A long-running institutional struggle over who controls European Union foreign policy has broken into the open, with EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas publicly acknowledging that the role of the High Representative has not worked as intended when decisions are effectively taken above her inside the European Commission, writes Catherine Feore.

Speaking after an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers, Kallas delivered an unusually candid assessment of the relationship between the European External Action Service (EEAS), the European Commission and the member states.

At the centre of the dispute is a fundamental question: whether the EU's foreign policy is ultimately directed through the High Representative, who is supposed to bridge the Commission and national governments, or through Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Kallas argued that the problem does not lie primarily in the EU treaties or the institutional architecture they created. Instead, she said, it lies in how that architecture has been implemented in practice.

Video

"The problem is not the treaties, not the institutional setup. The problem is the implementation of that setup that it would work in practice, and there was a broad support by the member states to make it work. But of course, it doesn't entirely depend on the member states," Kallas said.

The final sentence was significant. Kallas' comments point towards criticism of von der Leyen.

Under the EU's institutional structure, Kallas holds two positions simultaneously: High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission. The dual role was designed precisely to connect foreign-policy decisions made by the member states with the powerful economic and regulatory instruments controlled by the Commission.

Those instruments include trade, development assistance, enlargement, migration and visa policy. Kallas argued that Europe cannot operate effectively as a geopolitical actor unless it brings those tools together with the foreign policy agreed by national governments.

"If we want to act as a geopolitical player, we should really put these things together," she said, arguing that this was precisely why the treaties created the vice-presidential component of the High Representative's job.

A role that works "on paper"

Asked about proposals to shift parts of the EEAS, its staff or competences towards the Commission, she described a system in which her coordinating authority exists more clearly in theory than in practice.

"The high representative/vice president is the link between the member states and the Commission, on paper, in theory,” she added pointedly that “we have had issues where there is somebody above me that is actually deciding; then you know it doesn't work that way. Let's be very frank.”

The reference to "somebody above me" was the sharpest indication of the institutional problem Kallas was describing. Within the Commission hierarchy, the person “above” Kallas is Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Commission versus EEAS

The question arose because foreign affairs ministers were discussing the future of the EEAS and how Europe's external-policy machinery should be organised.

According to Kallas, governments broadly supported retaining the existing institutional structure rather than rewriting it. But they also want that structure to operate as originally intended.

She warned in particular against duplication between the EEAS and the Commission. If a function is already being performed effectively by the diplomatic service, she argued, there is little justification for recreating the same capacity inside the Commission.

The discussion also touched on proposals to concentrate more external-action functions inside the Commission. Kallas said such a transfer could not be separated from the High Representative's authority.

If external-action services are concentrated in the Commission, she argued, the other side of the bargain must be that the High Representative genuinely oversees those services. "One side of the equation cannot happen without the other," she said.

Kallas said a majority of governments supported maintaining the current institutional setup and opposed concentrating everything in the Commission without the High Representative's coordinating role being implemented in practice. 

PHOTO CREDIT: Roundtable Informal meeting of Foreign Affairs Ministers (Gymnich) - September 2026 - Irish Foreign Minister Helen McEntee and EU High Representative Kaja Kallas © European Union

Brussels is tightening its grip on some of the internet’s fastest-growing services, designating ChatGPT, Reddit and Roblox for heightened scrutiny under the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), writes Catherine Feore.

The European Commission said all three services meet the 45 million average monthly users threshold in the EU, triggering the DSA rules reserved for digital players considered large enough to pose systemic risks to European society.

“These new designations mean that ChatGPT, Reddit and Roblox will now be held to a higher standard of scrutiny and accountability in the European Union,” said Henna Virkkunen (pictured), the Commission’s executive vice-president for tech sovereignty, security and democracy.

The move puts the companies firmly in Brussels’ regulatory crosshairs. They must assess and mitigate risks ranging from illegal content and harm to minors to threats to fundamental rights, elections, public security, and users’ physical and mental well-being. Importantly, the designation also gives the Commission investigative powers to scrutinise relevant features and systems underpinning the services.

ChatGPT has been designated a Very Large Online Search Engine (VLOSE), while Reddit and Roblox are now Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs). They have until the end of January 2027 to comply with the DSA’s tougher obligations.

ChatGPT’s inclusion is particularly significant. The Commission considers the AI service a hybrid product that qualifies as an online search engine because it can search the web when answering users’ queries, bringing a major generative AI service into the DSA’s toughest tier of oversight for the first time.

