“Laws that exist only on paper achieve nothing.” This is not a slogan. It reflects the reality described by small-scale fishers and points to a wide gap between European Union commitments and delivery on the water. More than a decade after the last reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the EU is once again debating whether to rewrite this policy, even though the CFP’s framework is fit for purpose and delivers sustainable fisheries — when properly applied. What continues to fail is its implementation. The clearest example is the legal commitment to end overfishing by 2020, a deadline still unmet. > If Europe delays action until after another lengthy reform, it risks losing > the next generation of fishers and hollowing out coastal economies. Nowhere is this gap more visible than in the Mediterranean, and particularly in Cyprus and Greece, where stocks are further weakened by the accelerating effects of the climate crisis and the spread of invasive species. The Mediterranean remains the most overfished sea in the world, and small-scale fishers feel these consequences directly. Yet, Cypriot fishers are not asking for weaker rules or a new policy. They are asking for effective enforcement of existing legislation, and support from national authorities. Without these, the future of fisheries as a profession is at stake. If Europe delays action until after another lengthy reform, it risks losing the next generation of fishers and hollowing out coastal economies. Photo by A.S.S. The experience of Cypriot and Greek fishers mirrors a broader European issue. Before reopening the CFP, Europe should take stock of the real gap, which lies not in the law itself, but in its uneven implementation and enforcement. Calls for reform are driven by familiar pressures: environmental safeguards are increasingly framed as obstacles to economic viability and fleet renewal. Reform is presented as a way to modernize vessels and cut red tape. But this framing overlooks lessons from the past. Europe has been here before. Excess capacity and weak controls pushed fish stocks to the brink of collapse, forcing painful corrections that cost public money and livelihoods. For small-scale fishers in the Mediterranean, these impacts are not theoretical. They are experienced daily, through declining catches, rising costs and increasing uncertainty. The Common Fisheries Policy delivers when implemented Evidence shows that where the CFP has been implemented, it delivers. According to European Commission assessments, the share of stocks subject to overfishing in the North-East Atlantic fell from around 40 percent in 2013 to just over 22 percent by 2025. In the Mediterranean, the figure dropped from 70 percent to 51 percent over the same period. These improvements are closely linked to the application of science-based catch limits, effort restrictions and capacity controls under the CFP. > Europe has been here before. Excess capacity and weak controls pushed fish > stocks to the brink of collapse, forcing painful corrections that cost public > money and livelihoods. Economic and social data tell the same story. EU fishing fleets have become more efficient and more profitable over the past decade. Vessels now generate higher average incomes, with wages per full-time fisher rising by more than a quarter since 2013. In its 2023 policy communication, the Commission concluded that the CFP remains an adequate legal framework, with the real gap lying in its application and enforcement. Those involved in the 2013 reform understand why this matters. The revised policy marked a clear shift away from overcapacity and short-term decision-making toward a science-based approach. The European Commission’s own assessments show that this approach delivered results where it was applied. Parts of the EU fleet became more profitable, labor productivity improved and several fish stocks recovered. The CFP remains the EU’s strongest tool for reversing decline at sea. Implementation results in progress; reform leads to instability and uncertainty Strengthening the CPF’s implementation would deliver tangible benefits, including greater stability for fishers and coastal communities, avoiding years of legislative uncertainty, and allowing faster progress toward sustainability objectives. Firm and consistent implementation can enhance economic resilience while restoring ocean health, without the delays and risks that come with reopening the legislation. Given the time and resources required, another round of institutional reform is neither efficient nor necessary. Priority should instead be given to effectively delivering the agreed CFP commitments. Photo by A.S.S. Cypriot Presidency of the Council: a moment for delivery This debate unfolds as Cyprus assumes the EU Council Presidency, at a moment when choices made in Brussels carry immediate consequences at sea. Holding the Presidency brings responsibility as well as opportunity. It offers a chance to help frame the discussion toward making existing rules work in practice, while addressing current implementation challenges. This is where the credibility of the CFP will be tested. > Sustainability and livelihoods move together, or not at all. Reopening the CFP now may send the wrong signal. It may suggest that missed deadlines carry no consequence and that agreed-upon rules are optional. For fishers, it would prolong uncertainty at a time when stability is already fragile. For Europe, it would undermine trust in its ability to deliver. The EU was not conceived to generate endless processes or delay action through repeated legislative cycles. Its purpose is to deliver common solutions to shared problems, and to support people and communities where national action falls short. The last reform of the CFP was built on a simple principle: healthy fish stocks are the foundation of viable fisheries. Sustainability and livelihoods move together, or not at all. This principle is already reflected in Europe’s agreed framework. The task now is to act on it. Fisheries are a clear test of that promise. The law is already in place. The tools already exist. What Europe needs now is the political resolve to deliver on the commitments it has already made. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is OCEANA * The ultimate controlling entity is OCEANA More information here.

