After a two-week break from lecture, we had the privilege of starting our Monday off with a lecture from former Colonel Cuzzelli in the First Euroflat Hotel. He is a soldier from Italy who has become a scholar. His experiences and knowledge of security and military issues are reflected clearly in his lectures.

Our first day back in lecture was split into two parts: the first was about the concept of security and the second part was focused on crisis management. While they are interconnected, the former focused on the theory and general overview of security and the latter was more application.

Security is complex. It is something that we all knew, but Colonel Cuzzelli made it very clear that it is impossible to achieve it entirely. According to the Oxford Dictionary, security is quite literally “the absence of danger and fear.” It is a core value of human life. It is also central to most issues and highly interconnected with many other issues, like human rights. Security was broken down into three distinct fields: National, International, and Human.

National security is focused on the well-being and security of Nation-States people. Individual personal security and well-being depend on the promise of security from Nation-States. International security focuses more on an international society with common aspirations for peace. There are a few dilemmas, like how much deterrence is acceptable before it becomes dangerous for neighbors? Finally, human security is a state responsibility. National and international security cannot exist unless human security is in place. This is called spillover.

Our next lecture was focused on crisis management. We discussed the processes that take place when a crisis occurs. There is an overall procedure that states follow when there is a crisis. The process goes: indications and warnings, assessment, development of options, planning and then finally execution and transition. It was interesting getting a step by step process of how crises are handled, especially with the crises that are occurring all over the world right now, not just Europe.

After a quick lunch and coffee break, we headed to the Belgian Foreign Ministry. We had the absolute privilege of getting briefed by a seasoned diplomat, Thomas Lambert, as well as someone who works with the European Union budget, Bernard Latour. They gave us a wonderful briefing on the importance of the European Union budget, and how they intend to change it with the events of Brexit. A point that stuck out to me was the amount of the European Union budget that focused on agriculture, and how they would like to change it and allocate money to technology and innovation.

It was interesting to hear about the change that was coming to the budget. The effects of Brexit are demonstrated in every aspect of the European Union. We have heard quite a bit of information about Brexit and how each different institution has processed the information. In the case of the European Union, the effects are large but nothing that cannot be handled.

After a hectic week fillied with briefings and site visits to many of the European Institutions in Brussels, we found ourselves at the U.S. Mission ot the European Union. At 1:30pm we gathered outside the US Mission building, appreciative of extra hours of rest that left us ready to ask plently of questions.

Soon after, we were lead in the building and through security. A large portion of the building appeared to be under construction which, although insignificant, is a good sign the US Mission to the EU won’t be going anytime soon. We were led into a nice conference room in the basement of the facility which was suprisingly confortable and nicely decorated, unlike a typical US goverment office.

While in the conference room, we were joined by another study abroad program from the University of Pittsburgh. They too have been visited European institutions in Brussels and it was interesting to compare Our briefer soon entered the room, and like many other visits, requested that our briefing be structured as a fluid discussion rather than a lecture. He began with asking a little bit about our programs and what we’ve done in Brussels thus far. He then introduced himself as an economic expert and gave a brief introduction.

He described the function of the US Mission as a physical link between the European Union and its Institutions and, the United States government. This dimplomatic connected has been in place since 1953. Throughout this program, we’ve learned of the depth and historical basis of the Trans-atlantic relationship. The Mission was preceeded by the US diplomatic mission to the ECSC (European Coal and Steel Community). Our visit to the US Mission only solidified our understanding of that bond. Along with the Department of State, the mission housed over 100 employees from the Department of Commerce, Homeland Security, Justice, and Agriculture.

We then moved to a Q&A format, in which our briefer accepted questions on any topic related to the US and the EU. There were many of hard-hitting questions, mostly centered around the recent trade developments in the Transatlatic relationship, the impact of the Trump administration’s policies on our relationship with the EU, the influence of China on the Transatlantic relationship and, the US position on the WTO. Hearing the perspective of our briefer and more broadly, the Trump administration was an interesting parallel to the viewpoints given by their European counter-parts.

This was an intersting time to visit the mission. Particularly in the context of the senate conflirmation hearings of Gordon Sondland, President Trump’s nominee for the Ambassador for the EU, US-EU Trade relations, along with the upcoming NATO summit, in which Trump will be attending. As these topics continue to develop, it will be interesting to keep in mind how US organizations implement US policies in relation to Europe and, how the Trump administration’s changes impact their day-to-day work.

After the briefing, many of us joined Dr. Birchfield at a nearby cafe, continuing the conversations that we begun during the briefing. This was a relaxing end to a long but incredibly informative and exciting week in Brussels and I’m sure all of us are looking forward to our next 2 weeks here.

This lovely Wednesday morning we are heading to the European External Action Service, or the EEAS. I arrived at our meeting location, Exki—a grab and go restaurant with lots of healthy food options (and a new group favorite!)—a few minutes early so I grabbed a tea. I met up with the rest of the group shortly after and we walked next door to the EEAS.

