A dyed-in-the-wool European who chose Brussels over the national political arena,  (DP) didn’t even have to turn down a minister position in the Frieden-Bettel government to run on the European level: “Nobody would have thought of giving me one!” he laughs. Goerens served in the European Parliament from 1982 until 1999, when he left to become Luxembourg’s minster of the environment and of cooperation, humanitarian action and defence (until 2004). He was then reelected to the European Parliament in 2009, where he has sat without interruption ever since.

Paperjam: What are the issues at stake in the upcoming European elections?

Charles Goerens: Security, climate, the economy and the European Union’s position in the world.

These are clearly European issues. What are the issues for Luxembourg?

Everything that is an issue for Europe is also an issue for Luxembourg. Luxembourg has an open, international economy and is a host country. It therefore needs a well-functioning European Union and protection of the basic values and principles on which the EU is founded. Without Europe, Luxembourg would not be what it is today.

And what’s at stake for your party?

The same: our party is totally identified with European integration. We are a party that has taken part in practically every government since the end of the Second World War and has played an important role in the construction of Europe. Gaston Thorn was president of the commission. He was an absolutely brilliant foreign minister. So was Colette Flesch [foreign minister in Pierre Werner’s government from 1980 to 1984; editor’s note], as was  [foreign affairs minister in ’s government from 1999 to 2004]… We all got carried away by the European movement. Our party breathes like Europe, breathes with Europe.

From a numbers viewpoint, what are your objectives in terms of votes and seats?

We had a very good result in 2019, which we intend to consolidate. [The DP finished in first place with 21.43% of the vote, ahead of the CSV and stealing one of its seats; the party subsequently sent two MPs to the European Parliament, Charles Goerens and , who has since defected to Fokus; editor’s note.]

As a member of Renew Europe, are you in favour of Ursula von der Leyen serving a second term?

Let’s wait for the result of the elections… it is highly likely that Ms von der Leyen’s party will be the largest party in the European Parliament. This does not mean that she will automatically be nominated for the position of president of the commission. It is the European Council that must decide first and propose a candidate to the parliament. After that, there will be hearings and she will have to present a programme that speaks to the political parties with which she wants to form a coalition.

Without being able to comment at this stage on the fate of such a candidate, what I can say is that discussions on a coalition agreement must go well beyond a simple distribution of roles. It is important to agree on a well-defined, well-structured programme that is likely to move Europe forward.

In my view, the commission must once again become the driving force of the European Union. In recent years we have seen a shift in the political centre of gravity from the commission to the European Council. We need to redress the balance. The commission has an important role to play; it must show leadership. And it has not always done so in recent years, particularly in the fight against violations of the European Union’s fundamental values. Ursula von der Leyen has often been hesitant, for which many people have not forgiven her. Now she is going to have to brandish some claws to take on all those who want to attack the European project. And the most formidable attack on the project is to allow countries like Hungary to go ahead. Hungary has been far too soft on Viktor Orbán.

Why do you prefer to sit in Brussels over Luxembourg?

Firstly, because Europe is in my guts.

Secondly, there is a major difference between the European Parliament and the national parliaments. In the latter--in all the countries of the EU--you find the classic majority-opposition divide. Faced with a government’s plans, the majority applauds and the opposition condemns. It’s all very shaky. I prefer a political atmosphere in which we can move the lines. Members of the European Parliament have more freedom; they can influence the choices made in the search for compromise. In national parliaments, there are no compromises between the majority and the opposition. In the European Parliament, there are. In national parliaments, you have the synthesis, normally embodied by the majority; and the antithesis, embodied by the opposition. In the European Parliament, we start directly with the synthesis. The search for a modus vivendi is permanent. We know that we always have to bring together several political forces to get a piece of legislation adopted, and this climate is constructive. Sporting, but constructive.

Will the vote on 9 June be a national one or a European one?

Both. A number of political parties are using the European election as a test of their importance on the national political scene. But I think more and more people are aware of what’s at stake in Europe. They see what’s going on around them: Ukraine; attempts by China and Russia to interfere; an America that is increasingly distant, whatever administration is in power. So I think voters are beginning to understand that Europe can find itself isolated. Faced with this, we need to mobilise resources. Europe has them. The federators of the European Union, at the moment, are outside its borders: Putin and Trump have succeeded in getting most of the political forces in Europe to pull together.

Where are the grand duchy’s interests best served? Brussels or Luxembourg?

When you sit in the European Parliament, you can’t ignore your origins. In the same way, when you sit in a national parliament, you can’t ignore what’s happening in Europe. For me, it’s essential that a national MP be inclined to deal with European issues. If you really want to pull your weight in national or European political choices, you have to get involved from the very moment a legislative proposal is introduced. The Luxembourg parliament is beginning to realise this. It’s about time it did. And members of the European Parliament cannot ignore the fact that they are members of one legislative branch, and that the other legislative branch is the European Council--and the part of the council closest to them is the government of the country they come from. The two cannot be separated: the national sphere and the European sphere.

This article in Paperjam. It has been translated and edited for Delano.