Elisabeth Braw is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, the author of the award-winning book “Goodbye Globalization” and a regular columnist for POLITICO. You may have heard that some unsavory ships have been navigating our waters, smuggling drugs and other goods, damaging underwater infrastructure and sometimes just lurking, perhaps conducting surveillance. Many of these ships turn up in Irish waters, which are home to multiple undersea cables. But while Ireland has a tiny navy to deal with these unwanted visitors, it does have another formidable resource that helps keep its waters safe: its fishermen. And for the sake of national security, let’s hope this shrinking tribe manages to renew its ranks. In January 2022, Ireland was facing a terrible dilemma: The Russian Navy had just announced it was going to hold an exercise in Irish waters. Conducting wargames in the exclusive economic zones of other countries is legal, but guests ordinarily ask for permission — and Russia definitely wasn’t a welcome visitor. Like the rest of Europe, Ireland was gripped with fear that Russia was about to invade Ukraine and perhaps other countries. Dublin politely asked the Russian Navy to refrain from holding its exercises, but to no avail. The wargames were going to take place. But then the Irish government received assistance from an unexpected source. The country’s fishermen declared they wouldn’t allow the exercise to happen: “This is the livelihoods of fishermen and fishing families all around the coastline here,” announced Patrick Murphy, chief executive of the Irish South and West Fish Producers Organisation, on RTE radio. “It’s our waters. Can you imagine if the Russians were applying to go onto the mainland of Ireland to go launching rockets, how far would they get with that?” The fishermen, Murphy explained, would take turns fishing around the clock. The maneuver made it impossible for the Russians to perform their exercises, and Moscow ended up cancelling the wargames. The creativity of these gutsy fishermen made global news, but away from the headlines, they and their colleagues in other countries have long been aiding national security. In the early hours of Oct. 28, 1981, two Swedish fishermen on their daily round off the coast of Karlskrona noticed something unusual. They decided to alert the authorities, and the navy dispatched a vessel. What the fishermen had spotted turned out to be the U137 — a Soviet nuclear submarine that had run aground. The incident demonstrated several things: First, fishermen know their countries’ waters like almost no one else and notice when something is out of the ordinary. Second, the navy — or the coast guard — can’t be everywhere all the time. And third, fishermen can perform a vital service to national security by alerting authorities when something doesn’t look right. The grounded U137 wasn’t a one-off. In fact, fishermen keep a vigilant eye on their surroundings on behalf of their compatriots all the time. Stefano Guidi/Getty Image Ireland’s large number of undersea cables is the result of the country’s strategic location at the westernmost end of the north Atlantic and its need for top-notch connectivity to service its high-tech economy. Indeed, the republic has marketed its connectivity — and low corporate taxes — so successfully that a host of U.S. tech firms and other corporate giants have set up European hubs there. But its waters cover a vast 880,00 square kilometers. That’s a challenge for the Irish Naval Service, which has a small fleet of eight patrol vessels, and such a shortage of sailors that it can’t even crew those few vessels. Despite placing a few orders for maritime equipment recently, it’s in no position to detect all the suspicious activity taking place in Ireland’s waters. That’s where the fishermen come in. Because they spend so much time at sea — some 200 days in the average year — they are adept at spotting drug boats or, say, potential saboteurs. When the authorities detect something unusual, perhaps via radar, they often ask fishermen what they’ve seen. “People ring us up and say: ‘Did you notice ABC?’,” Murphy told me. “Then we send them pictures. A lot of fellas send in pictures and tracking. WhatsApp is very good for this.” This monitoring, Murphy said, isn’t just a phenomenal alert system. “It’s a deterrent.” We’ll never know how many unwelcome visitors that vigilance has deterred. But in keeping their eyes open, fishermen perform an indispensable service to Irish security — and it costs the government nothing. As unwanted visitors keep turning up in our waters, such contributions to national security are becoming increasingly essential all around Europe. There’s just one problem: The fishing profession is losing manpower. In Ireland, the fishing fleet has shrunk from some 400 vessels to just over 100 in the past two decades due to economics, foreign competition, fishing quotas and maritime regulations. From a security perspective, this continued decline of Irish — and European — fishermen is dangerous. They’re the best soldiers we never knew we had.

OPTICS SHORTAGE OF SAND: EUROPE’S IMPACT ON CAPE VERDE’S TURTLE CRISIS Plastic pollution, mass tourism, climate change and poaching all put pressure on a fragile ecosystem, revealing how local challenges often stem from global problems. Text and photos by LUIGI AVANTAGGIATO in Boa Vista, Cape Verde Above, Emilio Garcia Landim, a 29-year-old ranger of Fundação Tartaruga, spots a sea turtle on the beach of Lacacão on Cape Verde’s Boa Vista island. Next, tracks left by a turtle looking for a nesting site along the plastic-infested beach of Porto Ferreira. Plastic reaches the island carried by ocean currents, disturbing the nesting of reptiles that die of dehydration and disorientation looking for a clean place to lay their eggs. Bottom, the carcass of a turtle that died of dehydration, along Varandinha beach. Every summer, thousands of sea turtles climb the beaches of Boa Vista, Cape Verde, for a millennia-old ritual: nesting. Today, however, this process is threatened by several factors, putting one of the world’s largest Caretta caretta turtle colonies at risk. Poaching, pollution, mass tourism and climate change are all putting pressure on this fragile ecosystem, revealing how local challenges often stem from global problems — with a heavy shadow cast by Europe. The most significant threat to these turtles is plastic pollution. And here, the fisheries agreements Cape Verde has with the EU — allowing European industrial fleets, especially Spanish and Portuguese, to operate in its waters — have a significant impact on marine life. Nesting beaches are suffocated by tons of waste carried by currents, mostly originating from fishing activities and dumping along the European and African coasts. The accumulation not only chemically contaminates nests but also creates physical barriers that prevent female turtles from finding safe spots to lay their eggs. A numbered stick marks a turtle nest mapped by volunteers from the NGO Cabo Verde Natura 2000 along the plastic-infested beach of Porto Ferreira. The Cape Verde