Posted by 
David Miliband is the president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee.
Any political consultant will tell you that all politics is local. However, this year’s European election will test that proposition.
Indeed, there’s plenty of local dissent against governing parties, but from Gaza to Ukraine and migration to food and energy prices, it’s a luxury to believe that the solutions to these challenges are local. Foreign policy is no longer simply a nice-to-have — it has become a need-to-have.
The five years since the last European election has demonstrated how risks that were once contained within countries or regions can spill far beyond their boundaries. From the health of our publics to their quality of life, economic prosperity and the air they breathe, the citizens of Europe need a global vision — not just local action.
Europeans need to remember what Indian Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said last year: They need to grow out of the mindset that Europe’s problems are the world’s problems, but that the world’s problems aren’t Europe’s problems.
They need the next European Commission and European Parliament to recognize the demands of interdependence and global risk, and that if these institutions don’t help solve global problems, they will undermine Europe’s security and prosperity.
If nothing else, the state of politics in America should be a wake-up call for Europe. It’s not just former President Donald Trump’s version of “America First” nationalism — with threats to cut off support for Ukraine and impose 10 percent tariffs on all goods entering the country — that poses a threat either. While President Joe Biden’s administration styles itself as multilateralist and internationalist, it still faces a divided Congress and an impatient country, which limits its room for maneuver.
Moreover, the EU has already shown it can take great leaps forward on internal and economic policymaking in response to big shocks: Members agreed to overhaul the bloc’s financial architecture in response to the 2008 financial crisis; Covid-19 galvanized the EU to finance its unprecedented recovery fund by taking on common debt for the first time; and the Fit for 55 program has married environmental necessity with economic advantage. In addition, over the course of just one weekend in February 2022, the EU made dramatic moves to support Ukrainian refugees, granting them rights to temporary residence, work and support.
This Is Europe at its best: principled, moral, united and effective.
However, this isn’t always the case. The conflict in Gaza shows that when it comes to crisis management, Europe’s ability to leverage unity and influence is limited. And the migration pact hasn’t stopped beggar-thy-neighbor politics either.
The European election needs to bring out the best of Europe — not just summon the worst. And to this end, next week’s European Humanitarian Forum presents a chance to bridge political divides and show the world that Europe is ready to be a problem-solver when others retreat.
As the International Rescue Committee’s (IRC) 2024 Emergency Watchlist reveals, just 20 countries account for 86 percent of the global population in humanitarian need, and 72 percent of the 110 million people currently displaced from their homes. These are places where conflict, the climate crisis and entrenched poverty come together to blight lives and drive people from their homes.
On the cusp of a fresh five-year mandate, the EU needs to debate ideas for the future. As outlined in the IRC’s new report, there are four areas in desperate need of such new thinking.
First, we are faced with a crisis in peace-making. For example, Sudan — home to the world’s largest humanitarian crisis — is at a critical moment. The conflict and its consequences are metastasizing faster than diplomacy is working. And after the failure of successive mediation and cease-fire efforts, 25 million people are in humanitarian need, neighboring states like South Sudan and Chad are coping with hundreds of thousands of refugees, and malnutrition is rife inside the country. So, new diplomatic muscle is essential.
Second, famine. While farmers are protesting in Europe, 45 million children under the age of five are acutely malnourished around the world. No wonder the so-called global south accuses the rich north of not living up to its promises.
Thus, the EU must opt for impactful solutions that are proven to work. One of these is a breakthrough, a simplified approach to tackling childhood acute malnutrition using Ready-to-Use-Therapeutic-Food — over 90 percent effective in saving lives and 20 percent more cost-effective. The IRC has recently launched a new effort, the Movement Against Malnutrition, to promote this approach, and it’s calling for the EU to help lead by setting ambitious global targets and championing the use of simplified treatment to tackle the malnutrition crisis.
Third, asylum and migration. In the absence of a fair and effective Continent-wide system that works for both states and those on the move, the EU has been left to rely on fragile deals with third countries. The aim here has been to stop people reaching European shores, but those fleeing conflict, climate change and economic crisis will continue to arrive — this is a strength not a weakness, reflecting wealth and stability. We also have evidence that this approach doesn’t work and puts vulnerable people at greater risk, as smugglers simply divert to ever more dangerous routes. Moreover, it skews the EU’s foreign policy priorities — and when politics in a country like Niger, for example, change overnight, the EU is left short.
The alternative is simply clear legal routes — safe pathways to hope provided before people make risky journeys to Europe. Recent experience from both EU and U.S. borders shows the dangers of mismanaged migration. But buried under the political rhetoric is interesting evidence that when the Biden administration offered a limited number of legal options to migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, arrivals from those countries fell by as much as 44 percent.
Fourth, and finally, global problems need global institutions that are fit for purpose. The institutions designed to manage international finance after World War II — the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and regional development banks — are facing calls to reform the way finance is provided. However, they also need to change the way they deliver aid to the conflict states where 50 percent of the extreme poor now live.
What we need is people-centered aid. We believe that by using civil society — and not just governments to get aid to those in need — efficiency and effectiveness can be served, and the delivery gap closed. From vaccinations and education to the empowerment of women and girls, this is the way to make aid money go further and accomplish more.
The European Parliament election will reflect Europe’s diversity and show a new balance of power across the Continent. But there’s also a new balance of power across the world — and Europe needs to engage with it.
