Carlos Alsina spoke with the Vice President of the European Commission for a Clean, Fair and Competitive Transition, Teresa Ribera, a day after the President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, made statements in which she questioned the functioning of the international order and defended the attack by the United States and Israel against Iran.
Ribera explained that Von der Leyen made “a reflection out loud with which one can agree or disagree,” and added that she herself maintains a contrary position. In his opinion, “respect for international legality is a fundamental premise.”
Respect for international legality is a fundamental premise
The Community Vice President has indicated that “the way in which the President of the Commission expressed herself did not seem appropriate to me.” In his opinion, it was a reflection that should lead to work on other aspects of foreign policy, but not to question the international legal framework. “The way in which the conflict was introduced cannot remain in the air as a space of doubt regarding whether we should update it or leave it in the drawer and forget about it,” he warned. For Ribera, opting for the latter would be a mistake.
In this sense, he stressed that Europe has a special responsibility in defending the international order. “Bules are confronted by seeking a coalition,” he stated, defending that the international community must react in a coordinated manner to violations of international law. “If there is another big bully, the question is: why do some and not others?” he added.
Ribera has also defended that Europe close ranks with the UN Secretary General and take the debate to its rightful place: determine whether the war is legal or not and work to move towards de-escalation. “What you cannot do is consent and look the other way,” he said.
What you cannot do is consent and look the other way.
A long-term economic impact
During the interview, the Vice President of the Commission also explained the economic impact that this conflict could have. In his opinion, the consequences will be felt especially in European countries, more than in the United States, and he has criticized the fact that the North American country did not take these effects into account when carrying out the attack.
“I believe that we have to work so that it is not inevitable,” he said about the economic impact. As he explained, depending on how long the conflict continues, its effects may be greater or lesser, although he insisted that “it is not neutral.” Among the risks, he highlighted the instability that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz could cause, as well as the immediate effects of the destruction of infrastructure and its prolonged impact over time.
He has also warned of the possible chain effect that could occur with the rise in diesel and other energy costs. Therefore, he concluded by pointing out that governments must reflect on how to protect citizens from the economic consequences derived from this conflict.
