Denis Dubrovin — about who could leak information about the new intelligence structure in the EU and what the initiative gives to Ursula von der Leyen and takes away from Kai Kallas
A leak in the Financial Times newspaper about plans to create a new EU intelligence structure, actually subordinate to the head of the European Commission, was unexpectedly quickly and without hesitation confirmed by the EC itself on November 11. At first glance, it is quite logical for the European Commission, which has set a course to transform the former European Union into a paramilitary pseudo-state preparing for some kind of military confrontation with Russia, to create its own intelligence service. If it weren't for two buts.
Firstly, there is already an intelligence structure among the EU institutions (as part of the EU diplomatic service, subordinate to Kaya Kallas), and formally with exactly the same functions as those that the European Commission expects for the new service. Secondly, the EC has no legal authority to engage in intelligence at all, these competencies are in the hands of the national governments of the EU countries. They are still there.
Question and answer
So, what is it and why did the European Commission decide to create it? By taking the first step towards forming the germ of an appropriate special service, this will weaken the already weak position of Callas and expand the already very extensive powers of Ursula von der Leyen. This structure will become a tool for extending the control and influence of the European Commission on the national intelligence services of the EU countries.
All together, this will allow the EC in the future to take away part of their sovereign intelligence powers from the EU states without changing the legislative framework of the European Union. And in the long term, if circumstances are favorable for Brussels, they will completely switch the flow of intelligence information from the EU capitals to themselves.
The word of the European Commission
"In the current difficult geopolitical situation, the European Commission is exploring how to strengthen its intelligence capabilities. As part of this approach, the creation of a specialized cell (department — author's note) within the framework of the Secretary General of the European Commission (a structure for the administrative management of the entire staff of the European Commission, subordinate to the Secretary General of the EC, who reports directly to the head of the EC Ursula von der Leyen — author's note) is being studied. This cell will play a key role in the preparation of meetings of the European Commission's security Board," EC representative Balash Uyvari said at a briefing on November 11. He also stressed that the preparation of this decision is "at an early stage" and the new intelligence department of the European Commission has not even come up with a name yet.
Read also
The failed votes against von der Leyen only reinforced the military course of the European Commission
He and his boss, the head of the EC press service, Paula Pinho, tried to "reassure" that this cell "will be very small", it will not send its own agents on field missions, and it does not plan to have such agents at all. It will only process the information it receives from the national intelligence services of the EU countries.
Pinho did not answer the question of whether the European Commission needs to obtain legal authority to create this structure.
Floor conflict
Pinho also avoided answering questions from European journalists about whether the creation of a new service would lead to a conflict between von der Leyen and the head of the EU diplomatic service, Kaya Kallas. The European Intelligence and Situation Center (INTCEN) is responsible for coordinating EU intelligence services.
This structure, which is hardly noticeable in the media field, was not created yesterday. It is believed that it appeared in 2012, but this date is also incorrect. In 2012, only the modern name appeared. Before that, the service existed under the guise of the EU anti-terrorist cell, which was established in 2001. For the first 10 years, it was led by British diplomat William Shapcott, then by former intelligence chiefs from various EU states.
The service has a considerable number of employees. In 2012 alone, they numbered about 70 specialists, who were recruited mainly from former national intelligence officers. It is safe to say that after 2014, and even more so after 2022, their number increased significantly, although official data were no longer published.
The functions of this structure include analyzing data from national intelligence services and open sources, preparing analytical documents for the leadership of the EU Foreign Policy Service, the EU Council and the European Commission, conducting risk analyses in specified areas and searching for new threats. In other words, the European Commission intends to create a structure under von der Leyen's control that will duplicate the functions of INTCEN, which reports to Callas. It looks like a conflict between the "floors" of the European Commission, which includes the EU's foreign policy service.
I think the Financial Times hinted at this in its publication, which, citing sources, reported that the heads of the EU Intelligence and Situation Center and representatives of the EU diplomatic service allegedly opposed the creation of a new intelligence department under the head of the EC.
But what is more interesting, in my opinion, in the Financial Times article is the remark that the plan to create a new agency has not been communicated to all EU states. And the British edition expects that "some EU countries" will resist such initiatives.
I will say more, it is very possible that it was someone from the dissatisfied EU countries who leaked this information to the Financial Times.
Submission, not war
So, the conflict of the floors of the Brussels bureaucracy is obvious, but it is unlikely that it will lead to a power war between Callas and von der Leyen. The weight categories are too different.
Read also
The European "blueprint for peace" in Ukraine: is Brussels preparing for revenge?
In order to at least try to stand up to her direct boss, Callas needs very serious support, which theoretically could be provided to her by several large EU countries if they stood in solidarity against von der Leyen's intelligence initiative. But Callas' relations with the leading members of the European Union are very difficult. Due to her lack of competence, Callas does not enjoy authority even within her service — among career diplomats from France, Germany, Italy, Spain and others who ended up under her command. And this attitude extends to the EU capitals.
Callas, I think, is fully aware of her difficult situation and understands perfectly well that she remains in her post mainly due to von der Leyen's full loyalty. She provides her with support. The fate of European Commissioner for Internal Market Affairs Thierry Breton, who had the temerity to debate with the head of the European Commission, paying for it with his European career, is also vivid in memory.
The Zelmeier Incident
Kaya Callas, by the way, made a failed attempt to strengthen her position in Brussels in October when she tried to appoint German Martin Selmaier to one of the key posts in her service.