archipelago is the third-largest turtle reserve in the world, after Oman and Florida. The island of Boa Vista hosts two-thirds of Cape Verde’s turtles. “It’s like looking for a home in a minefield,” explained Franziska Haas, a German biologist and volunteer with Fundação Tartaruga, one of the most active local NGOs. “Often, we have to help them find a safe spot. Some get lost, wander for hours until morning and risk dying of dehydration.” Fundação Tartaruga currently monitors over 30 kilometers of coastline with teams of rangers and international volunteers, many with scientific training. Their work is crucial for identifying nests, protecting eggs, combating poaching and documenting the growing damage caused by pollution. There’s plenty more coastline to cover, of course, but their resources are limited. First, seven-year-old conservation dog Karetta and her handler João José Mendes de Oliveira, a 21 year-old ranger, patrol Santa Monica beach. Next, the remains of a turtle killed for its meat along Varandinha beach. Above, view of the Morro de Areia nature reserve. It covers an area of 25.85 square kilometers, with a 300-meter-wide marine protection zone. Below, ranger coordinator Adilson Monteiro, 28, shows a photograph of a turtle killed by a poacher on Varandinha beach. “Fishermen kill turtles while they are sleeping, during egg-laying. They pierce their necks with a fishing hook called incroque and cut off the rest of their bodies with a knife,” Monteiro said.  Next, a temporary tent used by volunteers of the NGO Bios Cape Verde for turtle monitoring along the beach of Varandinha. Then, there’s overtourism. In the last two decades, Cape Verde has become an increasingly popular tourist destination for Europeans. The islands of Sal and Boa Vista, in particular, have seen massive investment from European real estate groups, resulting in the construction of hotels, resorts and residential complexes along turtle-nesting beaches. But it’s not just the land that’s dangerous, threats to these turtles loom in the water as well. Industrial trawl nets accidentally catch tens of thousands of turtles every year, both in the archipelago and during their migration in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean to feed. And while European regulations mandate the use of exclusion devices, which allow turtles to escape nets, they’re only mandatory for certain fleets and areas, and enforcement is often inconsistent. Top, Cleidir Lopes, a 22-year-old tour guide, washes his horse Morena at Chaves beach. Cleidir is a member of Guardiões do Mar (guardians of the sea), a community of people from Boa Vista who report the presence of animals in difficulty in the water, such as turtles and cetaceans. Next, artificial nests of the association Cabo Verde Natura 2000 Cape Verde along the beach of Porto Ferreira. Below, Helmer Davy, a 22-year-old ranger, sleeps in his tent at the Fundação Tartaruga Lacacão camp in Curral Velho after covering his night shift.  There’s also he impact of climate change to contend with. In many cases, excessive heat causes embryo mortality. Meanwhile, the sex of turtle embryos depends on the temperature of the sand where they lay their eggs, with higher temperatures favoring females. And this growing imbalance could jeopardize long-term reproduction. In the face of all these threats, the volunteers’ night work has become essential; their observations are silent, meticulous, and almost ritualistic. Their teams consist of three or four volunteers and an environmental ranger, and their patrols are organized to the rhythm of a metronome, keeping the time dedicated to each female turtle to a minimum. Some of the volunteers help dig deeper holes, some inject microchips for the census, some note the nest’s GPS coordinates, and some come back to evaluate the turtles’ age, size, health and the presence of wounds. Volunteers Franziska Haas, a 22-year-old German biologist; Simone Ambrosini, a 21-year-old Swiss biologist; Nele Ruhnau, a 23-year-old German medical engineer; and ranger Emilio Garcia Landim inject a so-called Passive Integrated Transponder into the front fin of a turtle on Lacacão beach. They are also seen measuring the length of a shell to assess the age and health of a turtle, help dig holes and move eggs laid in a shallow hole to a hatchery. During breeding season, which lasts from June to October, each female can nest up to three times, digging a flask-shaped hole on the beach, each containing about 100 eggs. The laying lasts on average two hours. The eggs are incubated by the high temperatures of the sand for about 50 days. Still, despite all this work, poaching persists on the island too. Despite commitment from Cape Verde’s government, which criminalized the consumption of turtle meat and eggs in 2018, females are caught at night, killed while laying eggs and sold on the black market where meat can fetch up to €20 per kilo. “Turtles are hunted illegally for their meat and eggs, which are sold by word of mouth,” confirmed Fundação Tartaruga’s Executive Director Euclides Resende. But “in 2024, we documented just six killings on the beaches we monitor, compared to thousands just a few years ago.” The group’s surveillance work is effective, having adopted an innovative approach that uses conservation dogs and thermal technology in 2019. “This allows us to expand the surveillance range and collect evidence for potential legal action,” explained project coordinator Adilson Monteiro. Top, moonlight illuminates an hatchery along the beach of Lacacão. Many of the nesting beaches do not have the most favorable conditions for nest incubation such as the low slope of the beach profile, plastic and the presence of tourists. As a compensatory measure many of the nests are relocated to a controlled incubation area, which ensures the hatching of the young turtles and increases their chances of reaching the sea successfully. Next, a team of rangers and a conservation dog from the same NGO patrol an area at Santa Monica beach. The targeted selection of nesting beaches by a trained team of rangers equipped with night vision devices and conservation dogs has led to a massive reduction in poaching on the coasts of Boa Vista since its introduction in 2018. Below, Denis Quintino, a 31-year-old fisherman, returns to the port of Sal Rei after a night of fishing. But it’s exceedingly difficult to eradicate an activity so deeply rooted in the culture of a place: The meat and eggs of Caretta caretta have always been consumed on the islands. And in inland villages like João Galego, Cabedo do Tarafes and Fundo das Figueira, “Ba pa bela” (catching a turtle) is a true rite of passage. “For my family, hunting turtles was normal. My grandfather did it, my father did it, and I learned from my older brother. Every family in João Galego has always eaten turtles; it’s part of our tradition,” said tour guide Zenildo F. It is this difficult coexistence of tradition and environmental conservation, along with the need for further pollution and fisheries regulations, that makes the survival of Cape Verde’s sea turtles a truly global test case.

