IN CONVERSATION: "Global Gateway is the tool to bring the EU to the table"
Michael Reiterer, an all-round expert on Europe in the Indo-Pacific, on the EU's Global Gateway scheme and why it matters in Southeast Asia
Send tips here | Tweet @davidhuttjourno or @WatchingEUASEAN |
Good morning! Welcome to Watching Europe In Southeast Asia, by journalist and columnist David Hutt.
As well as weekly news briefs about Europe-Southeast Asia engagement, this newsletter also brings you exclusive analysis and in-depth Q&As with leading diplomats and businesspeople from both regions.
If you haven’t already, you can become a supporter of Watching Europe In Southeast Asia.
– A FEW WEEKS AGO, at the CCE-Asia Forum in Bratislava, I had the pleasure of meeting Michael Reiterer, a former EU ambassador to South Korea and all-round expert on Europe in the Indo-Pacific. Reiterer (@M_Reiterer) is also Distinguished Professor at the Centre for Security, Diplomacy and Strategy of the Brussels School of Governance; an adjunct professor for international politics at the University of Innsbruck, LUIIS Rome, Webster University; and a Senior Advisor at the Austrian Institute for European and Security Policy. At the event, we spoke briefly about the Global Gateway, the EU’s global infrastructure scheme, which some think aims to rival China’s Belt and Road Initiative. But I had more questions for him. Here’s what he had to say…
How do you rate the implementation of the Global Gateway scheme?
Global Gateway is a program to invest in infrastructure, digital connectivity, the energy sector, and sustainable development, in order to facilitate trade, promote economic growth, and strengthen diplomatic ties with key partners. However, it is not a purely technical, but an immensely political program as it provides the means to implement the goals defined in the EU Indo-Pacific Strategy. Its seven priority areas meet common interests: sustainable and inclusive prosperity; green transition; ocean governance; digital governance and partnerships; connectivity; security and defence; and human security.
How does the EU's Global Gateway scheme differ from other global infrastructure initiatives, such as China's Belt and Road Initiative or America’s Build Back Better World initiative? And how will it navigate potential geopolitical challenges and competition with other global infrastructure initiatives?
Global Gateway is the tool to bring the EU to the table, in order not to be on the menu in the Sino-US competition. At the same time, the EU has to balance its economic interests and geopolitical considerations and maintain its commitment to promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Therefore, unlike BRI, sustainability, transparency, and high environmental and social standards guide the program to achieve comprehensive connectivity, not only physical but also digital and people-to-people. The goal is to achieve sustainability and to increase resilience, not to create dependencies in building a debt trap. The need for improving infrastructure is limitless. The goal must be to use scarce resources efficiently and, therefore, overlap with other initiatives by the US, Japan should give way to a coordinated approach. G7 partners or another multilateral set-up, like a development bank, could take on this role.
One of the problems with Global Gateway could be securing adequate funding and financing for its ambitious infrastructure projects. How does the EU ensure there is long-term commitment to funding and is there a risk that commitment to the Global Gateway changes after this year’s European Parliament elections?
Funding is a problem; there are too many competing needs, ranging from greening economies, building a digital infrastructure, fighting climate change, strengthening of health and ocean governance, to reconstruction of Ukraine, once the war is over. The needs of the countries covered–in the Indo-Pacific, Africa and Latin America–vary. There is no one-size-fits-all. Africa, covered by the EU Indo-Pacific Strategy, got the necessary recognition not only to counterbalance the activities of China and Russia, but also to foster sustainable development, renewable energy, and green initiatives. These measures are essential to reduce the pressure of migration and offer a decent standard of living at home, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa as well as Sub-Saharan Africa. The India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, financed by Global Gateway, is a good example of the inter-regional approach with a strong security element in providing an additional connection between the two regions. The Indo-Pacific is economically and technologically important for mutual exchanges between Europe and the Indo-Pacific. Thus, the securisation of connectivity (maritime transport) against political and terrorist risks, is essential.
It is also clear that governments alone cannot finance these colossal needs: therefore, cooperation with the private sector is essential: The idea is to leverage the €300bn earmarked for Global Gateway by the factor three by the private sector. In addition, the EU can make better use of the financial power of the EBRD, a development bank larger than the World Bank. This would also be a geopolitical answer to the activities of the Asia Infrastructure Development Bank and the New Development (BRICS) Bank. These activities are in the interest of European security and economic interests, independent of the composition of the EP.
What role does diplomacy play in advancing the objectives of the Global Gateway scheme in regions like Southeast Asia, particularly in terms of building partnerships, resolving conflicts, and fostering mutual understanding among participating countries?
Global Gateway makes sure that EU politicians and diplomats are not talking empty handed with their partners. It lends credibility demonstrating the EU’s commitment to the region. Southeast Asian countries are interested in engaging with the European Union as they pursue a policy of hedging in the Sino-US competition. Take the South China Sea: they appreciate the EU’s insistence on the rule of law and UNCLOS to strengthen their position vis-à-vis China. Having learned the lesson of Sri Lanka, which lost control over its port because of its spiralling debt, countries appreciate sustainable projects which generate income and growth while contributing to development and the implementation of the SDGs. The people-to-people element is also important in the area of research and the re-organisation of supply and production lines.
What can the EU do to improve the rollout of the Global Gateway?
Global Gateway cannot be the only problem-solver–the buy-in of member states, the private sector, international financial institutions, and regional partners is necessary. An ‘all-in’ narrative has to be developed, outlining the common interests and shared goals, in contrast to the imperialistic, neo-colonial counter-narrative. Pursuing comprehensive security—which includes sustainable social development, climate change, and economic security and does not focus primarily on military and strategic considerations—is necessary. There is a need to demonstrate that a value-based policy has not only its merits but contributes to security and development.
Giving concrete examples of cooperation, to demonstrate that the EU is walking the talk is another must. Check out the website “International Partnerships–Global Gateway projects by regions”. To ensure the joint realisation of the goals of the Indo-Pacific Strategy, the EU has already organised three EU-Indo-Pacific Ministerial Forums; the latest in February 2024 in Brussels published a Chair’s Press Release; its most important part is the Annex, describing “Concrete cooperation between the EU and the Indo-Pacific region-Progress achieved across all seven priority areas of the EU Indo-Pacific Strategy.”
Project descriptions don’t read like a thriller, but these two sources provide the meat on the bones of policy documents. Therefore, they are required to read for an informed discussion or constructive criticism. This will facilitate engagement with the Global South as these concrete measures demonstrate the willingness of the EU to act and contribute to trust building, which is in short supply.