Our guest is one of France's most prominent commentators on European affairs and global trade issues. Pascal Lamy is coordinator of the Jacques Delors Institutes - named after the visionary of European integration whom Lamy worked with closely in the 1980s and 1990s. Lamy was EU trade commissioner in the early 2000s, and he served two terms as director-general of the World Trade Organization from 2005 to 2013. He is also vice-president of the Paris Peace Forum and has numerous books to his name about Europe, geopolitics, geoeconomics and global governance.

We begin with the US-EU trade dispute, and the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on EU steel and aluminium as well as on other European goods. "I had to deal with issues of this kind when I was European trade commissioner back in the Middle Ages, but on a much smaller scale," Lamy says wryly. "There is a zone where you can retaliate in pinching the US without shooting yourself in the foot. The usual candidates – Harley Davidson [motorcycles], orange juice or Kentucky Bourbon were already on my list (when I was the commissioner). But if there had to be retaliation this time, it would probably not be just on goods, but also on services, which is a much more complex area – whether that's in financial services, where the US have an extremely large position in Europe, or in digital services. So that would be new ground to be covered."

Lamy implies that the EU may end up having to retaliate against the US tariffs, one the current 90-day "truce" ends. "The EU has two options. One is to try to negotiate. And if that doesn’'t work, the second option is to retaliate," Lamy states. "Now, the question for Mr. Trump is, 'is there anything which you believe would ease transatlantic trade tensions and which we could negotiate together?' So far, as far as I know, there is no answer to this question. There have been repeated trips by Commissioner Šefčovič to Washington to try and identify some sort of negotiating corridor. 'What are you looking for? I can tell you what I am looking for. Then let’s structure some sort of trade-off.' But there is zero signal on the US side for the moment."

Does Lamy see the dispute ultimately going to the World Trade Organization? "If the US maintains tariffs that clearly violate their WTO commitments, then countries will have the right to retaliate and seek compensation," he replies. "You are allowed to offset the damage done to you by another damage that you impose on the US economy. At the end of the day, it's a lose-lose game. But there has to be a price for a country which belongs to an international organisation and which has taken firm commitments [to that organisation]."

We turn to the economic situation in France, which is a concern to many both in France and the EU. Lamy believes that debt is "the Achilles heel of the French economy. I entered professional life in 1975, and the French Republic has not had one balanced budget since 1975. And that's not normal. So we really have to, at some stage, bite the bullet and reduce public expenditure. None of the political forces in France really have a strategy to do that. And the public mood in France is pro-expenditure and against taxes. We've seen the results."

What would Lamy's former mentor Jacques Delors, who was president of the European Commission in the 1980s and 1990s, make of the direction that Europe is now taking, if he had lived to see it? "He would say, 'the world has changed. Europe needs to be more powerful'," Lamy replies. "Whether we like it or not, this a necessity imposed by the context." Lamy goes on: "We will not become more powerful if our economy is not stronger. So the first step to political power is to reform our economies, and to exploit the huge untapped potential of the internal market. This is a necessity. Then, of course, more investment in defence is a no-brainer."

Programme prepared by Agnès Le Cossec, Perrine Desplats, Oihana Almandoz, Isabelle Romero and Luke Brown

The EU faces long and likely tortuous negotiations on its next big budget, as the current one runs out in 2027. Many say the bloc shouldn't have to choose between funding defence – the current big priority – and financing the green transition, the welfare state, development aid and so on. But even if these different areas are equally important, the reality is that there are tough choices ahead for the EU, as political factions emphasise their own priorities and member states defend their national interests.

The European Commission, Parliament and member states are already working on their respective positions for the post-2027 MFF, or multi-financial framework. In the current period, from 2021 to 2027, spending works out to an average of €173 billion per year.

We sit down with two MEPs to discuss what could change in the next MFF, and what sacrifices might need to be made.

Programme prepared by Isabelle Romero, Luke Brown, Oihana Almandoz and Perrine Desplats

We sit down with France's minister-delegate for Europe, Benjamin Haddad, to take stock of diplomacy around Ukraine and the US-EU standoff over trade tariffs. Haddad lived in the US and worked for top think tanks there, including the Atlantic Council and the Hudson Institute. He wrote a book entitled "Paradise Lost: Trump’s America and the end of European illusions" during the first Trump presidency. With that theme in mind, we also touch on European competitiveness, research and innovation.

