Informal Dynamics Among National Diplomats in Brussels: How They Affect Decision-Making in the Council

In February 2023, we already looked at the underestimated role of Council working parties and their members, the national diplomats at EU level (attachés). We…

Published on: 20.06.2023
Reading time: 7 mins
Author: Timm Bopp

In February 2023, we already looked at the underestimated role of Council working parties and their members, the national diplomats at EU level (attachés). We showed why it is necessary to look beyond the ministers and the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper) and first understand which topics and challenges are negotiated and “pre-cooked” in the working parties before the trilogue. In the end, this accounts for around 70 percent of all decisions in the Council.

Building on this structural view of how decisions are made, we now want to show why it is also important to consider the social dynamics among member states in the Council working parties. Empirical observations[1] show that the common joke in Brussels about the “permanent traitors” (a play on “Permanent Representatives”) has some basis in fact.

The European Union is not only the largest regional bloc in economic terms. It is also one of the most institutionalized arenas of intergovernmental cooperation and therefore has one of the densest forms of diplomatic interaction. Decision-making in the Council working parties is one example of this and is often described as a process of hard bargaining between member states. But behind the scenes, a socialization process among the attachés softens, and sometimes prevents, this “hard bargaining” over national positions.

The attachés sent to Brussels work between two social contexts: the national and the European. They do not act only within the framework of the Council, but within a normative context shaped by formal, institutionalized channels and informal ones:

Regular working party meetings in the Council once or twice a week (9 a.m. to 6 p.m.);
Informal meetings with the Council Presidency, bilateral meetings to coordinate and win support for positions, or meetings within a group of like-minded member states[2];
Networks of formal and informal communication, ranging from phone calls and the mailing lists set up for the working parties to COREU messages[3] and WhatsApp group chats;
Joint trips and private get-togethers, since the atmosphere in the working party is often very familiar and friendly: group (“family”) photos are taken at the end of each Council Presidency, and former working party members stay in touch, visit each other and keep up with each other’s personal news and concerns.

Through this regular exchange, the attachés form a “social unit” and develop a strong sense of community.

In interviews, some attachés went so far as to compare these relationships, which are meant to be purely diplomatic (that is, about presenting and defending their country’s position as well as possible), with the dynamics of a school class: “You have your classmates and you’re all together. Then some are closer friends than others. And there are small groups that go to parties together. For us, that’s completely natural. Our children go to the same kindergartens and schools. We are friends, we know each other’s families and we often visit each other.”

This makes it easier to take the views of other member states into account instead of only following instructions from the capital. According to the attachés, nobody wants to be blamed for a failed negotiation: “Because those who vote against something are blamed by everyone for the fact that no agreement could be reached.”

The attachés of the Public Health working party see solidarity within the group as key to reaching agreements faster in legislative procedures. However, it should be stressed that this solidarity mainly develops among like-minded member states. The close relationships between the larger member states, Germany, France, Spain and Italy, were mentioned again and again.

Over time, diplomats “go native” by identifying with their host country. This can lead to tensions with the capital and is one of the reasons for the rotation system. However, attachés in the working parties differ from diplomats in national embassies because they are sent by national line ministries, not by foreign ministries. As a result, some attachés (examples mentioned were Austria and Poland) spend up to 15 years in Brussels.

This socialization can also be explained strategically, for at least two reasons. First, the dominant system of qualified majority voting (QMV)[4] is often not understood in the capitals. Ministries at home tend to write rigid instructions without considering the logic of QMV. This logic makes it easier for attachés to soften their capitals’ instructions.

One example is opposition to including gender perspectives in a legislative text. If a group (“bloc”) of member states that supports including gender considerations has a majority, it not only wins the vote but may also avoid reaching out to the “dissenter” in later negotiations, that is, involving them. As one attaché confirmed: “Even if we don’t like [gender considerations], voting against them means, first, that we have lost, and second, that we will not be a partner in future discussions.”

Second, the motivation to follow social pressure also comes from the wish to keep or improve one’s personal standing in the group over the long term. As one diplomat put it: “We are paid to make friends here.” An attaché who lacks good relationships with colleagues from other member states will find it hard to win allies in discussions.

Close cooperation, a sense of community and solidarity among the attachés help to speed up agreements in certain policy areas, often at the expense of their own instructions. However, it is important to note that these findings come mainly from interviews with the Council working party on public health and cannot simply be generalized.

The attachés themselves say that public health is an area strongly shaped by shared, rather altruistic values, such as fighting cancer or the harm caused by drug use. The health attachés’ goal is to “create a better Europe for health” and to “protect the health of European citizens.” In policy areas where financial gain is also a priority, such as intellectual property, the “we” feeling, and therefore its effect on cooperation and on softening national positions, is probably weaker.

In addition, health is mainly the responsibility of the member states. A large part of the health attachés’ daily work therefore involves keeping the Commission in check. One example is the pandemic, when the Commission was able to use the urgency of the situation to expand its influence in a policy area where it has no legal competence. Negotiations in this area are therefore shaped more by “us against the Commission” than by disagreement between member states.

Summary and recommendation

Our earlier look at the structure and decision-making levels of the Council showed that it is advisable to understand which topics and challenges are already being worked out at working party level in order to make your own position heard. This is especially true because the attachés of the EU member states, through their daily interaction, feel a political obligation to cooperate and find solutions. This also affects their role as representatives and advisors and as national negotiators on legislation.

Looking behind the scenes and taking into account the informal relationships and coordination within the Council working party can further support efforts to position yourself within the ministerial structure. For example, you can learn how flexible attachés are and how often they have departed from national instructions in the past. You can also consider to what extent your concern could help not only Germany but also partner countries in this area. Good relationships and thoughtful coordination can make an attaché more willing to push your concern within the working party, especially among like-minded member states.

[1] The findings presented here are based on expert interviews conducted in Brussels with members of the EU Council working party on public health.

[2] For example, the Nordic and Baltic health ministers regularly hold informal meetings with their ambassadors and attachés to coordinate early.

[3] COREU is the EU’s secure communication network used for exchanging information and messages between the member states and the EU institutions, especially on highly sensitive and security-related matters.

[4] A qualified majority requires 55 percent of EU member states, representing at least 65 percent of the EU’s total population, to vote in favor.