On the eve of the first State of the European Union speech of her second term, those close to Ursula von der Leyen acknowledged it was a critical moment: the Commission president had been forced to undergo a confidence motion in July, the EU was smarting from intense criticism over how she handled the trade negotiations with Donald Trump, her popularity among Europeans was under a harsher spotlight.
A poll across France, Spain, Italy, Germany and Poland found that six out of 10 people felt she should resign, with three quarters believing she had failed to defend European interests in the trade negotiations and 77% believing the deal benefited the US, and not the EU.
The geopolitical situation was, according to one senior figure, suffering from "an extreme acceleration of volatility."
Russia, Israel, China and the Trump administration were posing fresh challenges at a dizzying rate. The EU looked like it was struggling to cope.
In the 24 hours before her speech, Israel attacked Qatar and Russia attacked Poland.
The far right have been gaining traction in France and Germany. Policies the extremes have capitalised on have already eroded the pro-EU centre bloc in the European Parliament.
Europe was, on the eve of her speech, under external and internal pressure like never before, and President Von der Leyen had become a lightning rod for public fear and anger - not least over her seemingly tepid response to the suffering in Gaza, and her support for Israel (many MEPs on the left wore red in protest against the suffering in Gaza).
Sources acknowledged that Ms Von der Leyen had had a "challenging" summer, but signalled that she would come out fighting, since that was what the EU itself - facing hostility on all sides - would have to do.
"Europe is in a fight," her speech began.
"A fight for a continent that is whole and at peace, for a free and independent Europe.
"A fight for our values and our democracies. A fight for our liberty and our ability to determine our destiny for ourselves.
"Make no mistake - this is a fight for our future."
Von der Leyen delivers combative performance
For over an hour, in a speech punctuated by applause and persistent heckling (the latter from the far right), Ms Von der Leyen delivered her most combative performance to date, proclaiming the need for Europe to forge its own destiny in a ruthless world, where naked power - be it wielded by Russian President Vladimir Putin, US President Donald Trump or China's President Xi Jinping - was trampling over a multilateral rules-based system.
Attempting to put herself on the side of voters, she said Europeans "can feel the ground shift beneath them", anxiety over the cost of living, the speed of change, "the endless spiral of events they see on the news – from the devastating scenes in Gaza to the relentless Russian barrage on Ukraine."
In other words, her fight was their fight.
The messaging was more pertinently directed at MEPs, the policy priorities pitched at issues of key importance to the centre-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D) and the Greens, who have felt especially grieved that their support during July's no confidence motion had not be rewarded.
For the left, she promised a European Affordable Housing Plan, describing the housing shortages as a "social crisis…[which] tears at the heart of Europe’s social fabric."
For the Greens, she hailed the power of the (battered and bruised) Green Deal, declaring that Europe was on track to cut emissions by 55% by 2030.
"It was an attempt to recapture that centre ground and to reconstruct the very fragile centre platform that keeps her where she is," says Fianna Fáil MEP Barry Andrews.
"I think she got a bit of a surprise with the last confidence motion, but broadly speaking I think it was well pitched.
"People killed while begging for food. Mothers holding lifeless babies. These images are simply catastrophic."
"But it's only a speech. It depends on the member states doing the right thing, and on delivery [of promises] by the [European] Commission."
Undoubtedly, her criticism of Israel was the most eye-catching.
President Von der Leyen has been subjected to relentless criticism (especially in Ireland) since her visit to Israel just days after the 7 October attacks, in which she appeared to give unqualified support to in a manner which did not reflect the carefully nuanced position of EU member states at the time.
Perception von der Leyen will reflect unyielding German position
Her apparent unwillingness to use stronger language to condemn the soaring death toll in Gaza, and the Commission’s seeming ambivalence on hitting Israel with trade measures, have only cemented the perception that Ms Von der Leyen will reflect an unyielding German position rather than a European one.
Commission officials have long argued that the president has been privately putting pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to increase humanitarian aid to Gaza, and that she has consistently called for a ceasefire.
Her speech in Strasbourg suggests she has not been impervious to the criticism.
Without mentioning the Mr Netanyahu's government by name, the target was clear.
"What is happening in Gaza has shaken the conscience of the world," she said.
"People killed while begging for food. Mothers holding lifeless babies. These images are simply catastrophic.
"So I want to start with a very clear message: Man-made famine can never be a weapon of war.
"For the sake of the children, for the sake of humanity – this must stop."
She said she "understood" that Europeans found EU disunity on Gaza "painful" before announcing the partial suspension of trade measures with Israel, and sanctions on extremist ministers in Mr Netanyahu’s cabinet and on violent settlers in the West Bank
She denounced the Israeli plan to extend a West Bank settlement that would render a viable Palestinian state all but impossible.
Yet, the punitive measures she mentioned remain proposals, and remain hostage to the implacable opposition of those member states - mostly Germany, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Italy - who are not prepared to fully break with Israel.
A Commission official later clarified that the suspension of bilateral funding amounted to just €14 million, with a further €12 million being frozen over a two year period (funding for civil society and the Yad Vashem holocaust museum will not be affected).
Proposals to sanction Israeli ministers and settlers
Ms Von der Leyen highlighted proposals to sanction Israeli ministers and settlers, and the partial suspension of EU-Israel trade measures, but these will be a decision for member states.
That is where there could be a further roadblock.
After the EU’s diplomatic arm, the EEAS, found in June that Israel was likely in breach of the human rights clause in the EU-Israel Association Agreement, the EU’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas put forward 10 potential measures against Israel for foreign ministers to examine.
