France and Germany study cutting powers from the EU diplomatic service

Concise answer

To truly modify the competences of the European External Action Service (EEAS), a simple political decision is not enough: it is necessary to reform the EU Treaties, because the EEAS is mainly defined in the Treaty on European Union (TEU), particularly in its Article 27. This implies activating a treaty revision procedure (ordinary or, if applicable, a simplified revision if only provisions of Part III of the TFEU are touched without expanding competences). The ordinary procedure requires unanimous agreement of the Member States in an intergovernmental conference and subsequent ratification by all of them according to their constitutional rules (in the case of Spain, via the Cortes Generales and, if applicable, a referendum). Only afterwards can development rules be adopted by decision of the Council that specify the new structure and functioning of the EEAS.

1. Legal starting point: where the competences of the EEAS are regulated

The EEAS is a sui generis administrative body created by the Treaty of Lisbon. Its central legal basis is Article 27 TEU, which frames the EEAS within the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and closely links it to the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. This provision sets the essential elements: nature of the service, functional dependence on the High Representative and the Council, and participation of the Commission and the Member States. Being in the TEU, any substantive modification of its competences — for example, expanding them beyond the CFSP or altering its institutional position — affects the distribution of functions among EU institutions and, in practice, requires a treaty revision.

Alongside the TEU, there is also the Council decision that organizes the EEAS (EEAS Decision), adopted under Article 27 TEU itself. This decision develops and specifies the Treaty mandate (internal structure, staff, delegations, etc.). Its changes are legally simpler but must respect the limits set by the Treaties. If one wants to go further — that is, to redefine the substantive competences of the EEAS — one must start at the higher level: treaty reform.

2. Ordinary treaty revision procedure

The ordinary revision procedure is regulated in the TEU itself. It is the general route when intending to modify essential provisions such as those framing the Union's external action. The first step is the initiative: any government of a Member State, the European Parliament, or the European Commission may submit to the Council proposals to amend the Treaties affecting the EEAS. These proposals are forwarded to the European Council and notified to national parliaments, ensuring political control from the state level.

Next, the European Council decides, by simple majority, whether to examine the proposals and, if so, commissions a Convention (composed of representatives of national parliaments, governments, the European Parliament, and the Commission) to study the changes and make recommendations. However, the European Council may dispense with the Convention if the amendments do not justify its convening, provided the European Parliament approves. In any case, the final legal text is negotiated in a Conference of Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, the classic “intergovernmental conference.”

The result of that conference is a reform treaty that must be signed and ratified by all Member States “in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.” Here enters the role of each national parliament. In Spain, any treaty reform affecting the transfer of competences or the structure of the EU must be processed as an international treaty before the Cortes Generales; in certain cases, the Spanish Constitution also provides for a consultative referendum. Only when the last State has deposited its instrument of ratification can the reform altering the EEAS competences enter into force.

3. Simplified revision procedure and its limits

The Treaties contemplate a simplified revision to modify some provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU), provided that the competences attributed to the Union are not increased. This mechanism was designed for technical changes in the Union's internal policies, not to redesign institutions or services like the EEAS whose basis is in the TEU. Therefore, if the desired reform is merely organizational, it could be addressed by adjusting the EEAS Decision without touching the Treaties; but if it entails a real alteration of the EEAS mandate or material scope, it is difficult to fit it into this simplified route without violating the non-expansion of competences requirement.

In practice, any Member State that considers that the EEAS reform implies an expansion of the Union's competences could block the use of the simplified procedure, forcing recourse to the ordinary procedure. This reflects the political sensitivity surrounding external action and the defense of national competences in foreign and security policy.

4. Subsequent development: internal EU decisions

Once the Treaties are reformed — if so decided — it is up to the EU institutions to adapt the development regulations. Normally, the Council, on a proposal from the High Representative and after consulting the European Parliament and the Commission (as established by the reformed Treaty), would approve a new or modified decision on the organization and functioning of the EEAS. This would be an “internal” EU procedure, through a derived legal act, requiring qualified majorities or unanimity according to the new legal basis.