PARIS — The French have long had a habit of annoying the British. Lately they’ve been digging their heels in over concessions they want Prime Minister Keir Starmer to accept in return for his hoped-for reset with the EU.  From defense to fisheries, France’s diplomats have been playing hardball, according to officials from both sides. So while governments are optimistic that Britain and Europe can rekindle some kind of relationship in the wake of Donald Trump’s less-than-subtle attempt to turn his back on them, it’s certainly not turning out to be a painless process. Just as Paris played bad cop during the negotiations over the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU and subsequent trade deal between 2016 and 2020, it’s putting in a repeat performance now the Brits want to get closer again, with a crucial London summit less than two weeks away. “The French have stayed very much on the position that there shouldn’t be any advantages given to the British after Brexit,” said François-Joseph Schichan, a former French diplomat and director at advisory firm Flint Global.   In fact, some of the same issues that caused such a headache for the two sides during the divorce are rearing their heads again, according to diplomats from both sides who, like others quoted in this piece, were granted anonymity to speak frankly about talks behind closed doors. France, for example, wants to limit British access to a €150 billion European rearmament defense fund that is being negotiated. It also wants to secure access to British waters for EU fishing fleets ahead of a deadline next year. In Paris, French officials are optimistic that their lobbying will pay off on the arms purchasing issue, but they remain tight-lipped regarding any fisheries deal. FARAGE LOOMS LARGE European and British negotiators have this week been locked in another round of intensive talks to strike a three-part pact that includes a political declaration, a defense pact and a third section on other areas of cooperation. A landmark summit between the two sides is planned for London on May 19.  In the last few months, the warming relations have seen Starmer hosting and being invited to leader-level discussions on Ukraine and U.K. ministers participating in EU meetings. The most recent of these was Wednesday’s gathering of EU foreign ministers in Poland attended by Foreign Secretary David Lammy. “We are working hand-in-hand with our European allies to build a safer, more secure, and more prosperous Europe,” Lammy said. But a lot can still go wrong, not least because Starmer is under increased pressure following big wins by Reform UK leader Nigel Farage in local elections last week. Farage was one of the most vocal supporters of Brexit and is railing against any government attempt to push the U.K. back into the European fold. With uncertainty hovering over the future of the NATO alliance under Trump, and Washington threatening to walk away from difficult ceasefire negotiations with Russia and Ukraine, European officials want to land a security deal with the U.K., an allied nuclear power that has a seat on the United Nations Security Council.  The most recent of these was Wednesday’s gathering of EU foreign ministers in Poland attended by Foreign Secretary David Lammy. | Marcin Obara/EPA In Paris, however, the urgency to lock arms with the British is tempered by a desire to use the moment to address the bad blood left over from Brexit. The French are keen in principle on a security alliance with the U.K., but are worried that a bigger deal leaves them open to being blindsided later on more controversial issues, such as access to British waters for EU trawlers. Under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement with the EU, signed in 2020, European fleets have certain fishing rights and quotas in British waters, but those expire in 2026. France, Denmark and the Netherlands want that access extended.  And while Paris doesn’t want to trade guns for fish, it’s clear France is pushing to secure fishing rights as a prerequisite to a closer defense partnership.  “You can’t negotiate security [and] defense one year, and the next year be fighting over mackerel quotas,” a French official said. FRENCH ISOLATION The defense dispute boils down to money. The U.K. wants its firms to benefit from SAFE, the multibillion-euro rearmament program that is currently being negotiated by EU members, but France sees that effort as unwelcome competition from London and a case of the Brits trying to have their post-Brexit cake and eat it too. Some EU member countries such as Germany and those in Eastern Europe under greater threat from Russia have bristled at what they regard as French intransigence. One non-French EU diplomat said that France had started “to feel isolated” as it resisted making SAFE more accessible to the British. The mood in France is currently trending toward “including the British, but with strict conditions.” One option being floated is making the U.K. a fee-paying participant in SAFE, according to an official from Renew Europe, which includes French President Emmanuel Macron’s centrists. “I think the French reluctance on this issue was more an initial negotiating position, because the French defense industry doesn’t want rivals, and there’ll be an impact on jobs locally,” the official said. OLD HABITS DIE HARD  The disagreement boils down to a difference in post-Brexit mindsets between Paris and London. Britain still sees Brussels as a close partner despite leaving the EU, but French confidence in the U.K. remains shaken. And while Britain believes the “special relationship” with the U.S. is salvageable, Europe has come to terms with its breakup with America under Trump. That, and British efforts to secure a trade deal with Washington, have reinforced the French view that the reset with Starmer will be relatively limited and that the U.K. doesn’t see its future as lying exclusively with the continent. Nigel Farage was one of the most vocal supporters of Brexit and is railing against any government attempt to push the U.K. back into the European fold. | Adam Vaughan/EPA In the end, France’s role in the reset might come down to a cold political calculus. Macron needs Starmer if he hopes to achieve anything on Ukraine, and foreign policy is one of the few areas that can burnish his public image amid France’s domestic political gridlock. “If France and the U.K don’t work together, nothing will happen,” said Schichan, the former diplomat. “If Macron wants results, he needs to be aligned [with London].” Gregorio Sorgi and Jacopo Barigazzi contributed reporting.