The Commission will supervise compliance with the DSA, in cooperation with Coimisiún na Meán (Ireland’s media regulator) for ChatGPT and Reddit, and the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) for Roblox.

With the latest additions, 28 platforms and search engines have now received the EU’s “very large” designation.

Photo credit: Commissioner Virkkunnen Photographer: Lukasz Kobus © European Union

The US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) decision to allow 20 ZYN nicotine pouch products to carry a specific reduced-risk claim has created a striking contrast with the direction of European Union policy, as Brussels prepares new product rules and proposes EU-wide taxation of nicotine pouches.

The United States Food and Drug Administration has authorised 20 ZYN nicotine pouch products to be marketed with a statement informing adult smokers that completely replacing cigarettes with the pouches can reduce the risk of several serious diseases.

The decision, issued on 30 June 2026, represents the first time that the FDA has granted Modified Risk Tobacco Product orders to nicotine pouches.

The authorised wording states:

“Using ZYN instead of cigarettes puts you at a lower risk of mouth cancer, heart disease, lung cancer, stroke, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis.”

The orders cover ten varieties of ZYN, each sold in nicotine strengths of 3mg and 6mg. The products include Chill, Cinnamon, Citrus, Coffee, Cool Mint, Menthol, Peppermint, Smooth, Spearmint and Wintergreen.

The manufacturer, Swedish Match USA, is owned by Philip Morris International. The products had already received FDA authorisation to remain on the US market in January 2025, but the new decision goes considerably further by permitting a specific comparative health claim.

The FDA said its decision followed an extensive scientific review and was intended to give adult tobacco users accurate information about differences in risk between products.

“FDA’s review of modified risk products is intended to ensure that adult users have clear, science-based information about the relative harms of tobacco products, so they can make informed choices,” said Bret Koplow, acting director of the FDA’s Centre for Tobacco Products.

The ruling does not mean that ZYN is harmless, nor does it approve the products as medicines or smoking-cessation treatments. Nicotine is addictive, and the FDA continues to advise people who do not currently use tobacco or nicotine not to begin.

The significance of the decision lies instead in the regulator’s formal recognition that nicotine products can present very different levels of risk.

Switching, rather than dual use

A crucial qualification is contained in the phrase “instead of cigarettes”. The authorised claim applies to smokers who replace cigarettes with ZYN. It does not promise the same reduction in risk to consumers who use nicotine pouches while continuing to smoke.

Cigarettes burn tobacco, creating smoke containing toxic substances responsible for most smoking-related cancers, cardiovascular disease and respiratory illness. Nicotine pouches deliver nicotine through the lining of the mouth without burning tobacco or producing smoke.

This difference is central to the principle of tobacco harm reduction: smokers who cannot or do not wish to stop using nicotine may nevertheless reduce their health risks by moving away from combustible products.

The FDA’s decision therefore recognises an important distinction that is frequently blurred in political debate. A product can be addictive and unsuitable for non-users while still being substantially less dangerous than smoking.

UK-based public health commentator Clive Bates, a former director of Action on Smoking and Health, has argued that nicotine pouches could deliver benefits comparable to those associated with the use of Swedish snus in Scandinavia.

“Tobacco-free nicotine pouches with a consumer acceptable nicotine content have the potential to benefit public health in the same way that is documented for Swedish snus in Scandinavia, that is, by serving as a low-risk alternative to cigarettes”, Bates said.

“The European Commission should pay close attention to FDA’s exhaustive process and extensive reasoning. It’s unusual to have anything good to say about the Federal government these days, but this is an important exception, where the right answer has been reached for the right reasons”, he added.

Bates has also argued that poorly designed regulation, including excessively low nicotine limits, could make pouches less effective as substitutes for cigarettes and unintentionally protect the market for combustible tobacco.

Why the FDA decision matters for Europe

The American ruling comes at a particularly important moment for the European Union.

The European Commission is simultaneously advancing a formal proposal to overhaul tobacco taxation (TED) and preparing a broader revision of the EU legislation governing tobacco and nicotine products, their presentation, sale, advertising and promotion.

Nicotine pouches are not comprehensively regulated at EU level under the current Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). Because they contain nicotine but no tobacco, they fall outside many of the harmonised provisions that apply to cigarettes, roll-your-own tobacco, heated tobacco and electronic cigarettes. The result is a fragmented European market.

Some member states permit nicotine pouches subject to national restrictions. Others have introduced nicotine limits, packaging and warning requirements or advertising controls, while France has pursued a prohibition.