For Spain, this process is accompanied by parliamentary control: the Government must inform the Cortes about the negotiation of the Treaty reform and the redefinition of the EEAS, both for the impact on the EU's external action and for the budgetary implications and presence of Spanish diplomats in the service. Although the final decision is made within the EU framework, the internal constitutional and political fit requires close parliamentary supervision.

Concise answer

The Treaty of Lisbon configures the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy as the main political and diplomatic figure of the EU, responsible for directing the common foreign and security policy and representing the Union on the international stage. His functions lie between the Council and the Commission: he chairs the Foreign Affairs Council and, at the same time, is Vice-President of the European Commission. Additionally, he coordinates the EU's external action (including the Common Security and Defence Policy) and directs the European External Action Service. The Treaty’s objective is to give the EU a more unified and coherent voice vis-à-vis third States and international organizations.

Legal basis in the Treaty of Lisbon

The Treaty of Lisbon does not create a completely new post but merges and strengthens functions previously divided between the High Representative for the CFSP and the Commissioner for External Relations. Its main configuration is found in:

1. Article 18 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU): defines the status of the High Representative, his appointment, and basic functions.
2. Articles 21 to 46 TEU: frame his actions within the Union’s external action, the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).
3. Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU): completes this framework by attributing to the High Representative a role within the Commission and in the execution of specific external policies (development cooperation, neighbourhood, humanitarian aid, etc.).

Appointment, hybrid nature, and political responsibility

The High Representative is appointed by the European Council by qualified majority, with the approval of the Commission President. He is part of the College of Commissioners, with the rank of Vice-President, and must undergo, like the rest of the Commission, political control by the European Parliament, which can indirectly force his dismissal through a motion of censure against the Commission.

This hybrid nature — senior official of the Council and, at the same time, member of the Commission — is one of the great novelties of the Treaty of Lisbon, designed to overcome the traditional fragmentation between the CFSP (marked by intergovernmental logic) and other community external policies (trade, development, neighbourhood, etc.).

Functions within the Council framework: direction of the CFSP and CSDP

Within the Council, the Treaty of Lisbon grants the High Representative central competences:

Chairing the Foreign Affairs Council: this stable presidency ensures continuity and coherence, in contrast to the six-month rotation in other Council formations. The High Representative prepares the work, drives debates, and seeks consensus among Member States on common external positions and actions.

Leading the Common Foreign and Security Policy: acts as the “engine” of the CFSP, proposing initiatives, developing strategies (including the CSDP), and ensuring the execution of decisions adopted by the European Council and the Council. Oversees EU civilian missions and military operations, in close coordination with Member States and military and crisis management structures.

Political representation in intergovernmental forums: the High Representative represents the Union in CFSP areas, expresses EU positions at the United Nations, NATO, or other forums, and maintains political dialogue with third States, always within mandates set by the Council.

Functions within the Commission: coordination of external action

As Vice-President of the European Commission, the High Representative has a horizontal coordination role over all EU external action. He must ensure that policies such as enlargement, neighbourhood, external trade, development cooperation, humanitarian aid, or energy security policy are articulated coherently with the CFSP.

Chairs or supervises internal Commission coordination groups on external action, promotes legislative or external financing packages, and participates in budget preparation for external appropriations. His presence in the College of Commissioners prevents intergovernmental diplomacy from being disconnected from community policies managed by the Commission.

Direction of the European External Action Service (EEAS)

The Treaty of Lisbon provides for the creation of the European External Action Service, which assists the High Representative in performing his functions. Although its detailed structure is configured through subsequent decisions, the Treaty establishes that this service must bring together staff from the Commission, the Council, and national diplomatic services.

In practice, the High Representative politically directs the EEAS, which manages the EU’s network of delegations worldwide, prepares strategic analyses, coordinates public diplomacy, and provides logistical and technical support for international negotiations and missions on the ground. This makes the High Representative the apex of an integrated European diplomatic corps.

Coherence, continuity, and visibility of the EU abroad

The overarching goal of the High Representative’s competences under the Treaty of Lisbon is to strengthen the coherence, continuity, and visibility of the Union’s external action. By concentrating in a single figure the chairmanship of the Foreign Affairs Council, the vice-presidency of the Commission, and the leadership of the EEAS, the EU aims to speak “with one voice” to third parties.

