Freedom of Business
• Energy security
• Competitive and Resilient Agriculture
• Health Security

The broad principles guiding the Polish presidency were “Cooperate where possible”;  “Compete when needed”; “Confront when necessary”, and most importantly, “Use opportunities and Minimise threats”.

On the EU’s engagement with the Indo-Pacific, and especially with ASEAN, Poland subscribed fully to the idea of inter-connectedness between the EU and the Indo-Pacific. Whatever happened in the Indo-Pacific would have implications for Europe and vice-versa.  The EU and Poland hence would like to see an inclusive, stable, free and open Indo-Pacific.  As we faced a grave geopolitical environment, it was in the EU’s interest to strengthen cooperation with its Indo-Pacific partners and work together to support the rules-based international order.

Challenges and Opportunities for Enhancing EU-Asia / EU-ASEAN relations.

According to Prof Evie Fitriani, the EU was an important dialogue partner of ASEAN and greater engagement with the region during the Polish presidency would be welcome.  Both partners should focus on protecting the most important factor underpinning development, that is, stability in both regions.  She hoped see a more inclusive and realistic engagement programme under the Polish presidency.  The engagement should go beyond government-to-government level, with greater effort towards strengthening people-to-people ties through more Track-2 dialogue and engagement with civil societies and NGOs.  As the policies of the Trump Administration risk undermining the current global trading order, it was even more important for the EU and Asia to strengthen their trade and economic ties to mitigate any fallout from Trump 2.0’s tariffs and dismantling of the global trade regime.  When ASEM was established in 1996, it was driven primarily by the desire to strengthen economic ties between Asia and Europe and complement the stronger trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific partnerships.  With unilateralism under Trump 2.0, we needed to look into revitalising the ASEM partnership and strengthening economic ties between EU and Asian partners and tackling new issues such as building supply chain resilience.  It was an opportunity for Asia and Europe to re-orientate our relations. The lack of trust and confidence between the two sides could pose as an obstacle, but it could be overcome through more open dialogue.

Keeping “Security” front and center on the EU’s list of priorities

The Polish presidency’s emphasis on “security” was prescient.  What was said by the Trump Administration and what happened during the recent Munich Security Conference clearly demonstrated that the US expected Europe to take more responsibility for its own security.  Prof Dr Sven Biscop said that if the EU did not act fast enough, the US would be creating a fait accompli on the situation in Ukraine by negotiating a deal with Russia, without including the Europeans.  The EU needed to act quickly and decisively on what to do with the situation in Ukraine.  In his view, the EU could act fast to make it clear to the US that it would go ahead with Ukraine’s accession to the EU, maintain sanctions on Russia and be prepared to put together 50,000 troops to guarantee the security of Ukraine when a ceasefire deal was reached.  However, such decisions would unlikely be taken by all 27 EU or 33 NATO members.  Hence, there was a need to deploy a small group format and Polish Prime Minister (PM) Donald Tusk had taken on the task in consultation with French President Macron and some other European leaders.  Prof Dr Biscop hoped the Polish presidency would help the Europeans make decisions quickly.

Amb Sobkόw said the EU was united in its support of Ukraine and understood the tremendous security challenges facing the EU.  The security of Ukraine was inextricably linked to the security of Europe and no power should be allowed to dictate the path of development of smaller countries. Furthermore, the events in Europe could be replicated in other parts of the world, as there were superpowers in different regions.  Poland had put the accession of Ukraine to the EU as a priority and invited Ukraine to start negotiations.  He noted that Polish PM Tusk’s previous extensive experience with the EU was a real asset during this time.

The Indo-Pacific Ministerial Forum and the EU’s security role in the Indo-Pacific

Amb Sobkόw said the EU’s Indo-Pacific Ministerial Forum would likely be organised during the Danish presidency in the second half of the year.  Poland was working closely with the Danish presidency and Brussels on the format and agenda for the 2025 Indo-Pacific Ministerial Forum.  It was also important to note that during the Ministerial Forum, there would be many important bilateral meetings taking place on the margins. 

On the idea of a more prominent military role in the Indo-Pacific, Prof Dr Biscop opined that it was unrealistic for the EU to play a significant military role in the Indo-Pacific because there was no direct military threat to the EU from the region and because of the EU’s limited naval capacity.  The Houthis had effectively cut off the Red Sea and the EU was already struggling to find sufficient naval capacity to deal with that.  It was more important for the EU to secure its own continent and its immediate neighbourhood, such as in the Caucasus, North Africa, the Middle East and the Gulf.  The EU’s role in the Indo-Pacific should be focused on the diplomatic front.  On the eastern part of its sea lanes of communication – eastern Indian Ocean, South China Sea and East China Sea, he did not think the EU had the capacity to play a major military role. In the hypothetical scenario of an outbreak of war in Asia, the EU could at best play a role in safeguarding the shipping lanes and cutting off provisions of natural resources from the Middle East to Asia.

Prof Evi concurred with Prof Dr Biscop that the EU’s security role in the Indo-Pacific would not be military.  The EU was too preoccupied with its own neighbourhood and too far away.  She felt that the Ministerial Forum should focus more on cooperative areas, rather than on geopolitical issues.  In Asia and the Indo-Pacific, the EU should play a more active role in other areas of strength, such as energy transition and security.  Especially for the Southeast Asian region, the EU should be more forthcoming in technological transfers to help ASEAN in its environmental and energy agenda.  However, she cautioned that the EU should be more mindful about the different development needs and priorities of ASEAN countries and play a more constructive role.  Dr Yeo noted that some Southeast Asian countries had concerns about the imposition of EU regulations and directives, such as the EU Deforestation Regulation, on other regions without sufficient prior consultation to understand the constraints and challenges they faced.

Connectivity Agenda and the Role of Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF)

To Dr Yeo’s question on connectivity, which was an important agenda in the Asia-Europe Meeting process (ASEM) and a priority in the EU’s Indo-Pacific strategy, Amb Sobkόw said connectivity was also an important topic for the Polish Presidency.  Connectivity encompassed different subsections, including energy connectivity, transport connectivity, trade and economic connectivity, digital connectivity and higher education connectivity.  The EU and ASEAN had turned words into deeds with concrete projects, such as the EU-ASEAN framework on energy focused on energy transition and the EU-ASEAN Comprehensive Air Transport Agreement (CATA).

Prof Dr Biscop highlighted that his institute was involved in a Global Gateway project to look into the issue of the security of connectivity.  The main point was that this was a public good.  It was especially timely, considering the challenges faced in the Red Sea with the Houthis threatening to disrupt shipping in the area and the problems faced by Europeans in the Baltic Sea with the severing of subsea cables in the region.  No country was immune, since its goods could be carried in different ships and once a shipping lane was cut, this became a problem for every ship using it.  With common interest in ensuring uninterrupted trade and data flows, these were potential areas for cooperation between the EU and Asia.

Prof Evi said that another area that needed more support was people-to-people connectivity.  She mentioned the summer programmes that her university and the EU Centre in Singapore had previously co-organised for three consecutive years, bringing together students from Asia and Europe to learn more about each other’s culture and on ASEAN and the EU. More support should be given to such programmes to encourage students to meet, dialogue and learn from one another.  ASEF could play a very important role in people-to-people connectivity – between students, young people, academics and artists. 

Amb Sobkόw took the opportunity to highlight the collaboration between Poland and ASEF on a new project – the Asia-Europe Diplomatic initiative in Warsaw – to connect young diplomats from Asia and Europe.  There would also be more support to ASEF in its efforts to promote cooperation in the areas of Culture, Education, Economy, Governance, Media, Sustainable Development and Public Health.