Asked about the diplomatic prospects for reaching a breakthrough on Ukraine, Haddad says: "We've seen the strikes by Russia continue every day. Every day, horrific strikes against civilians, against infrastructure, against the Ukrainian military. And we’ve seen maximalist demands by Russia on demilitarisation and neutralisation. We Europeans share the objective of the United States, which is to find a solution to end this war and to have a long and lasting peace. That is in the interest of Ukrainians, of Europeans and of the United States. But now it's up to Russia to make up its mind, because it is continuing to renege on this."

Asked what form European security guarantees for Ukraine could take, Haddad explains: "This could be a deployment of contingents in key strategic points of Ukraine. Of course not fighting forces, not forces on the frontline, but reassurance forces like it is the case today in the Baltic states, in Poland or in Romania. It's fundamentally in our interest to have an independent, sovereign Ukraine that can continue, that can rebuild, that can continue its European orientation."

Turning to the US tariffs imposed on the EU, which he calls "completely unjustified", Haddad states: "We want to be able to find a solution that's in the interest of everyone and to be able to de-escalate. Right now, we have a situation where you have [a] 10 percent tariff on European goods, and 25 percent on steel and aluminum. This cannot be accepted as a sort of 'new normal' of the trade relationship. So let's have a negotiation. But we have the instruments at the European level to defend our interests. The EU is not weak, and President Trump is the first one to say so."

Haddad elaborates: "Beyond just this trade dimension, what's the question that's being asked right now? It's the question of European competitiveness. The best way to react to this is to focus on ourselves, to focus on supporting our innovators, our companies, our SMEs, to make sure that the €300 billion in European savings that cross the Atlantic every year to fund US stock markets, stay in Europe. That they stay in Europe to support companies in AI and quantum [technologies], in the green transition and in defence. Those companies need funding and capital. They want to be able to expand. But too often they still see too many impediments in trying to develop all across Europe, because you still have different regulatory standards."

"There are so many opportunities for Europe if we make the right decision, if we take this moment as a historical turning point, to focus once again on our reforms and our investment," Haddad concludes.

Programme prepared by Perrine Desplats, Luke Brown and Isabelle Romero

Romania is about to re-run a high-stakes presidential election, fuelled by a political crisis that has engulfed the country for the last five months. At the end of November, the ultranationalist Calin Georgescu sent shockwaves through the EU by winning the first round of the vote. But the Constitutional Court annulled the result in December, because of allegations of electoral violations and manipulation through social media. Indeed, the role played by TikTok has come under intense scrutiny, with the European Commission now saying that it has grounds to suspect that the platform was in breach of its obligations under the EU's Digital Services Act.

Georgescu is banned from the repeat vote on May 4, but Brussels still has plenty to worry about in Romania, as the far-right AUR, led by Gheorghe Simion, is polling strongly, and the allegations of Kremlin meddling in European elections – something that Moscow firmly rejects – have not gone away.

We delve into what's at stake with three MEPs.

Programme prepared by Isabelle Romero, Luke Brown and Perrine Desplats

We speak to the chair of the European Parliament's delegation for relations with the United States: Italian politician Brando Benifei. He recently led a group of MEPs to the US to meet members of the US Congress and other players in a bid to de-escalate the trade crisis between Washington and Brussels. He talks of the probability of a negotiated solution, and comments on the complicated political relationship between the US president and the EU – as evidenced by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's tightrope act when she was hosted by Donald Trump at the White House on Thursday.

Asked about the trade tariffs, Benifei says: "I'm firmly convinced that a deal will be reached because the damage for both sides would be too high. Do not forget that the EU has a so-called 'Anti-Coercion Instrument' that could be used to limit the economic presence of the US (in Europe) and badly damage many important US companies. They are scared that if there is no deal, the situation will be very damaging for them. I'm sure that pressure will make everyone more reasonable."

On his mission to Washington with other MEPs, he says: "We sent a clear message on what our availabilities are for the negotiations, but also what are our clear limits. We are ready to negotiate, but we cannot change profoundly our legislation on digital policy, on consumer protection, on sanitary and phytosanitary standards for food and drinks, to accommodate requests from the US. Because legislation is decided for the Europeans by the European institutions and the member states."

What attitudes did he detect among the members of Congress that he met? "In the short term, I think everyone will support the aggressive approach on the tariffs as a negotiating tactic," Benifei answers. "But in the long run, I see that he (Trump) might lose the support of parliamentarians that he needs to pass legislation, if he stays on a too aggressive stance."

Benifei is critical of the Italian government’s approach to dealing with the US president. Asked about Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's visit to the White House, where she was warmly welcomed by Trump, Benifei says: "To be honest, what I understood is that we promised to buy more American liquid gas, and we have promised some billions of investment by Italian firms in the US. And we didn't get anything, apart from making these pledges from our side. The invitation (for Trump) to come to Rome, with a vague possibility of meeting with European counterparts – I don't understand how this can be considered as a success. So it's a really irrelevant visit. Probably it's important for some bilateral issues between Italy and the US. And it's legitimate that the Italian prime minister meets with the leader of the US. But on the broader European issues and negotiations that also affect Italy, I think this visit was, frankly, useless."

