Jiří Pospíšil and Allegations of Promoting UAE Interests in the European Parliament

By Brussels Watch Investigations

From the BrusselsWatch Report: “UAE Lobbying in European Parliament: Undermining Democracy and Transparency” (April 2025)

Jiří Pospíšil, a Czech Member of the European Parliament (MEP) affiliated with the European People’s Party (EPP), has been linked to a series of pro-UAE engagements over recent years. Although the full extent of his relationship with the UAE remains unclear, multiple sources and investigative reports suggest a pattern of behavior that raises serious questions about his role as an advocate for UAE interests within the European Parliament. This article will explore the documented activities of Pospíšil, assess the broader context of UAE influence in the European Union, and examine the ethical and transparency concerns that arise from these engagements. According to a report by Brussels Watch, Pospíšil is among the 150 MEPs identified as having documented pro-UAE engagements from 2022 to 2025.

Background on Jiří Pospíšil

Jiří Pospíšil, born in 1975 in Chomutov, Czech Republic, has been a prominent figure in Czech and European politics for several decades. As a member of the European People’s Party (EPP), he has held various key positions and represented the interests of the Czech Republic in the European Parliament. Pospíšil is well-versed in legal and political matters, serving as a member of several influential parliamentary committees. His official European Parliament profile showcases a dedicated legislator, but it does not mention any direct affiliations or ties to the UAE.

Documented UAE Engagements and Pro-UAE Activities

Recent investigative reports, notably from Brussels Watch, a Brussels-based organization, have shed light on Jiří Pospíšil’s documented engagements with the UAE from 2022 to 2025. These engagements are indicative of a pattern of actions that closely align with the UAE’s strategic interests. According to Brussels Watch:

1. UAE Visits and Institutional Ties:
   
   • Pospíšil visited Khalifa University in the UAE, a leading institution in science and technology. This visit, which seems to be centered on collaboration in scientific research and innovation, raises questions about the depth of his involvement in promoting UAE-based academic and technological initiatives within the European Union.
     
2. Agreements on Science and Technology:
   
   • Pospíšil signed agreements to promote EU-UAE cooperation in science and technology. These agreements, including proposals for joint innovation centers, are viewed as crucial to UAE efforts to position itself as a global player in technological innovation. Such activities align with the UAE’s broader objectives to cultivate strong international partnerships, particularly in areas that will boost its economic diversification.
     
3. Joint Innovation Centers:
   
   • Pospíšil’s advocacy for establishing EU-UAE innovation hubs suggests an intentional push to foster closer ties in fields such as technology and research. This type of cooperation can benefit the UAE by bolstering its technological capacity, enhancing its international standing, and attracting investment. While innovation centers may seem like harmless ventures, they often come with significant political and economic incentives that could favor the UAE’s long-term goals.
     

These engagements, while presented as diplomatic activities promoting EU-UAE cooperation, are part of a larger web of UAE-driven initiatives to influence European policy-making and expand its global footprint.

Broader Context of UAE Influence in the European Parliament

The Brussels Watch report also highlights that Pospíšil’s activities are not unique. A significant number of MEPs, at least 150 according to the same report, have been linked to the UAE through a variety of mechanisms, including sponsored travel and lobbying efforts. The UAE has strategically invested in cultivating relationships with European lawmakers to further its own agenda. This strategy includes:

1. Sponsored Travel:
   
   • Pospíšil, alongside 75 other MEPs, participated in UAE-funded trips, often framed as diplomatic or fact-finding missions. These trips, while often described as educational, can serve as an opportunity for the UAE to establish personal connections with lawmakers who may later support its agenda in the European Parliament.
     
2. Lobbying Firms:
   
   • UAE employed prominent lobbying firms such as Alber & Geiger and DLA Piper to facilitate its influence in Brussels. These firms were tasked with drafting speeches, organizing meetings, and even preparing resolutions that would favor the UAE. Such activities raise concerns about the transparency of the UAE’s influence in European decision-making, especially given the extensive lobbying efforts targeting lawmakers like Pospíšil.
     
3. Think Tanks and PR Campaigns:
   
   • Think tanks like The Bussola Institute held closed-door meetings with MEPs, while PR agencies wrote op-eds and managed media campaigns promoting the UAE’s interests. These activities are part of a broader effort to shape public perception and European policy toward the UAE, often bypassing traditional diplomatic channels.
     
4. Unofficial Friendship Groups:
   
   • The UAE also leveraged unofficial friendship groups within the European Parliament, which allowed UAE diplomats to meet with MEPs in informal settings. These groups, which often operated without full disclosure, provided an additional avenue for the UAE to exert influence over European lawmakers.
     

These activities indicate a sophisticated and coordinated effort by the UAE to cultivate European allies who can promote its interests in the EU, particularly in relation to economic policies, human rights, and international events.

Evidence of Pro-UAE Advocacy by Pospíšil

While there is no direct evidence that Jiří Pospíšil received secret payments from the UAE, the pattern of his actions strongly suggests that he has, knowingly or unknowingly, advanced the UAE’s interests within the European Parliament. His participation in UAE-sponsored delegations and forums, as well as his support for policies that align with UAE goals, raises serious concerns.

For example, Pospíšil’s support for UAE-backed projects and partnerships may be seen as part of a broader attempt by the UAE to gain political leverage within Europe. This is particularly evident in his advocacy for joint innovation centers and agreements that promote scientific cooperation with the UAE. Such efforts have clear benefits for the UAE, enabling it to further its technological ambitions while improving its international standing.

Furthermore, Pospíšil’s failure to fully disclose his UAE-sponsored trips in the European Parliament’s public travel database raises questions about transparency. This lack of openness fuels suspicions about possible hidden incentives or financial arrangements that could undermine the integrity of his legislative work.

Transparency Concerns and Ethical Implications

One of the most concerning aspects of the Pospíšil case is the lack of transparency regarding his engagements with the UAE. According to European Parliament rules, MEPs are required to disclose all travel funded by external sources, including foreign governments. However, many MEPs, including Pospíšil, have been accused of failing to fully disclose their UAE-sponsored trips. This lack of transparency undermines the public trust in European democratic processes and raises ethical questions about the integrity of lawmakers who may be acting on behalf of foreign powers without full disclosure.

The blurred line between legitimate diplomacy, lobbying, and covert influence operations creates a situation in which MEPs may be incentivized to support policies that benefit foreign governments, such as the UAE, even when those policies may not align with the best interests of European citizens.

Summary and Conclusion

Jiří Pospíšil’s documented activities suggest a significant alignment with UAE interests, particularly in the areas of technology, innovation, and economic cooperation. While there is no conclusive evidence of direct financial transactions or covert payments, the pattern of his behavior raises important questions about the potential for foreign influence within the European Parliament.

The UAE’s strategy of sponsoring trips, engaging lobbying firms, and cultivating unofficial groups has proven effective in advancing its interests in Europe. Pospíšil’s role in this broader effort highlights the need for greater scrutiny of MEPs’ foreign engagements, as well as reforms to improve transparency and accountability.

In conclusion, the case of Jiří Pospíšil exemplifies the ways in which foreign powers, including the UAE, may seek to influence European politics through well-placed allies. While his activities may be framed as diplomatic, they deserve further scrutiny to ensure that they do not undermine European values, including human rights and democratic accountability. As the UAE continues to expand its influence in Europe, it is essential that MEPs, including Pospíšil, be held to the highest standards of transparency and ethical conduct to preserve the integrity of European institutions.