Summer Heat Fuels Pressure on Ursula von der Leyen’s Second Mandate

July’s Political Turbulence

Key Developments

• Motion of Censure: A formal vote to question the leadership’s decisions.
• Lopsided Trade Deal: An agreement perceived as heavily skewed in favor of one side.

Potential Impact

These events—ranging from the censure motion to the uneven trade agreement—could reshape the course of Ursula von der Leyen’s second term in office, threatening to divert her strategic trajectory in unexpected ways.

Ursula von der Leyen Confronts an Unexpectedly Turbulent July in Brussels

What was supposed to be a relaxed summer turned into a series of sharp, decisive moments

While July typically offers a quieter rhythm in EU politics, the European Commission president found herself at the center of a hectic pace that could alter her five‑year agenda.

Key Events That Altered the Narrative

• Domestic Frictions: Rising tensions within trade negotiations threatened to widen internal gaps.
• Global Upheavals: Pressures from external conflicts put the Commission’s strategic framework under strain.
• Personal Scrutiny: Public observations of her leadership choices exposed vulnerabilities previously unchallenged.

Why the Summer Became So Challenging

Following the announcement of a significant shift in global politics—which includes elements directly conflicting with the EU’s values of fair rules, open markets, and collaborative diplomacy—the Commission’s leadership faced a multi‑layered predicament. The combination of intra‑EU debate, worldwide instability, and heightened personal critique has cracked the president’s tightly controlled image, leaving her subject to sharp evaluations she had previously sidestepped.

Looking Forward

The events of the past few weeks illustrate the necessity for a refreshed approach as von der Leyen prepares for the next phase of her mandate.

First, the motion

European Commission President Faces Censure Bid in Brussels

Oct. 2025 – Brussels

Background: Long‑standing Tensions

Ursula von der Leyen has never been a favorite of the European Parliament. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) often criticize her preference for direct dialogue with national governments and regard the Parliament as merely a “secondary legislator.” Their frustrations simmered over months, culminating in a bold challenge from a right‑wing Romanian MEP.

The Censure Motion

Gheorghe Piperea, a hard‑right lawmaker from Romania, drafted a motion of censure against the European Commission. The proposal was swiftly backed by 72 signatures, allowing it to reach the parliamentary floor. The motion combined the Pfizergate controversy with allegations of electoral meddling—claims that proved unfounded and lacking any realistic chance of success.

Vote Results

• Against: 360 votes
• In favour: 175 votes

Von der Leyen’s Response

Rather than accepting the motion, the Commission chief seized the moment to dispel the accusations. She addressed each claim, labeling them as “false claims” and “sinister plots.” In doing so, she demonstrated a rare form of defiance without conceding ground.

Opposition Voices

Socialists, liberals, and greens—who supported her re‑election—used the occasion as a platform to air their grievances. They presented a “shopping list” of allegations that questioned the durability of the centrist coalition. In the following statement, von der Leyen emphasized her willingness to debate any issue the house raises, underpinning her call for unity.

Implications

• The motion exposed the vulnerability of the Commission to parliamentary pressure.
• It highlighted the ease with which MEPs can file a censure motion at any time.
• Manon Aubry, co‑leader of The Left, has already begun gathering signatures for a new attempt.

Then, the budget

EU Commission Announces €2 Trillion Seven‑Year Budget

Following a contentious censure vote, Ursula von der Leyen has pivoted to deliver the most ambitious financial plan ever proposed by the European Commission – a seven‑year framework covering 2028 to 2034.

Key Features of the Proposal

• Total Value: €2 trillion – the largest allocation in EU history.
• Program Reorganisation: Introduction of a single consolidated fund for agriculture and cohesion.
• Priority Funding: Adjusted allocations across energy, digitalisation, climate action, and research.
• Budget Distribution: Detailed distribution by country and sector remains under discussion.