BRUSSELS — Keir Starmer promised voters a big Brexit reset. This week, Britain’s prime minister will have to decide just how big. British negotiators are sitting down for a week of intensive talks with their EU counterparts as they prepare for the looming May 19 Brexit summit in London. Their goal is to break what one EU official described as a “deadlock” on key issues ahead of Starmer’s big foreign policy set piece. “Member states and the Commission share the view that the mood is constructive, on both sides,” according to an EU diplomat with their ear to the ground. But there has as yet been no major breakthrough on the individual topics with just two weeks to go to the summit itself, according to EU officials and diplomats familiar with the state of negotiations. They were granted anonymity to speak freely as talks continue. Starmer’s aim for the May 19 meeting is to sign a defense pact with Brussels to fill a Donald Trump-shaped hole in Britain’s security alliances — and net U.K. firms access to a €150 billion EU rearmament slush fund. He also wants to tee up negotiations on other issues for the rest of the year: addressing British priorities like easing the flow of cross-border food trade and simplifying electricity imports and exports. Brussels is in turn pushing for EU priorities like easy cross-channel visas for young people and long-term access for EU fishing fleets in British waters. COMMITTING TO INK Both sides think a landing zone is in sight after a series of compromises. But there’s still time for things to go wrong. Ambassadors from EU member countries expected to be updated on the details of an emerging deal last week but were told they would have to wait until after the weekend to hear more than an outline. “Member states were asking for details themselves, but are still waiting for the text,” a second person, an EU official, said. The compressed timeline has apparently been partly driven by a purported U.K. request not to commit hard policy details of the reset to ink until last Thursday’s English local elections were out of the way. British negotiators are sitting down for a week of intensive talks with their EU counterparts as they prepare for the looming May 19 Brexit summit in London. | Andy Rain/EPA Starmer’s Labour party received a widely expected drubbing on Thursday at the hands of Nigel Farage’s Euroskeptic Reform UK outfit. In the eyes of No. 10 Downing Street, a focus on talks with Brussels might have made the contest even more difficult. But keeping one eye on Farage has shaped the talks in other ways, too. Labour, like its Conservative opponents, is focused on the U.K.’s migration statistics and wants to keep them as low as possible in the hope it will be rewarded by voters. As such, Starmer has spent the last year giving the cold shoulder to Brussels over its request for a youth mobility scheme — which would make it easier for young people to experience life on both sides of the channel, but also impact the figures. It didn’t go down well. Finally, weeks ahead of the big reset summit, Starmer has started to publicly relent: ditching a canned response that he had “no plans” for the scheme. EU officials, meanwhile, said that U.K. negotiators were starting to show openness to the idea. But London has presented a compromise option: to keep immigration statistics down, the number of youngsters who can take part in the scheme will be capped, and their stays will be shortened to just one year to keep them from sticking around in the figures. British negotiators are also resisting EU pressure to restore European students’ access to lower home tuition fees at universities, a key ask of some capitals. “It seems like there’s a bit of a deadlock, especially when it comes to tuition fees and quotas,” the EU official quoted above said, adding that “discussions with the U.K. are planned all of next week.” At their check-in last week member country capitals urged the European Commission’s negotiators to stick to their guns. “Most of them really pushed on youth mobility,” the official said. Brussels has apparently attempted to compromise by dropping its earlier plans for four-year stays — it is now arguing for two years, or one initial year extendable to two. London is not yet buying it. GO FISH Then there is the question of fishing. When Boris Johnson signed the maritime chapter of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement in 2021, EU fishers breathed a sigh of relief. In exchange for a Brexit trade agreement, the then-British prime minister had given away generous access to U.K. waters until June 2026. With that access now due to expire and Britain back at the negotiating table, member countries like France want assurances it will continue for the foreseeable future. They’ve privately hinted they are prepared to send Starmer home empty-handed if they don’t get it. The problem for the British prime minister is that the sort of deal sought by Paris and other capitals could see him painted a sellout back at home — easy material for Farage and his colleagues. Keeping one eye on Nigel Farage has shaped the talks in other ways, too. | Adam Vaughan/EPA “The French will say what they will say, but we are absolutely determined to stand up for the interests of the U.K. fishing industry,” the U.K.’s Fishing Minister Daniel Zeichner last month told a parliamentary committee, channeling his country’s maritime patriotism. “The fishing industry has been let down before, and I don’t intend to let that happen again.” It’s fighting talk, and not everyone thinks it’s compatible with a successful summit on May 19. “I’m not sure the defense and security agreement is a given at the summit,” another EU diplomat said. “There are some vocal member states when it comes to fisheries.” Ultimately, what negotiators from both sides decide this week will determine the course of the meeting — and the course of cross-channel relations for years to come.