We ask if Benifei thinks the US is warming up to the idea of including Europeans more in negotiations about Ukraine, in the light of the visit to Paris by the US secretary of state and the US special envoy. "Well, during my visit to Washington, I also understood that in many sectors of the US government – Congress, but also the State Department – the mood is that the Russians are not really cooperating, and not getting to clear results in terms of negotiations," Benifei responds. "So clearly, now, the Americans also understand that this awkward rapprochement with Putin that we have seen is not producing any real advancement. And so they probably need to change their tactic."

Does that apparent change of mood in the US impact the EU? "I think Europe should continue supporting Ukraine to avoid the fall of Ukraine, because any negotiation needs Ukraine to be standing," Benifei replies.

Programme prepared by Luke Brown, Oihana Almandoz, Georgina Robertson, and Isabelle Romero

A crackdown on demonstrators in Turkey, the detention of the mayor of Istanbul and a clampdown on pro-EU protesters in Georgia – there is currently no shortage of challenges to the Council of Europe from its own members. Europe's largest and oldest intergovernmental body – comprising 46 countries – has a relatively new boss: Alain Berset became secretary general in September 2024. We ask him if human rights are under attack, and what recourse he has when members flout the organisation's core principles and values. Before his current role, Berset was an elected minister in the government of Switzerland. 

"We have some issues with member states. It is a bit more difficult maybe today than it was 15 years ago," Berset concedes. "It is unacceptable not to see a strong fight on violence against women and girls. We are seeing right now a kind of strange backsliding on those issues – if you look at political debates, quotes or positions being taken on those issues," he says. While noting that one country – Turkey – has left the Istanbul Convention on preventing violence against women, Berset points out that "we have new countries joining. So the development is never linear."

Berset stresses that "the most important thing is always to recall the principles (of the Council of Europe): freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, well-functioning democracies with diversity of the media. We are facing huge challenges on our continent, and in the world in general, so it is quite logical that this has consequences for our organisation."

Asked how his organisation can ensure compliance with its norms and values from member states, Berset says: "We have the strong commitment, coming from all member states, that have signed the European Convention of Human Rights. That's really the strong text that we have at the centre of our activities. And we also have the European Court of Human Rights. This legal body takes decisions against states when human rights are not respected. And then we have the political side. It’s not always easy, to be honest, but we have quite a high level of execution. Where it's not executed, we are in dialogue with member states to find a way."

Berset has said that the Council of Europe is ready to put the "special tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine" swiftly in place.

"We do not want to live in a world where violence, destruction and impunity will prevail," Berset states. "We want and need to have a world where peaceful relations, rule of law and accountability will prevail. That's the European Court of Human Rights. That's the first pillar. The second pillar is about the register of damages, and the claims commission. Then the third pillar will be about the special tribunal addressing the crime of aggression. And we are ready. The so-called 'core group' of countries decided to make the next step. And we will ask very soon if it's possible for us to do the organisation of this special tribunal. If there is political will and support from member states and other states, then we are ready to act."

Berset's advocacy for democratic principles of course raises the question of disinformation, foreign interference and how populist movements function. We ask him about the recent ruling in France that barred far-right figurehead Marine Le Pen from running for office, pending an appeal. "Being active in politics, being high in the opinion polls, never gives you the right not to respect the law. The opposite should be true. We do have higher expectations regarding the law for politicians. Regarding the case you mentioned, the law was known. There are possibilities to appeal. But this kind of thinking where, because you are active in politics, you are above the law – this would be extremely dangerous for democracies."

Programme prepared by Oihana Almandoz, Luke Brown, Perrine Desplats and Isabelle Romero

Camera: Luke Brown and Johan Bodin

Our guest is someone who spends a lot of time thinking about Europe's place in the world, and how it should adapt to the new global order of Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. We speak to Dutch political theorist and historian Luuk van Middelaar, who heads the Brussels Institute for Geopolitics, about European defence, its strategic autonomy, artificial intelligence policy and of course the frayed relationship with Donald Trump in the light of the US president's trade war.