Different national rules create uncertainty for consumers and manufacturers and complicate enforcement across the EU’s internal market.

The Commission’s April 2026 evaluation of the European tobacco-control framework identified the rapid growth of nicotine pouches, electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products as one of the main challenges that existing EU legislation is no longer adequately equipped to address.

The evaluation concluded that EU rules had contributed to falling smoking rates and smoking-related deaths but were failing to keep pace with changes in products, marketing practices and consumer behaviour.

The EC is particularly concerned about the use of novel nicotine products among children, adolescents and young adults. However, the FDA decision introduces an additional issue that EU policymakers will now find difficult to avoid: whether new EU rules should recognise differences in risk between combustible cigarettes and smoke-free nicotine products.

Two contrasting regulatory philosophies

The emerging difference between Washington and Brussels is not simply that one jurisdiction is permissive and the other restrictive.

The FDA subjects nicotine products to an exceptionally demanding premarket review. Products must receive authorisation before they can legally be marketed, and separate evidence is required before a manufacturer may make a modified-risk claim.

The FDA can impose marketing conditions, require post-market surveillance and withdraw an order if later evidence shows that the product no longer benefits public health.

Its approach nevertheless accepts that consumers should be told when credible evidence shows that completely switching from one product to another reduces disease risk.

The Commission’s current approach places greater emphasis on reducing the overall attractiveness and consumption of tobacco-related and nicotine products. Its taxation proposal explicitly presents nicotine pouches as products that can prolong addiction or act as substitutes for cigarettes, especially among young people.

These positions are not necessarily irreconcilable.

The EU could impose age controls, marketing restrictions, ingredient standards and proportionate nicotine limits while still recognising that adult smokers may benefit from switching completely away from cigarettes.

It could also prohibit unsubstantiated commercial claims while creating an evidence-based process through which manufacturers could apply for permission to communicate verified differences in risk.

The alternative would be to impose increasingly similar taxation, warnings and advertising rules on products with significantly different health consequences.

A test for evidence-based policymaking

The EC ran a public consultation on revisions to both the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) and the Tobacco Advertising Directive (TAD) from 22 May to 14 August this year. The consultation, is intended to inform a revision of the legislative framework planned before the end of 2026.

It creates an opportunity to consider evidence that was not available when the current Tobacco Products Directive was adopted in 2014.

Nicotine pouches were then a marginal product. They now represent a rapidly expanding category, and national governments are adopting increasingly divergent responses.

The FDA decision does not compel Europe to follow the US model. The EU has different legal structures, public-health priorities and attitudes towards commercial nicotine.

It does, however, establish a significant regulatory precedent.

One of the world’s most influential public-health authorities has concluded that there is sufficient evidence to tell adult smokers that completely switching to specified nicotine pouches reduces their risk of mouth cancer, heart disease, lung cancer, stroke, emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

That finding sits uneasily with any policy or public communication suggesting that cigarettes and smoke-free nicotine products are essentially equivalent.

The issue is particularly relevant to the Commission’s tax proposal. Taxation affects consumer behaviour partly by changing the relative prices of products. If pouches are taxed so heavily that the economic advantage over cigarettes is substantially reduced, smokers may have less incentive to switch.

Conversely, setting taxes too low could increase affordability and use among young people who have never smoked.

The task for EU legislators is therefore not simply to choose between regulation and deregulation. It is to develop a framework that calibrates restrictions, taxation and consumer information according to evidence about risk, behaviour and population-level effects.

Europe’s choice

While Washington is recognising that adults deserve accurate information about lower-risk alternatives, Brussels is looking for ways to restrict, tax or ban them.

Meanwhile, the EU is failing to control illegal disposable vapes, banned flavours, excessive nicotine levels and unauthorised devices moving through black-market channels. Regulated products are demonised, while illegal and unregulated products keep reaching consumers, including young people.

The forthcoming EU debate will test whether Brussels can reconcile its tobacco-free objective with the potential role of lower-risk alternatives.

The FDA decision makes three points that are likely to shape that discussion.

First, nicotine pouches are not harmless and should not be promoted to children or people who do not use nicotine.

Second, the absence of combustion means that their risks can differ substantially from those associated with cigarettes.

Third, the greatest potential benefit arises when smokers switch completely rather than using pouches alongside continued smoking.

The Commission is right to address gaps in the existing legislation and fragmentation between member states. Common product standards, youth protections and enforcement rules may be necessary for the Single Market to function properly.

But regulation that fails to acknowledge relative risk could also have unintended consequences.