BRUSSELS — A defense and security pact being drawn up between the U.K. and the EU will fall apart if Keir Starmer doesn’t make concessions on fishing rights, according to a senior European politician.  Jessica Rosencrantz, Sweden’s EU affairs minister, said it was vital to make fast progress on a formal security agreement with the U.K., especially at a time of heightened tension over Ukraine, as countries rapidly re-arm. Officials on both sides are looking to a summit in May as a moment when such a deal could be signed, at least in outline terms.  But in an interview with POLITICO, the minister said EU member governments were unlikely to sign off on a security deal with the U.K. unless negotiations are also resolved on other “sensitive” issues, including access to British waters for European fishing fleets. A deal on fish would also help in “building trust” between London and Brussels, she added.  “Just to be clear, I think it’s really important that the EU and U.K. work together on defense and security,” Rosencrantz said. “Obviously, there are other sensitive issues as well for many member states which also need to be resolved, fisheries being one.”  Asked if it would be possible to complete a defense pact first and then move onto negotiating fishing rights, she said: “I think we have to find a way where we can do both because we want to move ahead with the defense partnership but for many countries it’s important to solve the other sensitive issues as well. And therefore I think it will be important to take steps also when it comes to fisheries and other topics.”  While behind the scenes officials have let it be known that France in particular is determined to secure more advantageous fishing rights in return for a reset in the U.K.-EU relationship, it is rare for such a senior figure in a European government to publicly make the link between the defense pact and fish.  RESET IN RELATIONS The issue of fishing rights dogged the negotiations over Britain’s departure from the EU and soured relations between London and Paris after the U.K. left the bloc, especially during Boris Johnson’s tenure as U.K. prime minister, when he clashed repeatedly with French President Emmanuel Macron.  British officials had hoped that Starmer’s plan for a “reset” in relations with the EU would get a quick win on security and defense, because the U.K.’s military is still held in high regard across Europe ― and it also has nuclear weapons ― making an alliance attractive. Jessica Rosencrantz, Sweden’s EU affairs minister, said it was vital to make fast progress on a formal security agreement with the U.K., especially at a time of heightened tension over Ukraine, as countries rapidly re-arm. | Martin Bertrand/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images But numerous officials involved in the process say progress has slowed as a result of the question of fishing rights, along with issues such as a proposed youth mobility scheme and border policies for Gibraltar. Negotiations are ongoing with the aim of having an agreed plan ready to show off at a summit in the U.K. between Starmer and the EU’s top brass on May 19.  U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to downgrade American commitments on European security — and the EU’s plans to boost its homegrown defense industry in response — have added a layer of complexity to the talks on a British deal.  Brussels has proposed a  €150 billion loan program for EU governments to spend on re-arming. The funds should be invested on a “buy more European” basis, according to Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president.  But without a formal defense agreement with Brussels, the U.K. will be locked out of the scheme. If a deal is agreed, European governments will be free to use the funding to buy British-made weapons and equipment. “We want the U.K. to be a part of this as well,” said Rosencrantz, the Swedish minister. “We have a joint interest, responsibility, we agree on the matter of supporting Ukraine, on ramping up on defense. We need to work together and it would be very, very good to have a partnership.”  Jon Stone in London and Jacopo Barigazzi in Brussels contributed reporting.

LONDON — Keir Starmer came to power promising to reset Britain’s relationship with the European Union. As 2025 rolls in, that’s looking tricker than he thought. By all accounts, the new U.K. prime minister is getting on well with EU leaders. But misunderstandings over visas for young people, disputes over fish, and the small matter of being taken to court by the European Commission have put a dampener on things. To get the show back on track, Starmer has filled his diary with trips to Brussels, including a major EU-U.K. summit penciled in for “the first half of 2025.” A separate meeting in the Belgian capital at the beginning of February will focus on security, while Brexit Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds is planning to meet his EU counterpart Maroš Šefčovič roughly every two weeks — as negotiations enter what he calls a “new phase.” The Brexit reset, it seems, is getting a reset of its own. BOGGED DOWN While London and Brussels both say they want to improve the U.K-EU relationship, they are yet to nail down exactly what that would mean in practice. The February meeting could be an opportunity to fix that. Of the “several strands” where cross-channel cooperation could be improved, a defense agreement is emerging as the most promising, according to one senior EU official. “We see strong potential to move forward with the U.K. on a defense agreement,” the official commented. “The meeting on Feb. 3 is a good opportunity to discuss this. Then we have to assess whether we have agreement to move forward with that, on both sides.” Making progress on an area where London and Brussels see most eye to eye could help put the reset exercise back on track in other areas. Britain’s new government spent most of the fall bogged down in questions over where it stands on EU demands for a youth mobility scheme — which Brussels sees as essential to the reset. The young Labour administration is worried the idea smells too much like EU migration, a difficult political issue in Britain. It hasn’t ruled the idea out, but the official line is that it has “no plans.” That hasn’t stopped the questions. “I’ve been clear from the get-go that freedom of movement is a red line for us, and no plans in relation to free movement on any level, but we’re entering into discussions,” Starmer told the Brexit-supporting Sun newspaper when asked about the scheme in the run up to Christmas. Unlike freedom of movement, a youth mobility program would simply make it easier for British and European youngsters to access time-limited visas to move across the Channel for a few years. The idea polls well, but Labour strategists remain worried. Brexit Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds is planning to meet his EU counterpart Maroš Šefčovič roughly every two weeks. | Benjamin Cremel/Getty Images Despite a careful start to talks and few solid demands, Starmer has already found himself accused of betraying Brexit by Euroskeptics back home. Tory opposition leader Kemi Badenoch used her last parliamentary question before Westminster’s Christmas break to lambast the prime minister for “planning to give away our hard-won Brexit freedoms,” while Euroskeptic newspapers have already characterized a corps of civil servants set up to work on talks as a “surrender squad.” Meanwhile, the perceived indecision is starting to grate on the other side of the Channel. A recent delegation of members of the European Parliament to the U.K. ended with the chair of Strasbourg’s Committee on Foreign Affairs quoting ’90s girl band the Spice Girls: “Tell us what you want, what you really, really want.” The Parliament’s standing delegation to the U.K. in December also passed a text warning that “concrete commitments” were needed to prevent Starmer’s diplomatic exercise turning into a “reset in name only.” Europe’s political tides have also conspired against Starmer. The British prime minister spent much of his first six months in office building a close relationship with social democratic German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who is now on his way out and widely expected to be replaced by a conservative. SHIBBOLETHS Apart from youth mobility, Brussels has made clear it sees extended access for European fishing fleets as the entry price to talks — another politically sensitive area and rallying point of Euroskeptics. The U.K.’s own demands aren’t entirely straightforward, either. Brussels has indicated that a Labour manifesto commitment to sign a new deal on agricultural produce would require Britain to sign up to further European Court of Justice oversight — another Brexiteer shibboleth. A separate election promise — a better deal for touring British artists — is looking difficult to achieve while freedom of movement remains a red line in London. At a parliamentary committee hearing in December, Brexit Minister Thomas-Symonds repeatedly referred to his party’s manifesto promises as “examples” of things which could be achieved, compounding the uncertainty as to exactly what London is after. In the early months of 2025, the EU-U.K. summit will act as a target for Thomas-Symonds and his EU counterpart Šefčovič to work towards. Both have said that by that meeting, they want to see significant progress. While the clock is ticking, the deadline is not as dramatic as it could be: Brussels and London will ultimately control the date of the meeting — which is yet to be set. Even the format for the gathering is yet to be confirmed: one EU official told POLITICO it’s likely to consist of at least Starmer and the heads of the EU Commission, Council and Parliament. Another diplomat suggested member states could have a role to play, too. It’s a fitting state of affairs for a summit about a relationship where nothing yet seems to be quite nailed down.