Internal Challenges

Despite the headline roll‑out, the draft faced significant debates among commissioners:

• Disagreements about the overall size of the budget.
• Controversy over the merging of agricultural and cohesion funds, drawing sharp criticism from the agricultural lobby.
• Questions surrounding transparency, with some commissioners left uncertain about future allocations for their portfolio.

Commissioner Relations

During the press conference, von der Leyen was asked whether she had treated all 26 commissioners equitably. She replied, “Not everyone was satisfied,” describing a series of one‑to‑one consultations. “We have strong support, the collegial decision is made, and now we must work to advance this budget in the next two years,” she added.

Implications for the EU

The announcement marks a pivotal turn in EU policy, signalling a unified direction for structural and economic planning over the next decade. While the debate continues behind the scenes, the 2028‑2034 budget sets the stage for significant investments across the European Union.

Later, the summit

EU‑China Summit Yields Limited Outcomes for the European Union

European Union, 2025.

“Unsustainable” Outlook on Bilateral Ties

Commission officials described the current state of EU‑China relations as “unsustainable” in anticipation of a high‑stakes summit in Beijing. China’s heavy reliance on state subsidies to bolster domestic production, despite a lack of internal demand, has sparked anger in Brussels. The city fears that the relentless race‑to‑the‑bottom could erode European industry.

Beijing’s recent moves—curbing exports of critical raw materials, restricting market access for foreign companies and maintaining an unrestrained partnership with Moscow—have added to the mounting tensions.

Ursula von der Leyen Leaves Without Substantial Gains

Although the summit was urgently needed for tangible change, President von der Leyen departed with little to show for it. A new pledge to tackle bottlenecks in the supply of rare earths and a joint statement on climate action were the only tangible outcomes. The core points of friction remained conspicuously unaddressed.

“We are at a clear inflection point,” she told reporters. “As we have communicated to Chinese leadership, for trade to remain mutually beneficial it must become more balanced. Europe welcomes competition, but it has to be fair.”

Impending Confrontation and Strategic Choices

The underwhelming summit signals that EU‑China relations will likely stay confrontational in the foreseeable future, placing von der Leyen between two perilous options: retaliate and risk Beijing’s backlash or offer concessions that may not be reciprocated.

“With its rare earth restrictions, China has demonstrated the havoc it can wreak if the trade battle heats up,” Noah Barkin, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, noted in his latest newsletter. “Conversely, if Europe fails to push back aggressively—deploying all its defensive trade tools—long‑term damage to its industrial base could be profound.”

And finally, the deal

Background

On April 2, 2025, former President Donald Trump announced a series of “reciprocal” tariffs that threatened to reshape the post‑World War II economic framework. His letter demanded a 30% blanket duty on most EU exports, sending Brussels into a state of alarm.

Negotiations

• Ursula von der Leyen, at a press conference in Scotland, flew to meet Trump in a last‑ditch effort before the August 1 deadline.
• Behind closed doors, both sides drafted a compromise: a 15% tariff on the bulk of EU goods and a 0% duty on the majority of American products.
• To sweeten the agreement, the EU pledged to infuse a staggering $750 billion into U.S. energy projects and earmarked an additional $600 billion for investments in the American market upon the end of the Trump administration.

Outcome

The deal, while seemingly a corporate concession, formalized the steepest tariffs measured between the two continents in over seven decades. EU leaders received the contract, accepting it as the most favorable stance they could secure.

Reactions

• Critics accused the EU of “capitulation,” “humiliation,” and “submission,” citing the lopsided nature of the accord.
• Von der Leyen defended the decision: “15 % is not underestimated; it is the best we could obtain.”

Strategic Implications

While the agreement may tarnish von der Leyen’s reputation as a competent leader, it also places her in a difficult position for her ongoing term, where competitiveness and growth are central to her agenda.

Perspective

French President Emmanuel Macron remarked: “Europe doesn’t yet see itself as a power. To be free, you must be feared. We were not feared enough.” This sentiment underscores the lingering questions about Europe’s role on the global stage.