Clive Bates and other harm-reduction advocates argue that treating all nicotine products as though they are similarly dangerous can preserve smoking by discouraging consumers from moving to safer alternatives. European health campaigners respond that the growth of commercially marketed nicotine products could create a new generation of dependent users.

The revised Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) will need to address both concerns.

As the EC completes its consultation and develops its legislative proposal, the American decision gives European policymakers a concrete case study rather than a theoretical argument.

The question is no longer whether a regulator could authorise a carefully limited reduced-risk claim for a nicotine pouch. The FDA has now done so.

The question for Europe is whether its forthcoming legislation will allow comparable scientific evidence to influence regulation, taxation and communication — or whether nicotine pouches will be treated principally as another product to be restricted, irrespective of their potential role in moving smokers away from cigarettes.

Episode 12 of the DGT podcast: Languages and Technology is now available.

How does a European Commission document become 24 equally valid language versions of itself?

Anna Holmén takes us behind the scenes with Ivana Zeljković and Iva Vatova-Ivanova from DG Translation’s Demand Management Unit. They reveal how translation work is planned and coordinated, how tight deadlines are managed, and how technology and human expertise come together to keep multilingual Europe running — with deadline compliance above 99%.

Step inside the engine room of EU multilingualism and discover the people and processes that make 24-language communication possible every day.

Tune in to hear more

The European Commission has approved, under the EU Merger Regulation, the acquisition of joint control of Eurowind Energy A/S by Norlys a.m.b.a. and EWE Holding ApS (‘EWH'), all of Denmark, and Blackstone Inc. of the US.

The transaction relates primarily to the development, construction, and operation of wind and solar farms in Europe, the wholesale of electricity, the provision of electricity balancing and ancillary services, as well as the development of renewable energy solutions.

The Commission concluded that the notified transaction would not raise competition concerns, given the companies' limited market positions resulting from the proposed transaction. The notified transaction was examined under the simplified merger review procedure.

More information is available on the Commission's competition website, in the public case register under the case number M.12473.

The European Commission has approved, under the EU Merger Regulation, the creation of a joint venture by CMA CGM S.A. and TotalEnergies S.E., both of France.

The transaction relates primarily to LNG bunkering logistics services.

The Commission concluded that the notified transaction would not raise competition concerns, given that the joint venture will have negligible activities in the European Economic Area and given the companies' limited combined market positions resulting from the proposed transaction. The notified transaction was examined under the simplified merger review procedure.

More information is available on the Commission's competition website, in the public case register under the case number M.12406.

The European Commission has closed an antitrust investigation into alleged anticompetitive behaviour by Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. (‘Pratt & Whitney'), the main supplier in the European Economic Area (‘EEA') of turboprop aircraft engines. The closure of the investigation follows the company's amendment of contractual clauses, which removes possible obstacles to access to critical input and services faced by spare parts suppliers. Spare parts are sold to customers in the EEA for the repair and maintenance of engines.

The Commission investigated whether Pratt & Whitney may have been foreclosing access to critical input and services needed by spare part suppliers, so-called used serviceable material (‘USM') suppliers, for certain turboprop aircraft engines. USM suppliers need access to used engine cores to tear them down and replenish their stock of spare parts. They also need access to certification services that attest that a spare part is airworthy and can be reused. By limiting the ability of maintenance shops in their network to sell used engine cores or provide certification services to USM suppliers, Pratt & Whitney may have restricted competition from independent USM suppliers. Following exchanges with the Commission, Pratt & Whitney amended its agreements to remove these restrictions and clarified that maintenance shops are not prevented from buying USM from other suppliers.

After thorough analysis and assessment of evidence, and considering the changes and clarifications made by Pratt & Whitney to its contractual clauses, the Commission concluded that the investigated concerns have been addressed. Further action is no longer considered a priority at EU level. Pratt & Whitney has made a public announcement on its website highlighting the changes made to its contractual clauses.

The closure of the investigation is not a finding that the conduct in question complied with EU competition rules.

Register for the 2026 Internal Audit Service Conference 

Registration is still open.  Join us on 11 September 2026 in Brussels and experience face‑to‑face networking opportunities with with Europe’s leading internal‑audit professionals.

The European Commission’s Internal Audit Service (IAS) will host its annual conference on 11 September 2026, in Brussels at the Charlemagne building.

