Berlin asks the EU to remove the possibility of member state vetoes

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said on Monday that the European Union (EU) should abolish the right of individual member states to veto foreign policy measures, as the 27-nation bloc cannot afford to be "held hostage". He made the following remarks at a press conference in Berlin: "We can no longer allow ourselves to be taken hostage by those who paralyse European foreign policy with their vetoes. Those who do so are playing, in the short or long term, with the cohesion of Europe".

"So, I say it openly: the veto must disappear, even if it means that we too could be in a minority”, he added, but he did not name any specific member state.

In the past, the principle of unanimity has repeatedly prevented the EU from taking a clear position on foreign policy issues. One example is Hungary's blocking of an EU statement in April that criticised China's new security law in Hong Kong, undermining the bloc's efforts to tackle the Asian giant's restriction of freedoms. 

Last month, Budapest refused to ratify a new EU trade and development agreement with African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries, as well as refusing to support an EU call for a ceasefire on violence between Israel and the Palestinians.

Outside foreign policy there are also examples such as Hungary and Poland's controversial veto of the EU budget at the end of last year. Prior to Maas's statement, Berlin's State Secretary of the Federal Foreign Office, Miguel Berger, posted a tweet, stressing the need for a debate on the voting system in European foreign policy:

Such statements are unusual in Germany, a country that is well aware of its economic and political weight in the Union, and therefore usually chooses to be more cautious. These developments underline the growing frustration in Berlin with the way member states are able to stop decisions of the bloc that are supported by the majority.

Currently, depending on the issue under discussion, decisions in the EU Council are taken on the basis of three types of voting: simple majority (14/27 member states vote in favour), qualified majority (55% of member states or 15/27, representing at least 65% of the EU population vote in favour) and unanimity. When voting by simple majority or qualified majority (QM), abstentions count as votes against, whereas for those issues requiring unanimity, abstentions do not prevent decisions from being taken.

Unanimity is required for issues that member states consider sensitive, for example: the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), a growing area within the EU; EU accessions; EU finances, own resources or the multiannual financial framework; and the harmonisation of national legislation on indirect taxation, among other issues.

At a time when the bloc wants to opt for strategic autonomy, three scenarios are being considered: the abolition of unanimity voting in its entirety, qualified majority voting on CFSP issues, or the procedures remaining as they are.

According to analysis carried out by Leonard Schuette at the Centre for European Reform, qualified majority voting on CFSP issues would prevent member states from blocking foreign policy decisions when third countries encourage member states to break consensus while protecting EU foreign policy from the intentions of Eurosceptic governments. But it would not miraculously lead to a convergence of national interests or assessments of geopolitical challenges, the other two sources of division in this area. What MC voting would do, however, is to incentivise unity where differences between member states are small. This would help to streamline decision-making and enhance the effectiveness of EU foreign policy.