Daily Inspiration Quote by Marek Belka

Belka’s sentence reads like diplomatic oatmeal, and that’s the point: it’s a technocrat’s way of choosing sides without sounding like he’s choosing sides. By elevating “the state of the transatlantic relationships” above all other “international issues,” he’s quietly asserting a hierarchy of threats and priorities. In European political economy, that hierarchy usually means this: security and markets run through Washington, and stability inside Europe is easier to manage when the U.S. connection is steady.

The repetition - “transatlantic,” then “Euro-Atlantic” - is not verbal clutter so much as strategic widening. “Transatlantic” can sound narrowly transactional (U.S.-EU trade, NATO burden-sharing). “Euro-Atlantic” drags in the broader architecture: NATO’s political identity, the post-1989 promise of Western integration, the idea that Europe’s prosperity is tied to an American-backed order. It’s an economist’s framing of geopolitics: institutions first, feelings last.

The most revealing move is the double verb: “develop” and “strengthen.” “Strengthen” flatters the status quo; “develop” admits it’s not sufficient anymore. That’s a nod to recurring moments when the alliance looks shakier than the communiques suggest - Iraq-era fractures, energy dependence anxieties, the EU’s periodic autonomy ambitions, and the perennial question of whether America’s attention will drift elsewhere. Belka isn’t selling romance; he’s selling maintenance. The subtext is insurance: if the Euro-Atlantic link weakens, everything else - investment confidence, defense credibility, even internal EU cohesion - gets more expensive, fast.