This year’s theme is  Internal Audit in Motion: Keeping Pace with a Changing Europe and will feature keynote speakers, three discussion panels, and a TEDx-style session to examine the challenges of internal audit in the public sector within an increasingly complex environment. The programme will cover:

• The transformation of the EU budget and new MFF 
• The impact of technology on the future of internal audit work 
• Organisational culture and adding value via internal audit

The conference is open to all Commission officials as well as external professionals with an interest in internal audit and can be attended in person or online. CPE points will be awarded for participation and registration is free.

The Commission looks forward to welcoming you to an insightful and engaging day of discussions on the future of internal audit in the European Commission.

Programme and registration

The European Commission has published an updated version of the guidance document to help stakeholders prepare for the implementation of the Digital Batteries Passport under Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 concerning batteries and waste batteries.

The Guidance Document: Digital Batteries Passport – data points by category provides a structured overview of the data points relevant to electric vehicle (EV) batteries, light means of transport (LMT) batteries and industrial batteries covered by the passport requirement. For each battery category, it indicates whether individual data points are mandatory, optional, applicable only in specific circumstances, or do not have to be completed or displayed as of February 2027, when the Batteries Passport requirements will begin to apply. In total, the document brings together 71 data points, showing their legal sources and their applicability to each battery category.

Supporting industry preparations

The guidance is intended primarily for economic operators across the batteries value chain, including manufacturers, importers and other organizations responsible for making information available through the Batteries Passport. It may also be useful for conformity assessment bodies, market surveillance authorities and other stakeholders involved in implementing the Batteries Regulation.

By bringing the relevant data points together in a single document, the guidance aims to promote a common understanding of the Batteries Passport information requirements and a consistent approach across the sector. It can help organisations identify the information they may need to collect, assess and make available, and begin aligning their internal processes, data systems and reporting practices.

From 18 February 2027, each EV battery, each LMT battery and each industrial battery with a capacity greater than 2 kWh that is placed on the market or put into service shall have a battery passport.

How to use the guidance

The guidance should be read together with Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 and any relevant delegated or implementing acts. It does not introduce additional legal requirements and should not be regarded as an authoritative interpretation of the legislation or as representing the European Commission’s official position. The document may be developed further as implementation progresses. Future updates may provide further clarification of individual data points and indicate possible measurement units or reporting formats, supporting greater comparability and consistency.

The EU has spoken out in support of “all those who have suffered under totalitarian and authoritarian regimes”. This comes on the eve of the Europe-wide Day of Remembrance of the victims of all totalitarian and authoritarian regimes on 23 August. Ahead of the Day, senior EU political figures have issued a strongly-worded statement against “hatred, intolerance and the denial of human dignity. The statement was issued by the EC Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, Henna Virkkunen, and Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law, and Consumer Protection Commissioner Michael McGrath (pictured).

It reads: “On 23 August, we commemorate the anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, signed in 1939 between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. “That pact, and the war and devastation that followed, brought intolerable suffering to millions of people across Europe and beyond. The years that followed were marked by occupation, repression, deportation and violence on a massive scale.”

It goes on: “Today, we honour the memory of all those who have suffered under totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. “The pain endured by victims, survivors and their families echoes across generations. Every EU country is now home to a generation that has grown up free from tyranny and oppression.

“For many, freedom, democracy and peace may appear self-evident, but they are not. They were secured through extraordinary courage, sacrifice, resistance and resilience, and they must never be taken for granted. Remembering the past is therefore not only a duty to those who came before us. It is also a responsibility to future generations.”

The statement continues: “This day is a solemn reminder of the consequences of hatred, intolerance and the denial of human dignity.

“It calls on us to remain vigilant in defending the values on which the European Union is founded: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and fundamental rights.

"By preserving the memory of the past, we reaffirm our commitment to a Europe built on peace, justice and solidarity.”

The European Commission has approved, under the EU Merger Regulation, the creation of a joint venture by AI Infrastructure Development, S.L. (‘ACS AIID'), Telefónica S.A. (‘Telefónica'), Banco Santander, S.A. and Entidad Pública Empresarial Sociedad Española para la Transformación Tecnológica, E.P.E. (‘SETT'), all of Spain.

The transaction relates primarily to third-party data centre colocation services in Spain and contributes to the EU's tech sovereignty strategy of strengthening and expanding sovereign cloud and AI infrastructure in Europe, as part of the EU's AI Gigafactories Initiative.

The Commission concluded that the notified transaction would not raise competition concerns, given the companies' limited market positions resulting from the proposed transaction. The notified transaction was examined under the simplified merger review procedure.

More information is available on the Commission's competition website, in the public case register under the case number M.12498.