real delicate position at the moment where the americans seem to be supporting taiwan. there was a visit by the president of taiwan to california, which the chinese were very unhappy about. and as i say, president macro brief, these reports is saying essentially the europe should make his own policy. it should be considered his own superpower. it should be the world's 3rd superpower, and shouldn't follow either the americans or the chinese on this issues, but should make its own decision that the americans and a lot of republican senators, especially have come out and said, hang on. if, if europe doesn't follow us and, and sort of back us on these issues, maybe we shouldn't that you're upon ukraine. that was the comment by the florida senator. anyway, marco rubio, and it pulled up a massive question here in europe all over the weekend and running into days. we wait for the speech by emanuel micron. the question is, who speaks for europe does for the french president go when he makes comments like this? does he speak on behalf of all the european countries?

we already know that that probably isn't the case. specifically, we've seen the polish prime minister mateusz marvia ascii tweet. i say we are a strong allies with the united states and it was clear while not specifically mentioning the taiwan issues. he was making a point that from the polish perspective, the perspective of the poet government that they back the americans and want to stay on site countries in the east of europe. a very, very heavily reliant on the american presence that they fear. the, you know, over that border over the borders with russia on that, cuz that closest to russia, and they really feel that they need the american military and defense presence. and jack, as we were talking there were just seeing at live images from the dutch nexus institute in the hague, where emmanuel on my call is due to make a speech in english on european sovereignty insecurity and economic matters. no, jack you just mentioned are some of the criticism there. but as anyone actually back to were agreed with in particular here in europe. not too much public support

for him right now, but that isn't to say there isn't a support for him. there is a sort of tacit understanding if you speak to a lot of the, the diplomats here in brussels, there is a sense and that this really started to be a much clearer during the trump presidency. the, there was a lot of people say that you're, it needs to stand on its own 2 feet and not stand and not sorta jumped to whatever the americans were saying. joe biden, as a president, has been more favourable without question for, for european tastes. and the question is whether that should mean that still, that sort of idea that the french president was putting forward this, this sort of buzz were buzz phrase that gets bonded around a lot here in brussels of strategic autonomy trying to make europe are able to deal with its own issues, able to confront its own concerns. that is something that is a popular among a lot of you capital, that they don't want to be relying on the chinese for the ram, minerals, fur, fur, fur for energy from the russians,

for goods and sort of political guidance from the united states and defense. as well, there is a sense that you would like to do that in low european capitals would, but how they would do it. that's the other question. and i think there's a lot of discomfort manual macro mom made such broad sweeping statements that tend to be then considered a sort of statement for europe, at least in the eyes of the allied partners. that's where the discomfort comes from that perhaps the americans that chinese a because he's such a powerful leader in europe, that they start to think that he's speaking on behalf of the whole of the european union. now, as we've mentioned, jack and you've been touching on a 3rd, the speech is billed as machinations, thoughts on the future of europe. now, previously, he called for europe, become the 3rd superpower after the u. s. in china, you're in brussels and iraq, the grand there and you speak to a lot of politicians. you're following the news closely there. what do people make of that kind of talk in brussels?

yeah, it's an interesting one. this. this idea of the future of europe is one that's been going on for a while. we had a broadly ignored conference on the future of europe to decide whether the european union would entirely overhaul it. systems of governance and whether there will be much more integration on certain issues. macro was a huge supporter of that was mainly done in strasburg 2nd. see of the european parliament. but the questions that perhaps he wasn't said comes to perhaps ending the 2 c seats about european parliament, the french, and certainly not in favor of the other seat being here in brussels. but we do know broadly what manual micron is in favor of and really what he wants is much deeper economic and financial and fiscal joining of the member states. he really is pressing for the banking union to be to be, to be created much at least before it is much more. he wants a much more unified system. he's even spoken in the past about the idea of a sort of finance minister rather than just having the euro a he sees

a big way to support the economic growth of the europe, ian you, me, economic integration. that would then create it as that sort of sad power that he talks by a lot of, of the leaders would already save the european union is the 3rd power. i think if you look at the institutional heads of on the line of the european commission, she would talk about the european union probably in those times, not specifically those times, but in the sense of your having that kind of power in it's, it's economic way till ready to wait and see, i think because he's had such a backlash for these taiwan comments, will be really interesting to see what he says in the speech about the future of europe and high strongly he will come out and defend and it looks like he may soon start to be in, looks like i'm going to jump in there and other than it looks like he's about to speak. now we're just hearing there where we weren't hearing. we were seeing rob raymond, the founder of the dutch nexus institute in the hey. so jack,