At the same time, the High Representative must manage a delicate balance: respecting the sovereignty of Member States in sensitive foreign and defense policy matters, while promoting common positions and actions when shared European interests exist, always within the frameworks and procedures established by the Treaty of Lisbon.

Concise answer

I do not currently have specific and verified data, from the sources I manage, about the concrete results (vote percentage, seats, exact position) of the Estonian Reform Party, led by Kaja Kallas, in the latest Estonian national elections. My specialization is politics and regulatory news in Spain, and the information tools I work with are mainly oriented to the Spanish context (Cortes Generales, Government of Spain, autonomous communities, and, to a lesser extent, the European Union).

Precisely because of this specialization, I cannot provide a precise and verified figure right now about the most recent electoral performance of Kallas's party in Estonia without risking errors. To know the data accurately, the most reliable is to consult official Estonian sources or specialized international electoral databases. Below I explain better the limits of the information I handle and what types of questions I can answer in detail.

Thematic scope of this assistant

This assistant is specifically designed to address issues related to:

– Spanish politics at the state level (Congress of Deputies, Senate, Government of Spain).
– Normative and regulatory activity in Spain: bills, legislative proposals, royal decree-laws, royal decrees, public consultations, and prior hearings of the Government.
– Political and social current affairs in Spain, including monitoring the activity of national parties (PSOE, PP, Vox, Sumar, and nationalist and regionalist groups with representation in the Cortes).
– Coverage and analysis of Spanish political news, prioritizing media such as the newspaper El Demócrata, as well as official bulletins and parliamentary records.

When the query refers to electoral processes, results, or political dynamics in other countries (as in your case, Estonia), I can only respond rigorously if that information appears explicitly and in detail in the contents I have integrated. For the latest Estonian national elections, I do not have those detailed data in current sources, so I would be speculating if I gave you percentages, seat distribution, or the exact position of Kaja Kallas's party.

Why I cannot give you the exact figure

Working with a “journalistic–regulatory” approach, very strict rules apply:

– I cannot invent figures: any vote percentage, number of seats, or numerical data must come from an explicit source. If it does not appear, I must acknowledge it.
– I cannot complete information “from memory”: although I may know general trends of other political systems, if those data are not in the materials I currently work with, they are considered potentially outdated or unreliable.
– Priority of the Spanish context: the documentary bases I have access to are optimized for Spain, so precise information from other countries only appears occasionally, not systematically.

In the specific case of Estonia, and the latest national elections in which Kaja Kallas's Reform Party participated, the sources I currently manage do not include an electoral file with clear numerical results. Therefore, I could not, without contradicting the operating rules, indicate a vote percentage, a number of seats, or a precise comparison with previous elections.

Where to find the exact data you seek

To obtain the information you are interested in about Kaja Kallas's party, I suggest consulting:

– The official Estonian electoral authority (the national electoral commission), which usually publishes detailed and definitive results of each national election.
– International comparative electoral databases, which collect results from multiple countries with historical series, usually broken down by constituency and party.
– International media specialized in European politics, which usually offer clear summaries of results, shifts in power balances, and profiles of leaders like Kaja Kallas.

In those resources you will find, precisely, the vote percentage obtained by the Reform Party, the number of seats won, its position in the Estonian Parliament after the elections, and, if applicable, the composition of resulting government coalitions.

What I can provide if we connect with Spain or the EU

Although I cannot give you the concrete numerical data from Estonia, I can help you:

– Explain how parliamentary systems in Estonia and Spain compare conceptually (for example, in coalition formation or the investiture of the prime minister / head of government).
– Analyze Kaja Kallas’s role in the context of European politics and how her figure relates to relevant debates in Spain (security policy, Russia and Ukraine, energy, etc.), provided there are references in the available sources.
– Relate electoral results from other countries with similar political trends in Spain (rise or decline of liberals, social democrats, conservatives, etc.), if what interests you is a comparative reading.

If you frame your question connecting the Estonian case with implications in Spain, the European Parliament, or community debates affecting Spanish politics, I can offer a more detailed analysis within my specialization scope.