The European Parliament must be prepared to use the ‘veto’ it holds, to increase the size of the next MMF, to strengthen support for regions and farmers, and also to achieve further political deepening beyond the expectations for a common defense approach, tells Domenec Devesa, President of the UEF, former MEP (S&D) in an interview with John Papageorgiou.

Recently, you called the European Parliament to be ready for a veto on the MFF proposal. Why? And how would this help build the consensus needed for the MFF or the omnibus proposals from the EU Commission?

In our perspective, our federalist perspective it is very clear that we need to have defence union. A defence union cannot be only about buying weapons or producing weapons together. It must have a European chain of command, European Quarters, and a system of territorial defence. That means we also need a political union. We cannot have a defence union if we don’t have democratic control, democratic legitimacy. The public opinion is in favour, if you see Eurobarometer, a big majority wants a European army and no veto. A Federal political union means that as well.

We have the European Parliament in favour. But the governments of the Member States are not moving. So, we can convince them -so far we have not been very successful. But the European Parliament also has an important tool: the possible veto over the multi annual budget of the European Union. The MFF is not an end in itself. Of course, it’s very important to increase the size of the multiannual budget because 1% of the GDP is not sufficient. And we shouldn’t kill the funding for regions and farmers to give more money for defence. So, we have to increase the budget, overall. We need to enhance the role of the regions and the European Parliament in the multiannual budget. But at the same time, it is a great tool to have institutional innovations. This is why we have to encourage the Parliament to be smart and to tell the Member States governments… ‘look, if you want us to vote for your MFF, which has to be approved, you also have to move on defence and you have to move on political union.’

On the one hand, I understand that when you are under crisis or under pressure, you have to make decisions that are more difficult. On the other hand, do you think that the federalists or your party, need a reposition in order to face the current global geopolitical shifts?

Well, these geopolitical shifts make the case for this federal union. We are 27 states. We cannot survive alone against Russia. Trump is not an ally, it’s very clear. And the Chinese. So, we need to be more united. And what does this mean? It’s easy to say, it’s almost a slogan, “a more united Europe.” What does it mean in practice? This is the federalist proposal. Let’s have a European defence that we can activate if NATO is not available or if the Americans are not available. And let’s have a more efficient and democratic decision making. So, a no-veto system and a Parliament that can decide also on revenues and taxation.

You have already referred to the new MFF. In order to build consensus you must persuade the so-called “frugals” to invest more in the EU. How is this possible?

Well, you see the frugals are also in favour of funding new priorities: research and defence, and we can all agree on that. But in order get there, they need to have a new MFF with the support of the European Parliament. Otherwise, we will keep the current MFF which will be prolonged. They don’t get funding for the new priorities. This is the incentive to compromise, to understand that we need a larger budget, so that we don’t sacrifice important policies for also the “non-frugals”- let’s call them that way, Greece, Spain, Italy, France… For us, cohesion and agricultural policy are important. So, we need a compromise.

Under this pressure and under the current shifts and developments, how optimistic one can be as a federalist?

Well, Jean Monnet has said “I’m not optimist, I’m determined.” And I agree with that. It is not about making a hypothesis of what can or may happen. It is about being determined, defending our positions with reason, with facts and with conviction to persuade. The European Parliament is very much on our side. Now, we have to do the job with the Member States.