Ex-Commissioner Slams Von der Leyen's Leadership Style, Citing Centralization and Silenced Colleagues

Brussels - Ekhbary News Agency

Ex-Commissioner Slams Von der Leyen's Leadership Style, Citing Centralization and Silenced Colleagues

A former European Commissioner has voiced significant criticism of Ursula von der Leyen's leadership within the European Commission, describing a system that he claims actively silences those working under her. Nicolas Schmit, who served as the Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights representing Luxembourg from 2019 to 2024, has joined a growing chorus of former officials questioning von der Leyen's management style during her first term.

In a candid interview with Politico published on Monday, Schmit articulated his concerns, stating, "I have the impression that commissioners are now largely silenced." He elaborated on the perceived structural issues, adding, "The system, how the College is organized – very centralized, call it presidential or whatever system – is not good for the College, it’s not good for the Commission, and it is not good for Europe in general." This critique points towards a perceived consolidation of power, moving away from the collegial decision-making model traditionally associated with the European Commission.

Schmit further argued that under von der Leyen's tenure, the European Union has struggled to engage in "a real strategic debate on Europe in the world, which was already a different world from the one we knew before." He highlighted a perceived lack of a "real strategy" to navigate an increasingly complex and rapidly changing global landscape. This assessment suggests that the Commission, under its current leadership, may be failing to adequately anticipate and respond to geopolitical shifts, economic challenges, and evolving international relations, potentially leaving the EU ill-equipped for future crises and opportunities.

Adding another layer to the criticism, Schmit accused the EU leadership of exhibiting reluctance in confronting U.S. President Donald Trump. He specifically referenced the controversial decision by the Trump administration to sanction former Commissioner Thierry Breton, who was allegedly accused of promoting censorship of U.S. social media platforms in Europe. Schmit stressed that the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA), a landmark piece of legislation, was a collective effort approved by the entire Commission, not a solitary initiative by Breton. This defense of Breton and the collective process underscores Schmit's broader concerns about centralized decision-making and the attribution of policy outcomes.

Thierry Breton himself, after departing the Commission in 2024, had previously commented on the concentration of power, noting that some Brussels media outlets had depicted von der Leyen as "the Empress of Europe." Breton’s remarks implied that the EU's institutional framework, designed for collaborative governance, might not be suited for such a highly centralized leadership model. The narrative of an "Empress" suggests a departure from the principles of shared responsibility and democratic deliberation that are foundational to the European project.

The political context surrounding Schmit's comments is also noteworthy. He was the lead candidate for the Party of European Socialists in the 2024 EU elections. His renomination for a commissioner role was ultimately declined by Luxembourg, which instead selected Christophe Hansen from von der Leyen's own European People's Party. This political maneuvering may have influenced the timing and nature of Schmit's public criticisms, although he frames them as genuine concerns about institutional integrity.

The article also touches upon von der Leyen's resilience and approach to opposition during her second term. It mentions her success in defeating four attempts by smaller-party MEPs to unseat her, often countering such challenges by labeling critics as "Russian agents." Von der Leyen is a known proponent of a firm stance against Moscow. This aspect of her leadership, while positioning her as a strong defender of European interests against external adversaries, also raises questions about her handling of internal dissent and the potential for political polarization within the EU institutions.

Schmit's critique, therefore, adds a significant voice to the ongoing debate about the future direction and governance of the European Union. His emphasis on the need for a more decentralized, collegial approach and a robust strategic vision resonates with broader discussions about democratic accountability and institutional effectiveness in an era of profound global change. The former commissioner's assessment serves as a stark reminder of the challenges facing the EU in balancing strong leadership with the foundational principles of European integration.

Ekhbary News Agency