Is Von Der Leyen trying to become the leader of the foreign policy of the EU disrespecting the Democratic principles of the EU?

 

Is Von Der Leyen trying to become the leader of the foreign policy of the EU disrespecting the Democratic principles of the EU?

Ursula von der Leyen's centralization of foreign policy during her presidency of the European Commission has sparked significant debate, drawing heavy criticism from EU lawmakers, member states, and the EU's diplomatic corps. 

The tension centers on the institutional boundaries set by EU treaties: 

• The Mandate: According to EU treaties, official foreign policy and global representation are the domain of the High Representative (currently Kaja Kallas) and the European Council (representing the 27 member states). 
• The Allegations: Critics, including European Parliament members, argue that von der Leyen's ambitious rhetoric and direct engagement with international leaders on global conflicts often bypass the High Representative, undermining the EU’s unified, consensually-agreed diplomatic positions. 
• Institutional Imbalance: Critics have characterized her approach as "authoritative," alleging that her moves to expand the Commission's authority over foreign affairs encroach on the democratic representation of member states. 
• The Defense: The European Commission has rejected these accusations, maintaining that von der Leyen's actions fall within her legitimate mandate to demonstrate political leadership and manage the external economic, trade, and geopolitical dimensions of the EU's global strategy. 

While the debate highlights deep frustrations over the balance of power within Brussels, whether her actions amount to an active "disrespect" for democratic principles remains a subjective issue, generally framed by critics as institutional overreach and by supporters as necessary geopolitical pragmatism.