In the European Parliament in Brussels this week I was able to discuss with Lena Schilling, a Green MEP, the current debate over whether the European Green Deal should be postponed.
This is currently a topic of much debate in Brussels, and beyond, amid growing concerns about European energy security, defence preparedness, industrial decline, and rising populism.
Ms. Schilling argued that the Green Deal is not an obstacle to Europe’s resilience but is in fact a necessary component of it.
Geopolitical Pressures and Energy Independence
The war in Ukraine and a recalibration of American foreign policy have prompted calls to reindustrialise Europe and shift focus from climate goals to strategic resilience. For some, this means putting the Green Deal on hold. Ms. Schilling rejects this dichotomy.
“Since Russia started the war against Ukraine, our reality in Europe changed,” she said. “But even if we talk about industrialisation and so on, we have to do it in a way that our planet keeps protected… One of the drivers of security should also be the Green Deal.”
She warned that Europe’s dependence on imported fossil fuels from autocratic states undermines its sovereignty and security. “We need cheap and green energy because every other energy form will make us reliant either on the US when we talk about LNG or on gas and oil when we talk about Russia,” she said. The solution, she argued, lies not in reverting to fossil-based systems but in accelerating investment in renewables.
Bureaucracy or Political Will?
I raised the issue of perceived inaction by the European Commission, questioning whether the institutional machinery is capable of responding swiftly in times of crisis. Ms. Schilling acknowledged the need for faster decisions but insisted that abandoning democratic procedures would be a mistake.
“Our democracies are strong and resilient because we have processes for things,” she said. “Of course, there are situations where we need to act faster… but making fast bad policies will not help us in the end.”
She pointed to the current inefficiency in EU transport infrastructure, which hampers military mobility: “To take a tank from Spain to Poland takes over 40 days… In 40 days, wars are won sometimes.”
While simplification is possible, She insists that the real problem often lies in diverging political interests rather than bureaucracy.
Renewables, Infrastructure, and Strategic Industry
Asked whether Europe’s current renewable capacity can realistically replace fossil fuels, Ms. Schilling was clear: “No, we will not replace all fossil fuels tomorrow… but we need strict dates and long-term investments to make this possible.”
She stressed the strategic importance of developing energy infrastructure close to the point of use. “Pipelines are incredibly vulnerable,” she noted. “Renewable energy sources like wind and solar provide more stable costs and decentralised production, which increases resilience.”
She also addressed concerns that green regulations are pushing European manufacturers abroad. She believes these fears are overstated.
“We need commitment from states to invest in the resources we need,” she said, referencing Austria’s own green steel production as an example. “Circular economy policies can help keep materials like steel in the system. If we do it right, we can have the best technology and show the world how green industrialisation can work.”
She questioned the narrative around industrial relocation. “I’m never sure how much of that is true and how much is myth,” she said. “Yes, parts of tour industry are leaving, but others are profiting from the regulations.”
She warned that instability in EU regulation is now causing uncertainty for businesses. “Big companies like Coca-Cola and Nestlé actually told us they were ready for due diligence rules—then the Commission changed course. We need clear rules and the political will to keep to them.”
Populism and the Politics of Protest
The recent wave of farmers’ protests has drawn public sympathy and political capital from populist movements, something Ms. Schilling views with caution. “Of course, we need to defend the interests of farmers,” she said, but she questioned whether far-right actors truly represent those interests as they claim to, or is this just opportunism on their part?
“Populists are not saying things because they believe in them. They’re doing it because it gets them more votes. They’re exploiting fear,” she said. “If the Commission tries to adopt their strategy, that’s really poor.”
She called for genuine engagement with citizens, especially those in rural and farming communities. “People have fears and these have to be respected. But populists aren’t aiming to make things better. They are aiming to destroy Europe.”
Climate as a Security Threat
Ms. Schilling was firm in her view that climate change constitutes a long-term security threat. “Wars are often about resources—water, food, land,” she said. “If we destroy our ecosystems, we will have problems feeding people. And if we can’t feed people, I can predict a war.”
She pointed to the World Economic Forum’s 2020 Global Risk Report, where six of the ten highest global risks were climate-related. “We need to act now. If we wait 20 or 30 years, we will be too late.”
The situation in Bangladesh, where rising sea levels threaten much of the country, illustrates the urgency. Some 15 to 20 million people could potentially be displaced. They are neighbours to India and Pakistan. “What could possibly go wrong?” I asked.
A New Industrial Model
The Green Deal, Ms. Schilling argued, is not anti-industrial. Rather, it represents a newer industrial paradigm, more relevant to our future world. “We’re not going back to the model of the last 200 years. We’re building a different one,” she said. That includes adapting infrastructure, addressing supply chain resilience, and supporting technological innovation.
“We need to make tech work for our society, not just for billionaires,” she said. “We should be using innovation to make life easier for everyone, to drive green policy, and to push productivity in a sustainable way.”
Asked whether the EU’s climate neutrality target for 2050 is at risk, She responded, “Of course it is. But if we roll back the Green Deal, we lose credibility. How can we expect other countries to take their targets seriously if we don’t take our own seriously?”
Jobs, Stability, and Credibility
She highlighted the job creation potential of the green sector, particularly in rural and peripheral areas. Unlike centralised fossil fuel industries, renewable energy production is geographically distributed. “We can create a lot of jobs out of making our own energy with renewables,” she said.
She also emphasised the stability of renewable energy markets compared to fossil fuels. “The price of fossil fuels fluctuates wildly. But with renewables, we know how many hours of sunshine we have. The water cycle doesn’t change. The cost is stable and predictable.”
In conclusion, Lena Schilling positioned the Green Deal not as a luxury project to be sacrificed in times of crisis, but as a central component of Europe’s path to strategic autonomy, economic resilience, and environmental sustainability.
“We have a historic responsibility and the opportunity to do it,” she said. “We can just do it—if we commit to it.”
As Europe faces overlapping crises of war, climate, and industrial transformation, the decisions taken now will shape the continent for decades to come. For Ms. Schilling, the Green Deal is not a policy to be postponed—it is a policy to be accelerated.
Lena Schilling was elected to the European Parliament in July 2024, and is a member of the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance.
She sits on the Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, and the Committee on Transport and Tourism.
Main Image: Photographer: Brigitte HASE ©European Union 2025 – Source : EP