Those measures were put on hold when Ms Kallas negotiated an agreement with Israel for a significant ramping up of humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Amid concerns that Israel was slow-walking that deal, the Commission proposed partially suspending Israel from the €95 billion Horizon Europe research fund, of which Israel has benefitted to the tune of €200 million since 2021.
"While a genocide rages in Gaza and Israel rips up international law your response is pathetic."
When the proposal was put to EU ambassadors at the end of July it was blocked by pro-Israel member states.
What of her proposal to partially suspend EU-Israel trade measures? One diplomat pointed out that this would not mean a trade embargo; simply, that Israel would no longer avail of the preferential tariffs and reduced controls enshrined in the EU-Israel Association Agreement.
If the Horizon proposal fell foul of member states, would something tougher like a suspension of trade measures stand a chance of getting past Germany, Hungary and Italy, even if the proposal has been articulated with such strong language by the Commission president herself?
"Good question," mused one EU diplomat. "The answer to which continues to lie in Berlin. As of yet, I've not seen any statements that would indicate a fundamental change of position."
Ms von der Leyen’s Gaza speech did not cut much muster with the left.
"While a genocide rages in Gaza and Israel rips up international law your response is pathetic," Labour MEP Aodhán Ó Riordáin told the chamber.
"The partial suspension of the association agreement you announced today is an insult. This is not a partial genocide.
"20,000 Palestinian children are not partially dead."
He has joined a follow up no confidence motion in the Commission president tabled by the far-left group.
The Left’s Luke Ming Flanagan, as well as Sinn Féin MEPs Kathleen Funchion and Lynn Boylan are also signatories.
While, the latter welcomed the new approach, she said "it simply doesn’t go far enough, and we must wonder why it’s taken so long to reach this point?"
For over 22 months, we have had Israel’s genocide live-streamed to us, but the EU chose to sit on its hands until now."
States would veto any actions against Israel
The reality is that Ms Von der Leyen could have proposed all kinds of punitive actions against Israel months ago and none would have been adopted: member states such as Germany and Hungary would have wielded their national veto.
As Brigid Laffan, the Chancellor of the University of Limerick and a longstanding expert on EU affairs, told an event organised by the International Institute for European Affairs (IIEA) in Dublin, Gaza and Ukraine took up one third of Von der Leyen’s speech, and that if Russia prevails in Ukraine the European Union as a peace project will be peril.
Indeed, said Ms Laffan, "in the next five years, defence and security [will be] woven into issues of economy, political economy, and the relationship with the United States".
"It’s all interconnected, interacting and intersecting," she said.
Read more: Ex-EU ambassadors and officials call for immediate suspension of EU-Israel agreement
The EU has embarked on an accelerated programme of coordinated defence spending to both ensure readiness against the Russian threat (the drone strike on Poland graphically laying bare the vulnerabilities), and to help Ukraine hold Moscow back and deter it from attacking in the future.
The so-called SAFE programme, which involves €150 billion in soft loans, will help member states plug gaps in those military capabilities, such as air-defence, which have been jointly identified by the EU and NATO.
So far 18 member states have opted to take up loans worth €127 billion. Ireland has chosen not to avail of the loans but is expected to enter into joint procurement defence projects with other member states.
The overall challenge will be for the government to reconcile these new imperatives with a neutrality rooted in postwar Europe.
One eye-catching part of the speech was the reference to a European Semester on defence.
This is reworking a tool from the financial crisis, which requires member states to submit spending and budget plans to the Commission, but now to be used for defence.
"The idea of a European defence semester, where the Commission would start looking in detail at your defence expenditure, your capabilities and so on, I wonder how that's going to play out?" said Tom Hanney, a former Irish ambassador to the EU, who also spoke at the IIEA panel.
"The line between where Europe starts and NATO ends on defence is quite blurred.
"That’s all going to have to be sorted out. I think Ireland would be a bit apprehensive, but there are a lot of questions raised by what she said that are going to have to be looked at very carefully," he said.
European Commission can only propose policies
The obvious question is whether member states will buy into Ms Von der Leyen’s ideas - the Commission can only propose policies, national capitals actually make the law (along with the European Parliament).
On the EU-US trade deal, the president dug her heels in, insisting that a 15% baseline tariff is better than what most other countries have achieved and that the stability the deal offers is better than a trade war.
The risk, of course, is that Mr Trump is likely to throw other curved balls at the EU, including at the digital and energy sectors.
"This is not going to be the end of Trump's pressure on Europe," says Geog Riekeles, associate director at the European Policy Centre (EPC).
"Quite the contrary: she has let them smell blood. They will continue to push Europe."
Mr Riekeles, who had been a member of EU negotiator Michel Barnier’s team during the long Brexit negotiations, draws a comparison between the second Von der Leyen Commission, where power has allegedly been concentrated within a small team around the President, and that of the Jean Claude Juncker Commission, when Brexit first struck.
"The EU at that time realised this was an existential moment and took the necessary steps: laying down fundamental principles at the highest level, rallying around them, putting up a dedicated team, a task force in the Commission with sufficient staffing, functioning like a hub and spokes, working with the Council [ie, member states], constantly touring capitals, and building a united position among the 27 member states, with a forceful and clear negotiator," says Mr Riekeles.
"What's happened in the way she is dealing with Trump is exactly the contrary," he argues.
"She's brought the file very close to herself, and it’s that kind of leadership and methodology that is going to mark her second term."
Read more: Poland tells Trump Russian drone raid not a 'mistake