For many coastal communities around the world, especially in developing nations like ours, fish are essential for survival. They support robust livelihoods, provide protein and nutrition, contribute to food security, and anchor centuries-old cultures and traditions. But all of that is at risk. Rampant overfishing is depleting this valuable marine resource. In the mid-1970s, 10 percent of fish populations were fished at unsustainable levels, according to a 2024 United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization report. Now, nearly 50 years later, that number has almost quadrupled. In 2021, 37.7 percent of stocks were overfished. It is imperative that all of us — developed and developing nations alike — embrace sustainability and halt this spiraling problem. > For many coastal communities around the world, especially in developing > nations like ours, fish are essential for survival. Much of the world’s overfishing is powered by government subsidies. Of the $35 billion spent globally on fisheries subsidies each year, $22 billion are classified as harmful subsidies because they make unprofitable fishing profitable and increase fishing capacity to unsustainable levels, according to data published in the journal Marine Policy in 2019. Industrial fishing by the largest subsidizers is primarily to blame. Eighty percent of the world’s $35 billion in annual subsidies goes to large-scale industrial fishing fleets, and only 19% goes to the small-scale fishing sector, including artisanal and subsistence fishers, according to research published in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science in 2020. Industrial fleets use many of those subsidies to build bigger boats, travel farther out to sea, and fish for longer periods, enabling them to catch more fish than is sustainable — often in other nations’ waters. Developing countries are often the destination of these industrial fleets. For example, Papua New Guinea, Micronesia, and Mauritania are among the top five targets for distant-water fishing subsidies, according to 2018 estimates from the University of California, Santa Barbara. Competing against subsidized foreign fleets is difficult for developing nations, which often have limited financial resources to support our own fishing sectors. And when harmful subsidies incentivize excessive fishing pressure in or close to our waters, the marine resources that support our socioeconomic development and the well-being and livelihoods of large parts of our populations are under threat.   We have seen the consequences of irresponsible subsidized fishing firsthand. Fishers in our countries are bringing in smaller yields and being pushed to fish farther from home, often in rougher seas, at great personal risk and cost. Families are spending more of their hard-earned money as low supply drives up prices. Harmful fisheries subsidies are jeopardizing the livelihoods and food security of our communities. > Competing against subsidized foreign fleets is difficult for developing > nations, which often have limited financial resources to support our own > fishing sectors. But there is a solution within reach. World Trade Organization (WTO) members are negotiating new rules that would limit these types of damaging subsidies. Finalizing these prohibitions is essential for protecting the health of the fish stocks on which so many coastal communities rely. The draft rules, which would build on the 2022 WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies, are intended to create an element of fairness currently missing in the global fishing sector. They should allow developing countries that have small fishing industries — and that provide only minor capacity-enhancing subsidies to their fishers, if any — to grow their industries with relatively less competition from other nations’ highly subsidized industrial fleets. Crucially, the new WTO rules encourage a much-needed paradigm shift toward improved conservation and the sustainable use of marine resources in both developed and developing nations. In doing so, the draft provisions place a greater burden on countries that have more heavily subsidized and advanced fishing sectors, which has been a key demand from many developing countries during the negotiations. In its current form, all large subsidizers and fishing nations must accompany risky forms of subsidies with fisheries management. But developing countries are given time to establish their management structures, as they would be granted a transition period to prepare and ensure that fishers’ livelihoods would not be impaired. The latest version of the rules also goes to great lengths to ensure that least-developed countries, small fishing nations, and artisanal fishers in many developing countries would not be negatively impacted by the removal of subsidies — illustrating our negligible contribution to overfishing and, even more importantly, that our voices were heard during the WTO negotiations process. > Harmful fisheries subsidies are jeopardizing the livelihoods and food security > of our > communities. As we and more than two dozen other developing nations said in a June communication sent to the WTO, curbing harmful subsidies is critical “for protecting ocean health, the livelihoods of fisherfolk, and the communities they support.” At this year’s United Nations General Assembly session, world leaders adopted a Pact for the Future to improve global governance and cooperation for the benefit of future generations. They agreed that sustainable development should be a central objective of multilateralism and committed to taking “ambitious action to improve the health, productivity, sustainable use, and resilience of the ocean and its ecosystems.” The adoption of the new WTO rules is one of a number of actions that the international community can take to achieve this target. Effective multilateralism and international cooperation were essential in achieving consensus around the 2022 WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies. We must recapture that spirit and finalize the new rules under negotiation at the WTO to curb harmful subsidies that drive overfishing and overcapacity. Our coastal communities — their livelihoods, food security, and way of life — depend on it.