After checking in and going through security, we were escorted to a press briefing room where we remained for the rest of our visit. Our first briefing was from a Strategic Communications Officer who presented to us some information on the role of the EEAS.

The EEAS was formed in January of 2011 with the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty. It was meant to be a platform for policy coherence and to find common ground between the three main EU Institutions—the Commission, the Council, and the Parliament. The main roles of the EEAS are to be the voice of the UE, work on a common foreign and security policy issues with member states, have a strong relationship with the United Nations and other international organizations, and to be responsible for EU delegations and offices around the world. There are over 140 delegations of the EU around the world! Essentially, the EEAS is the EU’s foreign ministry. It is headed by the High Representative, who is currently Federica Mogherini of Italy (and a favorite of Dr. B’s). She’s kind of like the EU’s foreign minister, and represents them internationally.

Federica Mogherini, the current High Representative

We discussed the main priorities of the EEAS, which include security and defense, supporting global governance, working to foster world peace, and helping the peace process and agreements. The EU and its member states is the largest funder of development aid and one of the largest humanitarian donors. This is one of the ways that the EU stays true to its value of championing human rights and supports the EU as a peace project. We talked more about the variety of Civilian and Military peacekeeping operations before moving on to areas of defense and security. There is a connection between climate change, migration, and terrorism that contribute to areas of conflict and tension. These tend to be areas where the EU sends peacekeeping missions. We learned a lot in this briefing!

Our second briefing was more specific to EU/US relations. We discussed security, trade, energy and climate, and foreign policy cooperation with a specialist in EU and US policies. The EU is the United States’ largest trading partner and many EU member states are also NATO allies. The United States has a long and friendly relationship with the EU. With the new administration imposing tariffs on aluminum and steel, and the EU responding with tariffs of its own, it threatens to destabilize the current world order. There are also different perspectives of the US and EU relationship depending on regions of Europe. Western Europe is more concerned on its trade and economic relationship, while Eastern Europe is more concerned with security due to its neighbor being Russia. The development of the EU and US relationship over the next few years will be one to keep an eye on, and any drastic changes will be felt across the globe.

We concluded our time at the EEAS, but the day is not over yet. We split off into groups for lunch, and we will be meeting next at the European Parliament for meetings with MEPs!

Our journey to the Centre for European Policy Studies began later in the day than any of our previous site visits, at 16:30. We were met with the vibrant personality of John Peterson. His contagious smile and quick remarks left us all ready to hear more.

Instead of just beginning with a spiel about himself, he asked to hear a little more about us. We each described our favorite part of the trip thus far. Answers ranged from all the various institutions we have visited to more broad responses. These broad answers touched on the cohesion of the European Union amidst great cultural diversity, and how our visits to the various institutions have lent themselves to analysis of the differing perspectives of different institutions.

Once we had gone around the table, it was time to hear from the experts. While MEP Richard Corbett was meant to be the one briefing us, he had important business that kept him in London. Understandable, especially since this is a bit of a tumultuous time for the United Kingdom. In a pinch, John Peterson was able to rally some of his colleagues to give us a fascinating view from the thinktank itself.
As we moved on to the perspective of the think-tank employees, the mood turned more somber. Our first presenter began discussing how he thinks the EU has failed to make drastic changes since he first moved to Brussels. He highlighted that a lot of this lack of progress stems from the locations of the various institutions, which is detailed in the treaties. For example, he described these red boxes in the Parliament building in Brussels that contain material that must be shipped to Strasbourg because of the incidence of there being two Parliament buildings.

We then moved to a more positive note with the talking points on the summit agenda coming up at the end of the month. The agenda includes Brexit, migration, the deepening of the banking union, and the probable accession of Albania and Macedonia. On the idea of Brexit, one of the students wanted to understand what exactly the exit of the United Kingdom will look like. The conclusion seems to be that no one truly knows. There will have be a transition period, due to the fact that Article 50 was triggered with no plans in order for an exit strategy. Overall, though, British citizens are surprised about how little Brussels today is concerned with Brexit. This is due to negotiations being extremely compartmentalized within the institutions.

Our next briefer was involved in the economic policy unit at CEPS and also happened to be from Italy. As there is quite a bit going on with the Italian government at the moment, it was interesting to hear about it from the perspective of an Italian citizen. The newly elected government is a coalition government that is sympathetic to Trump and Putin and has agreed on a loose fiscal policy, which will increase the country’s debt further. As of right now, Italy has a 130% debt in relation to their GDP and has experienced low growth since the Great Recession. Although the EU has already experienced a debt crisis with Greece, Greece accounts for approximately 1% of the EU economy, whereas Italy accounts for 12% to 13%. This crisis would be more disastrous to the European Union than any other. Due to this situation, the EU is justifying moving some of their budget to Southern European countries. This may also be a scheme to remove some of the funding from Hungary and Poland, where there is democratic backsliding.

To wrap our meeting up, we briefly touched on whether the Trump administration will drastically change the trajectory of the EU-US relationship. I think that while it may put a major stall on the process, it will not change the trajectory completely, but the next president will have major bridges to build.