Van Middelaar points to the crucial role played by Germany in changing Europe's course on defence. "Friedrich Merz, on behalf of Germany, has found the space for €500 billion of investment, not only on infrastructure and transport, but also on defence. In a way, this is exporting a loosening of the fiscal rule book to the rest of the EU," van Middelaar states. Alluding to the opposition to the EU's ReArmEU plan in the Dutch parliament and in parts of the Italian government, van Middelaar says: 'I think the Dutch will come along once they see how Germany's position has changed. Germany is the central player here because it is the strongest economy and has the strictest budget rules. So when Germany relaxes those rules for itself, that encourages its neighbours and European partners to do the same. That is a general movement that Germany can set in motion, that Dutch and Italians and others will not stop so easily. So I think that fundamental change is afoot in that field."

Continuing with the theme of fundamental change, van Middelaar contends that "2025 might, in hindsight, at some point, be seen as the same pivotal moment in European or world history as 1989 – the end of the Cold War. [The historian] Francis Fukuyama called it 'the end of history.' Putin put an end to that three years ago already. But, in a way, what Trump is doing, I would say, is even more fundamental. Because Trump is ending the world order which started in 1945. That order is being unravelled, and I think that's the underlying objective in all the actions of the Trump administration – be it in his opening to Putin when it comes to the war in Ukraine, or his contempt for Europe as a historic ally (of America)."

Speaking of Trump's overture to Putin, and the apparent exclusion of the EU from the negotiating process on Ukraine, van Middelaar says: "The EU, or at least some European powers – France, the UK, or others – should try to get a seat at that negotiation. Because what is at stake is the future of European security. It's about how the continent at large, all the way from the UK to Ukraine, holds together and keeps the peace. It’s a bit humiliating that there are no European voices currently in that conversation."

So has the EU "woken up" to this new world order when it comes to its own strategic industries and artificial intelligence? "I think there is an awareness in the EU that, in the field of AI, Europe risks being squeezed between China and US big tech, especially now that American big tech is becoming more adversarial and closely aligned with Trump," van Middelaar replies. "There are startups; there are initiatives. There was a big AI summit in Paris earlier this year and I think this will be followed up with dedicated investments, with EU funding and also with funding by national capitals. So this is really a continental effort." Both the Americans and the Chinese "look at the 21st century as the era of AI wars that are fought with different means," van Middelaar goes on. "So Europe has to get ready for a rougher world order where we have to be able to defend ourselves."

Programme prepared by Oihana Almandoz, Perrine Desplats, Luke Brown and Isabelle Romero

Trade, defence and Ukraine are not the only areas in which the EU is facing a massive challenge from the Trump administration. The US president's "America First" agenda is having a huge impact on the developing world. In March, it was announced that 83 percent of USAID programmes and contracts were being terminated. These programmes "don’t serve US interests", members of the Trump government say. But critics – including some MEPs in Brussels – say the de-funding is costing lives, for example when it comes to treatments for HIV.

The US had been the single top provider of overseas development assistance around the world, accounting for just over 23 percent in 2023. The EU and its member states collectively contributed 41 percent. One of the key questions now is who, if anyone, can fill the $60 billion funding gap? We put this question and others to our panel of MEPs.

Programme prepared by Perrine Desplats, Luke Brown and Isabelle Romero

It was not supposed to happen again. Two years ago, after the cash-for-favours scandal known as "Qatargate" rocked the European Parliament and sent shockwaves through the EU, reforms were introduced to improve transparency. But now, fresh allegations of bribery have hit the EU's legislature – purportedly to the benefit of China's tech giant Huawei, according to the Belgian prosecutor's office.

Huawei is one of many companies that try to shape conversations in Brussels, and firms do report their activities on the EU's transparency register. But Huawei has been in the spotlight because it builds 5G networks, and Western countries are worried about possible collusion between Huawei and the Chinese Communist Party – a notion the tech firm rejects. 

Our panel of MEPs reflect on what the scandal says about lobbying and access to politicians, and why transparency reforms have foundered.

Programme prepared by Isabelle Romero, Perrine Desplats, Luke Brown and Oihana Almandoz

Strategic autonomy is a buzz phrase in Brussels, as the EU tries to ramp up its capabilities in key industrial sectors. Defence is of course a major focus for those efforts. But calls have grown for the bloc to boost its presence in space as well. Space is seeing weaponisation and hybrid warfare; indeed, the EU Commission says it is just as contested as land, sea, air or the cyber field.  Europe does have some world-class systems such as Galileo or Copernicus, but when it comes to the space sector as a whole, it suffers from fragmentation and underinvestment, similar to the problems that have bedevilled its defence sector.

With our two MEPs from the Sky and Space Intergroup at the European Parliament, we discuss how Europe can get smarter amid American and Chinese domination of the global spacecraft market.

Programme prepared by Isabelle Romero, Perrine Desplats, Luke Brown and Oihana Almandoz