thank you so much for your analysis will be back to you afterwards. i'm short let sir. go to the hague and listen to the french president. the monumental michael members of parliament must should have president the old ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, thank you very much for the so bought nitty and i have to say that i do admire nexus institute. what you do and how much you delivered such long message is not just for europe, that's for humanity and i'll come and values. hello. my friends, democracy. read it. i can, i can answer this question if you, if you give me some time. oh

oh, oh. do you mean, sir, if you want me,

if you're just tuning, if you don't use, we're just seeing i live images from the hey, where am i speaking? there's just being protested or i can place your side of this brush himself or beaten. and this is why, and this is why i do believe it, very important to have social debate. i don't know, and i can answer all the questions you have on what we are discussing in france, the law we are passing and how this is a democracy. and democracy is exactly a place where you can demonstrate you can have as your country is. this type of into vance, but as in the world, we are places where a democracy doesn't exist. we should not compare precisely the 2 situations. we can

disagree. but what should accompany democracy because you vote and you elect people and people elected, void follows, and they have to respect constitutions, and this constitution were voted by people. but a counterpart is that you need a respect and this is the end of violence. as a day you consider that when i disagree with the law, which is fast, or the people who are elected, i can do whatever i want because i am the one to decide for the legitimacy of what i do. you put democracy at risk from capitol hill to brazil, ya 2 or the types of fir happening. i would say this is the main difference i do between a dictator on adequacy on a democracy. this is just the we might have wanted to know.

and obviously i can revert into questions and everything was mentioned on climate to the pension reform in france and so on. but i wanted to take, indeed the opportunity of the speech in what you offered to me and to discuss about our europe. and much more to discuss about our europe and sovereignty. and i think this concept is extremely important, especially in this time because it's a little bit more than one year ago. russia unleashed a barbaric war against the grain, an op, and probably one of the most pert values time of our european union. our union is said to grow stronger through crisis, but never had we faced such a threat, a war involving nuclear power at all, borders and, and unsinkable, even said shepherd,

eyes lasting peace and brought violent conflict back to the european continent. since our european submitting vis a few weeks after the beginning of the war during the french prison seat was in march last year, europe stepped forward and responded swiftly and efficiently. and as continued to do since and boast bonding egon war. we're big ex said a rate or of this european sovereignty. and this is what i wanted to advocate and i wanted perhaps to elaborate a little bit on these concepts and what it means to day and what it should mean in the very context we, we know european sovereignty could seem as us send word for years. this concept may have sounded like a fringe fantasy or perhaps my cure been wishful thinking. i have to say when i delivered the speech and i saw been september 17,

a lot of comments whereabouts. ok, europe, and sovereigns is, is a french idea, is just a speech. it will never happen. but i haven't said it to make these words sound called to my political projects. and i have never forgotten that is a very concept of sovereignty. as, as all its roots in the netherlands. and this is a very european concept. 350 years ago, right here in the city of from the hague. one of the founders of believable modernity bulk spinoza wrote in an article 17 chapter 2 of his type. that was fully dykus. i quote him, the right is defined by the poor of the meal to jude. we call it sovereigns. i will not like your un spinners. i want to reassure you. i just want to highlights it's in spin as a series of feet. sovereignty is a means to guarantee these sense of being to persevere in oneself. to put it

plainly wherever wants to be themselves must be sovereign. in other words, and i wanton systems that identity and sovereignty are intertwined. and i think this is very important to understand this link and so fact that's spinoza makes it as one of the funding concepts of precisely political philosophy. because if you accept to lose your sovereignty, it means if your accept to depend on also poor's, you put yourself in the situation, not to decide for yourself, and not to be in charge of precisely continuing preserving, developing your own identity. that defending sovereignty doesn't mean to shy away from all lies. it means that we must be able to choose our partners and shape our

on destiny raises. on being, i would say, a mere witness of the dramatic revolution of his word. this means that we must strive to be a rule makers, prisons on the whole diggers, and this we can do it in a cooperative manner in keeping with there are spirit of openness and partnership. but i think a wake up call was made during the panoramic. we discovered that we were dependent on a lot of devices on a lot of rows and a lot of products suddenly and even those were supposed to cooperate with us some in life decided to bands. it's fathering months as long as there were not served and protected. and during the war, those were decided to corporate to make tate with neighbors, even if they went nuts, allies, russia for emerge. because we decided defacto that trade could

be the best way to cooperate, could crates, irreversible lengths and precisely avoid the orders to be aggressive. they decided to weaponized energy, putting us in a completely crazy and unbelievable situation. found him, he can a wall just met cautious in a situation to discover that we have to reduce our dependence. if you want to preserve european identity as a wise, we will progressively be dependent on everything. and it's probably due to the fact this is a sort of convergence with what i've heard europe worth. and especially european union was too much driven by a customer approach. and not sufficiently by, as a citizen and to produce or approach. and we didn't build sufficiently how to ensure our i would say economy security.