Original text
European Commission - Speech [Check Against Delivery] Speech by Commissioner Šefčovič at the Brussels Economic Security Forum Brussels, 5 June 2026 Ladies and gentlemen, It is a pleasure to return to the Brussels Economic Security Forum, so let me thank the European Policy Centre for the invitation. Twelve months ago, I stood here and made a simple argument – openness must be backed by security. It was true then. It ...
European Commission - Speech [Check Against Delivery] Speech by Commissioner Šefčovič at the Brussels Economic Security Forum Brussels, 5 June 2026 Ladies and gentlemen, It is a pleasure to return to the Brussels Economic Security Forum, so let me thank the European Policy Centre for the invitation. Twelve months ago, I stood here and made a simple argument – openness must be backed by security. It was true then. It remains true today. Since then, we have moved from vision to doctrine, and from doctrine to action. Economic security is now embedded in every major policy decision. We are using our existing tools more assertively. Where gaps exist, we are building new tools. For instance, the revision of the Foreign Direct Investment Regulation and our reinforced approach to export controls. Or our recent action aimed at ensuring that EU funding does not benefit projects that go against our core economic security interests. Even the most committed champions of open trade – and the EU is very much one of those – must accept that openness without security is vulnerability. Just like last year, I have arrived here fresh from the OECD Ministerial meeting in Paris. There I had the opportunity to engage with ministers from around the globe. And one message consistently rang clear – fair and open trade demands that industrial policy be built on a genuine global level playing field. In a world that is unpredictable, fast-moving, and fiercely competitive, vulnerabilities carry a cost – often an existential one. * But this is not a counsel of despair. First, the EU is categorically not abandoning its commitment to rules-based trade, nor to opening new doors for exporters and investors. Even in sensitive strategic cases, we carefully balance the need to defend our industries with staying open. We have 45 agreements in force with 80 countries. Add concluded negotiations – with Indonesia, India and Australia – and that rises to 48 deals covering 83 countries. We value each and every one of them. Each new agreement creates new opportunities. And each new opportunity reduces dependence. Second, diversification now requires a dedicated instrument. The model I have in mind is the Energy Union, a crucial undertaking for Europe, that I had the pleasure of overseeing in a previous Commission mandate. At the time, investing in LNG terminals and interconnectors was unpopular. Many questioned the cost because of cheaper Russian gas. With hindsight, it was vital. The energy crisis Europe suffered following Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was bad enough. But we need only imagine where Europe would have stood then – or where it would stand today – without that effort. Recent industrial cases – in particular, supplies of chips and rare earths – have reinforced my conviction that a step change is necessary. We understand the urgency for critical minerals. But every high-risk sector must be weaned off single-supplier dependence. Third, economic security is a shared responsibility. Industry stands on the front line. We must have their back – but industry must do its part, too. That means diversifying rapidly and strategically. And it means integrating the costs of resilience into business models and treating geopolitical risk as what it is – a core business risk. Because the cost of inaction could be a lot higher. As we almost learned the hard way in the area of energy. * Ladies and gentlemen, Let me conclude on a point that is easily overlooked – economic security must be built from the inside out. Being stronger within the EU, means being stronger outside, on the global stage. To this end, there is still so much potential to trade more within our own Single Market. That is a structural weakness that we must address by dismantling internal barriers. A 2% increase in our internal trade could completely offset the impact of tariffs put in place by the U.S., something which underlines the unused power of the Single Market. Likewise, moving towards European capital markets that are less fragmented, would see investments and savings flow more freely, helping businesses to access funding and empowering citizens to invest across the EU. Avoiding a situation where our savings go to funding innovative startups abroad, where their impact would be felt most. While our efforts to cut red tape and unnecessary rules for companies will ensure they can do business more easily here in Europe. Reducing energy prices is equally essential – not just for competitiveness, but as a foundation of our economic security itself. So, in conclusion, to sum up: The ambition is set. The doctrine is in place. The work continues. Thank you. SPEECH/26/1278
Speech Brief