Panorama 04.07.2025
Euranet Plus Panorama is a weekly news review that showcases our network’s wide-ranging coverage of EU-related stories.
Radio România Internațional, 07.07.2025, 17:55
Climate and conflict
On Wednesday (2 July), just as the European capital was caught up in its own heatwave, the Commission unveiled a new climate target.
A target that is, in the words of climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, ambitious, yet pragmatic and flexible. Namely, a 90-per-cent cut in greenhouse-gas emissions on 1990 levels by 2040, with a number of flexibilities built in to ease the burden on member states.
Climate calculations
To put this in context, the bloc’s scientific advisers believe the EU could have managed an even higher target… even without the flexibility provision that allows for up to three per cent of the reductions, from 2036, to come in the form of negative emissions and the purchase of carbon credits overseas.
Nadia Cornejo, Spokesperson for Greenpeace Belgium (in French):
“Flexibilities were not recommended by the European Scientists’ Advisory Council on Climate Change. Minus 90 per cent is the minimum that the scientists recommended to stay within the 1.5 degree reduction by 2050. And these flexibilities, in particular carbon markets, are really something they advised against, because we need to concentrate on reducing domestic greenhouse gas emissions and not resort to international opportunities and loopholes.”
That was Nadia Cornejo, spokesperson for Greenpeace Belgium and vice-president of Belgium’s Climate Coalition, speaking to RTBF. She qualified this, though, by saying that 90 per cent is not insignificant, and that we are still on course to hit the target of minus 55 per cent by 2030 – as long as we keep up the pace.
While the Paris Agreement sets the goal of carbon neutrality by 2050, Greenpeace would ideally have liked to aim for this in Europe by 2040, adds Cornejo, in order to give developing nations a little slack.
Luxembourg, a country that has pushed for strong action on the climate, welcomes the fact that the Commission is at least sticking to the 90-per-cent objective by 2040, as environment minister Serge Wilmes tells 100,7.
Serge Wilmes, Environment Minister of Luxembourg (in Luxembourgish):
“The target is ambitious, but it is doable. The details still need to be clarified, but we, the Luxembourgish government, are especially pleased that with this target, we are in line with the scientific recommendation; in line with the Paris Agreement.”
Luxembourg did not ask for flexibility, but is not fundamentally opposed to it – as long as there are strict conditions attached, as set out in the Paris Agreement. Ultimately, the objective is to get member states on board, and Wilmes is convinced that a two-thirds majority can be achieved.
Serge Wilmes, Environment Minister of Luxembourg (in Luxembourgish):
„We will also, as we have done for a year now, help to mediate between the Commission and the more sceptical member states. And I am convinced that, once we take some time to talk about the flexibility mechanisms, we can get all of our member states on board to move towards the 2040 target.”
He cautions, though, that the flexibility that has been introduced must not prevent any member state from doing everything in its power to reduce its own carbon emissions.
Critics of the Commission
This has all been going on against a backdrop of the UN secretary general’s September deadline for countries to set fresh national targets on emissions under the Paris Agreement – targets that will cover the next decade: to 2035. He wants to formalise these targets at the COP30 climate conference, which will take place in Brazil at the end of this year, on the tenth anniversary of the Paris Agreement.
Brussels wants to push through the 2040 goal and then extrapolate the 2035 target from that. But it will be a challenge to achieve this in time.
French president Emmanuel Macron has argued, though, that separating the two things would allow more time for debate on the 2040 figure. Something that is mainly being demanded by those countries hoping to water it down.
Other member states that have shown reluctance to support this 2040 target include the Czech Republic, Poland, Italy and Hungary, the usual suspect. But Nadia Cornejo, the Greenpeace spokesperson interviewed by RTBF, counters one of their key arguments.
Nadia Cornejo, Spokesperson for Greenpeace Belgium (in French):
“There is opposition from a number of government representatives because they have concerns about competitiveness. But it is by investing in clean technologies, by reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, that we will ensure the prosperity of the European economy.”
President Macron is clearly facing a populist surge in France, as are many of Europe’s more centrist leaders. Indeed, even the Commission recently abandoned its Green Claims Directive, which was close to finalisation, under pressure from right-wing MEPs who argued that it would hamper industry.