Costas Kadis has a delicate task: protect the health of Europe’s ocean life, while also serving the needs of the fishing industry. Often these two interests are diametrically opposed. A biologist by background, Kadis (we can assume) has a deep understanding of ocean biodiversity. This came across in his response to answers, in which he pledged not to sacrifice ocean health for the short-term interest of the fishing sector. But how exactly does he intend to tread this fine line? That’s a core question members of the European Parliament’s fisheries committee will grill him on today. There’s also another issue hanging over Kadis. As a POLITICO investigation recently revealed, Kadis was Cyprus’ environment minister when the country was being investigated over a waste scandal, in which EU funding was provided for a waste treatment project that the Cypriot government knew could not deliver on its promises. While Kadis was not implicated in the scandal itself, questions remain over his handling of the fallout over the five years that he was environment minister.

LONDON — British PM Keir Starmer says he has no plans for a youth mobility scheme with the European Union. Brussels, meanwhile, thinks he should make some. A leaked codex of EU positions seen by POLITICO says the bloc views the policy as “an indispensable element” of negotiations with London. It’s the latest sign that the idea — which the internal paper also describes as “essential for our future relationship” — is still very much in the sights of Brussels despite pushback from Britain’s new leader. A youth mobility scheme would give British and European youngsters the opportunity to live abroad for a few years, as long as they had the means to support themselves and obtained an inexpensive visa. Proponents argue such a step is needed after Brexit slammed the door on more comprehensive freedom of movement. But Starmer is facing a Labour split over the EU demand, with MPs and regional mayors like Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan backing it. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, with one eye on the U.K.’s politically sensitive immigration statistics, is strongly opposed. The leaked document seen by POLITICO was drawn up by officials to get candidates for Ursula von der Leyen’s next European Commission on-message ahead of their grueling European Parliament confirmation hearings this autumn. Keir Starmer says he has no plans for a youth mobility scheme with the European Union. | Christopher Furlong/Getty Images As well as the section on youth mobility, it includes perhaps the clearest statement yet of EU positions on talks with London across the range of issues — and confirmation that Brussels is in no mood to back down on its priorities. ‘NOT FREE MOVEMENT’ Supporters of a youth mobility scheme point out that the U.K. already has similar arrangements with countries like South Korea, Japan and Australia. “If Iceland and Monaco can be approved countries under the reciprocal U.K. youth mobility scheme, our closest neighbors like Ireland and France should be as well,” said Ian Roome, Liberal Democrat MP for North Devon, during a grilling of Europe Minister Stephen Doughty in the House of Commons this month. And it’s not just opposition MPs who are putting pressure on the government over the policy. Stella Creasy, who chairs the Labour Movement for Europe, was one of several representatives who raised the policy with ministers in signs of a growing appetite for the plan among the government’s own MPs. “It’s important to be clear that a youth mobility scheme is not freedom of movement. When we already have schemes with Uruguay, with Japan, with Canada, New Zealand, Australia, we can absolutely see that there are strict conditions on when people can come here,” she told the same debate. Doughty, who has a role overseeing relations with Europe alongside Cabinet Office Brexit minister Nick Thomas-Symonds, told MPs: “We’re not going to give a running commentary on our discussions with the EU, and the Minister for Cabinet Office [Nick Thomas-Symonds] and others have already given a clear statement on this issue. “We’ll continue to look at EU proposals on a range of issues, but we will not return to freedom of movement, but we are committed to finding constructive ways to work together and deliver for the British people.” But a Downing Street spokesperson gave a blunter answer earlier this month when quizzed on the policy at a regular briefing of journalists in Westminster, telling reporters: “Our position hasn’t changed. We’re not going to be joining an EU-wide youth mobility scheme. There will be no return to freedom of movement, and that remains our position.” PREREQUISITE If London wants Brussels to engage on British priorities, it may have to shift. EU member countries are currently drawing up a negotiating mandate for the Commission to start talks on the matter with London. Diplomats have indicated that it could include provision for compromises — such as caps on numbers, tighter eligibility criteria, or shorter stays to make the idea more palatable. But they want it to happen. Stella Creasy was one of several representatives who raised the policy with ministers in signs of a growing appetite for the plan among the government’s own MPs. | Oli Scarff/Getty Images One EU diplomat, granted anonymity to speak freely on a sensitive subject, described the issue as the No. 1 demand raised by capitals at a meeting of member state ambassadors ahead of Starmer’s recent visit to Brussels. As well as stressing the importance of youth mobility for the EU, the document, seen by POLITICO, also gives further clues as to how Brussels wants talks to be structured. Above all, it heads off suggestions that a planned review of the Brexit trade deal, the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), could be used to make fundamental changes to the deal. “Given that the U.K.’s red lines have not changed (the U.K. will not rejoin the Single Market and the Customs Union, and will not accept Free Movement of People), it is unlikely that reopening the TCA would bring benefits for either side,” it warns. However, the EU is willing to “explore agreements alongside” the TCA — particularly in areas like defense and security, where London and Brussels are on a similar page. Other British government priorities, such as a veterinary agreement, mutual recognition of professional qualifications, and linking emissions trading systems, are also potentially on the table — as long as the British play ball. Apart from hinting that Starmer should think again on youth mobility, Brussels is adamant that the U.K. should first implement existing agreements drawn up by former PMs Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak as a “prerequisite” for further talks — particularly on Northern Ireland and on the rights of EU citizens living in Britain. “The implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement by the U.K. needs to be substantially improved,” the document adds. The paper also warns that “any new agenda” must address access for EU fishing fleets in British waters, where tougher post-Brexit U.K. environmental rules on bottom trawling and sand-eel fishing have made life difficult for some member states. That, and the other policy areas, could be politically tricky for London as well.