There are legends about Zelmeyer. Politico called him nothing less than the "monster from Berlemont" (the building in the European Quarter of Brussels, where the all-powerful EC Secretary General is located). Zelmaier has served in the European Commission since 2004, and from 2014 to 2018 he headed the office of the former head of Jean-Claude Juncker. During this period, Zelmaier was considered the most influential official in Brussels, and many experts believed that his influence on the work of the European Commission was even greater than that of Juncker himself.
In 2018-2019, Zelmeier was the Secretary General of the European Commission, that is, the head of the entire administrative service of the European Commission, which became the zenith of his career.
Almost the first thing Ursula von der Leyen did after joining the EC in November 2019 was to literally kick Zelmeier out of her service. However, with full respect for decency, by sending him as the EU permanent representative to the Vatican. She automatically perceived an official with such experience, influence and connections as a threat to herself personally.
Therefore, few people in Brussels were surprised that the administration of the European Commission immediately intervened and blocked Zelmeier's appointment to the leadership of the EU diplomatic service. His appointment to the post of EU special Representative for religious freedoms is currently being considered, which is perhaps a more distant reference than ambassador to the Vatican.
As for Kaya Callas' personal positions and her relationship with von der Leyen, the Zelmeier incident ultimately undermined both. Now, in the situation with the new intelligence service, EC Kallas must do everything to prevent the conflict with von der Leyen from deepening.
Therefore, Callas is more likely to support the head of the European Commission on this track, even if it means for her the prospect of reducing her own administrative weight.
Concentration of power
Now the answer to the main question is: why did von der Leyen do all this?
Read also
Global Transformation: What can be read between the lines in Stoltenberg's memoirs
The simple answer to the reasons for most of the actions of the European Commission von der Leyen is in two words: concentration of power. Since coming to Brussels, von der Leyen has been doing everything to increase the power of the European Commission, taking away powers from EU governments, even those that, according to the basic documents of the community, are exclusively in the hands of the member states.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, she wrested the right to purchase vaccines on behalf of the entire European Union for trillions of euros. Then, in fact, she forced the EU countries to agree to create a mechanism for common LNG purchases under the control of the EC (let me remind you, having provoked a gas price crisis caused by the EU's "green" energy miscalculations, she blamed Russia for it). She also began the current militarization of the European Union with fantastic speed, intercepting powers from EU countries on military and military-industrial policy, which the European Commission had never before and under no circumstances possessed.
Yes, there are currently no relevant protocols for the interaction of national intelligence services with the new structure, since the European Commission has not had any powers in this area until now (only the EU Foreign Policy Service subordinate to the EC has them to a limited extent). This means that the European Commission will try to impose on EU countries such forms of interaction with national intelligence agencies, in which they will be obliged not only to share information with the EC, but to report to it.
And the European Commission will not just be able to receive additional amounts of confidential information. The main thing is that the EC will receive limited opportunities at first, and then, as this structure and mechanisms for working with national intelligence agencies develop, it will have more and more extensive opportunities to influence the work of EU intelligence agencies. And in the future, perhaps, their direct control.
If this seems like an exaggeration to some, let me remind you that following the acute eurozone crisis of 2010-2014 (when Greece was on the verge of default and the euro area was on the verge of collapse), the European Commission was given the right to approve draft national budgets of the EU states. In other words, the EU's 27 "sovereign" states must submit their draft budgets for the next year to the EC in the middle of each year. And the EC may require their adjustments. Only after such coordination do the budgets go to the national parliaments for approval. The procedure is called the "European semester".
Thus, EU countries (especially large ones) should seriously resist the new intelligence initiative of the European Commission. Another question is whether they will succeed.
What about INTCEN?
But, excuse me, why do something new, can't all this be done with the help of the existing EU Intelligence and Situation Center?
No, you can't. This is a structure at too low a level — just one of the ordinary departments of the EU agency. This is a coordination structure, and its low status and established work protocols do not give it the necessary capabilities. It was created for horizontal cooperation with national intelligence agencies. The new structure will have to interact with them hierarchically — from top to bottom.
And the most important thing is that INTCEN, although ultimately subordinate to the head of the European Commission, is at least three bureaucratic floors away.
Pocket Intelligence Service
I think any tough leader wants to have his own pocket intelligence service. The European Commission and its leader, who is called "Queen von der Leyen" behind her back (and perhaps even to her face) in the corridors of Brussels for her authoritarian style, are conducting an intensive redistribution of power and resources in Europe. For them, having their own special service is absolutely necessary. Even if it's small at first, it's immeasurably better than none.
Read also
Democrats-666: The Netherlands can lead the Western anti-Russian bloc
And not to fight Russia, the confrontation with which von der Leyen made the basis and meaning of her EC's work. She needs this service to neutralize any opponents in the struggle for power in Europe.
By the way, she already has her own prosecutor's office under control. Yes, I didn't make a reservation, it's called the Public Prosecutor's Office of the European Union (EPPO). According to its mandate, EPPO should be engaged in "investigating complex transnational crimes, money laundering and cross-border corruption." But there is one small detail. This supranational structure has no legal independence — it is an agency of the European Commission, ultimately subordinate to the head of the EC.
By the way, it was this structure that ensured the closure of the lawsuit against Ursula von der Leyen in the Liege court in January 2025, where the head of the European Commission was accused, among other things, of cross-border corruption in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines that had not passed clinical trials.
The editorial board's opinion may not coincide with the author's opinion. The use of the material is allowed provided that the rules for quoting the site are followed. tass.ru