But giving into such pressure could backfire, as polls show that most European citizens remain firmly in favour of strong climate measures. Polls such as the latest Eurobarometer, as announced by Commission spokesperson Anna-Kaisa Itkonen and reported on by AMS.
Anna-Kaisa Itkonen, Spokesperson for the European Commission (in English):
“An overwhelming majority of Europeans consider climate action a top priority. We just published a Eurobarometer study which shows that Europeans support the EU-wide goal of reaching climate neutrality by 2050. Almost 90 per cent of Europeans think it is important that the EU takes action to increase renewable energy and energy efficiency. Over 90 per cent of citizens also take individual climate action by making sustainable choices, for example.”
For its part, Denmark, which has just taken the reins of the European Council Presidency, hopes EU countries can agree on the 2040 target by September. A qualified majority is required for this. The European Parliament will also have to approve the new target and the modalities for achieving it.
Dialogue with the diaspora
With an uneasy ceasefire between Iran and Israel in place for the past ten days, but the situation in the Middle East still potentially explosive, several radio stations around the network have sought the views of Iranians and Israelis living in Europe.
From an official perspective, Majid Tafreshi, Iran’s ambassador to Portugal, insists in an interview with Rádio Renascença that Iran has no intention of seeking escalation of the conflict.
Majid Tafreshi, Iranian Ambassador to Portugal (in English):
“We are not going to [launch] a bigger war. We are doing our best to minimise the risk of use of force. So we have not declared a war; we are not going to have a war. We Iranians are very good friends with America. The American nation and the Iranian nation do not have any problem together.”
Yet Belgium’s Iranian-born MP Darya Safai, a member of the nationalist NVA party in Flanders, casts doubt over the veracity of Tafreshi’s claim of friendship. In a conversation with RTBF, she draws on her own experience of growing up in Iran, where she was constantly exposed to anti-Western propaganda and encouraged to trample Western flags.
So, ask our Belgian colleagues, is this why supporters of the regime have taken to the streets, or do they feel they have no choice?
Darya Safai, Member of the Belgian Parliament – NVA (in French):
“We have a country of 85 million inhabitants. You only see a few in the streets, and they are people that the regime is paying to be there; paying to defend it. I don’t think it’s a secret that the Iranian regime has no popular support because they’ve been killing the Iranian people for 46 years.”
If they have no popular support, what then are the chances of regime change? French Renew Europe MEP Bernard Guetta shares his thoughts with our colleagues at euradio.
Bernard Guetta, Member of the European Parliament – Renew Europe, France (in French):
“Apart from the reformers from within the regime, there are currently no forces ready to take power into their own hands, but this does not mean that there are no opponents in Iran. On the contrary, the country has many figures who are admired for the courage they have shown standing up to the mullahs. Not only will these dissidents carry weight in the debates to come, but the battles that have beset the Islamic Republic for some three decades have also trained countless men and women in the fight for freedom.”
Iranian activist and writer Rana Soleimani, who is living in exile in Sweden, is one such dissident. She does not mince her words, telling Bulgarian National Radio that the Iranian government has brought her homeland to “the brink of destruction”.
But she agrees with Guetta: the future of Iran lies in the people’s hands, and the people’s hands alone.
Rana Soleimani, Iranian Activist and Writer (in Persian):
“The ‘Women, Life, Freedom’ movement, together with trade unions, teachers, students and civil society activists, are a voice for liberation and change. They know that the future of Iran lies not in war and external imposition, but in the strength of the people and a change in attitudes towards extreme nationalism, patriarchy and centralism. Iranian women, especially in these critical times, are both victims and agents of change. The future of Iran belongs to the women who fight for freedom, strive for peace and work tirelessly to build a democratic and humane society. They will light up the darkness left by war and war-loving politics. Only a people’s movement can lead Iran to a better tomorrow.”
And this message of hope in a dark world is echoed by another BNR interviewee, but one from the other side of the tracks: Alexa, an Israeli student who recently graduated from a US university.
Alexa, Israeli Student in the US (in English):
“There are extremists on the Palestinian side, there are extremists on the Israeli side, and they are the most outspoken people, the loudest ones. They are the ones who are hating on the other side. And people don’t realise that there are so many people below the extremists that want to engage in conversation and don’t want to hate the others.”
Only time will tell if these people – in Israel, Palestine and Iran – will succeed in achieving the peace, and the change, that so many of them desire.
