European Commission Executive Vice President Frans Timmermans appears to be wary of the possibility of opening accession talks for Ukraine this year, a goal publicly set by President Volodymyr Zelensky. However, in an exclusive interview with K, Timmermans reiterates that EU support for Ukraine will continue “for as long as necessary”, while calling the Xi-Zelensky talk “a good sign.” As custodian of the Green Deal, the Dutch commissioner defends EU action. in legislation to reduce emissions and explains how the extension of the emissions trading scheme to shipping will work. However, he notes that he is not surprised by how difficult the process of reaching an agreement on climate targets is, since the transition to a zero-emission economy is a “huge change”.

“We have just completed work on a large package of climate laws designed to reduce our emissions by at least 55% by 2030 (compared to 1990 levels). This goal is essential for the EU to do its part. in limiting global temperature rise as close to 1.5 degrees Celsius as possible. When I made relevant proposals in 2021, even most of my colleagues said that they were unattainable. Well, look where we are now, less than two years later. We are the first major economy to implement such a wide-ranging reform. This is by no means a failure.

– Absolutely. Ukraine has been brutally invaded and we will continue to provide strong support to this country. We should try to keep it as short as possible – because the sooner Ukraine is defeated, the better – but the EU will stand by its side for as long as it takes. We support Ukraine in different ways, including militarily. In addition to continuing to supply weapons, we are working to increase the capabilities of the European defense industry. Military assistance is absolutely essential: Ukrainians are fighting for their survival as a nation against a barbarian invader. But they also fight for democracy, for the freedom to decide their future, for human rights and basic values.

– Last year, European leaders decided to grant Ukraine the status of a candidate country. Ukraine will need considerable time and effort to complete all the necessary steps before accession negotiations can formally begin. But the Ukrainian government takes the process very seriously, and this is important, because progress largely depends on what it does itself. This autumn, the European Commission will carry out the first assessment.

This is not in the interests of the EU. bipolar world. We can and should have an independent relationship with China.

Integration is a long process, and it is too early to tell if agriculture will be a particularly difficult problem. However, the recent grain debate speaks volumes from a different perspective. After the outbreak of the war, we worked hard to facilitate the export of Ukrainian grain to those parts of the world that were in dire need of it – Africa, Central Asia. Even then it was clear that the problem lay in financing and logistics, and not in the sufficiency of supply. However, the European agricultural lobby argued that even in Europe there would be food shortages and that farmers should be allowed to grow grain on the allotted land. Look where we are now: farmers are in serious trouble because of the oversupply of grain in the market. I don’t blame the farmers in any way. But the agricultural industry must ask itself whether opportunism and, quite frankly, fear-mongering is really in the interest of the farmers it claims to represent. Climate change, droughts, the disappearance of pollinators are the real threats to our food security.

“These proposals are designed to help European industry support our climate goals. The pandemic and then the war against Ukraine disrupted supply chains around the world, not just in China. They reinforced the need to become more sustainable and less dependent on non-European suppliers. In response, we must move towards a circular, energy efficient, renewable energy economy.

As for raw materials, we want to diversify our sources of supply. The plan is not to mine or produce everything in Europe: we will continue to import, increasing production here. But since natural resources are scarce and their extraction pollutes biodiversity and leads to biodiversity loss, the Critical Raw Materials Regulation stipulates that by 2030, 15% of the consumption of raw materials in the EU will come from processing. The regulation also strikes the right balance between the growing demand for raw materials and the need to protect the environment. It even includes the possibility of mandatory future environmental impact requirements.

Yes, we can and should. This is not in the interests of the EU. bipolar world. We want a strong international system based on common rules. On global trade, the financial system, the climate, sustainable development, health care, we must all work together. China is a competitor, adversary and partner – the balance depends on the issue and the moment, so our interaction with it must be flexible. There are areas where our interests coincide. The climate crisis is a prime example. China played a leading role in the global biodiversity deal negotiations last December, China’s emissions trading system is based on ours, and we have an ongoing dialogue on climate and the environment. But there are also areas where we disagree. As a permanent member of the Security Council, China must support the restoration of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and uphold international normative frameworks and rules in general. China’s attitude towards the Russian invasion will significantly affect our bilateral relationship. The phone call between President Xi and President Zelensky is a good sign in this regard.

All zero emission vehicles from 2035

– The ETS review was completed last Tuesday and we are almost done with the whole package. For renewable energy, energy efficiency and sustainable fuels in aviation and shipping, we are waiting for the official final vote, but the substance has already been agreed.

Emissions trading will apply to shipping from 2024. This is important as maritime transport accounts for about 4% of CO2 emissions in Europe and is expected to grow in this sector. The system will cover travel within the EU. and half of emissions from travel to or from the EU. from third countries, as shipping is a very internationalized sector.

Emissions trading is a very effective way to reduce emissions. The cap ensures that levels go down, the price of carbon rewards innovation and efficiency, and the system generates additional revenue for governments. Through the Innovation Fund, we will reinvest part of the proceeds from the implementation of the ETS of shipping to decarbonize the shipping sector. A parallel agreement on sustainable fuels will create new opportunities to reduce emissions from maritime transport.

– Are you satisfied with the compromise reached on car emissions after 2035? Doesn’t the complexity of the debate make you more pessimistic about Europe’s political will to achieve the ambitious Green Deal goals?

– I am glad that we have kept the agreement reached between the Member States and the European Parliament. Starting in 2035, all new cars sold in the EU. should be zero emissions. This sets a very clear direction for the future. How automakers want to achieve this goal is entirely up to them. Most invest heavily in electric batteries. The European Commission has agreed with Germany to establish the possibility of selling cars running exclusively on synthetic fuel (e-fuel) in the EU. These cars don’t exist yet, but they could be built if part of the auto industry decides to do so.

It was an unexpected last-minute hurdle. But in general, I’m not surprised that conversations are getting more difficult. This transition is difficult. Achieving zero emissions, helping nature recover, building a circular economy: these are huge changes. And when distant goals become the laws of real life, of course, it will be very difficult to reach a consensus. But the support for our action on climate change, both in the Council and in Parliament, is very strong. And frankly, if the process was easy, it would be a sign that we are not ambitious enough.

– How satisfied are you with the implementation of the EU strategy? for biodiversity? What are the main goals for this year?

– Well, now we can talk about real difficulties! We have a lot of work to do to convince Member States and MEPs that our proposals on nature restoration, pesticides and other environmental policies are not only right, but very necessary. As humans, we are part of nature and we cannot continue to pollute it like we are now. We depend on nature for food, clean air and water, and our health. We also need this in our fight against the climate crisis: healthy nature helps keep temperatures low and carbon sequesters.