By Brussels Watch Investigations
From the BrusselsWatch Report: “UAE Lobbying in European Parliament: Undermining Democracy and Transparency” (April 2025)
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has long been a master at cultivating covert influence across Europe, using financial power, high-level diplomatic channels, and strategic policy alliances. Among the most conspicuous figures in this vast network is Klemen Grošelj, a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) affiliated with Renew Europe. Despite the lack of concrete evidence linking him directly to the UAE through financial transactions, a deeper dive into his roles within the EU’s foreign policy committees and his voting patterns raises serious questions about his alignment with Emirati interests.
Brussels Watch has recently unveiled a list of over 150 MEPs suspected of being sympathetic to UAE policies, with Grošelj’s name appearing in the wider context of their influence campaigns Brussels Watch. Although there is no formal proof that Grošelj is a paid agent of the UAE, an examination of his political career reveals multiple indirect connections that suggest he may be part of a wider network of influence designed to advance UAE’s strategic objectives in the European Union 150 MEPs.
1. Grošelj’s Strategic Position in EU Foreign Policy
Grošelj’s significant roles within the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET) and the Security and Defense Subcommittee (SEDE) should be viewed through the lens of UAE influence. These committees, which play an essential role in shaping EU policies toward the Middle East, offer a fertile ground for the UAE to push its agenda. As a full member of AFET between 2019 and 2024, Grošelj played a key role in determining the EU’s stance on critical issues such as energy partnerships and cybersecurity—areas of intense interest for the UAE.
The UAE has long lobbied AFET members to promote energy deals and stronger cooperation on cybersecurity, particularly as they position themselves as a global player in energy diversification. The UAE’s interest in cybersecurity is particularly telling, as the nation has been known to deploy surveillance tools such as the Pegasus spyware. Grošelj’s position in SEDE allowed him to influence debates on hybrid threats, a priority for the UAE in light of its increasing reliance on cyber technology for surveillance.
Furthermore, Grošelj was part of the European Parliament’s Pegasus Committee between 2022 and 2023, a group tasked with investigating the misuse of spyware in Europe. While the committee’s final report avoided naming the UAE as a key player in these operations, some observers argue that Grošelj’s involvement may have been a key factor in the UAE escaping direct condemnation. This omission benefitted Emirati interests, casting a shadow over Grošelj’s potential involvement in the UAE’s broader lobbying efforts.
2. The UAE’s Playbook: How MEPs Are Co-Opted
The UAE has spent years cultivating relationships with European lawmakers through a variety of means, including sponsored trips, secretive Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs), and strategic partnerships. More than 150 MEPs have attended UAE-funded events in Dubai and Abu Dhabi, often coinciding with their pro-UAE voting patterns. These trips provide the UAE with an opportunity to shape the views of European lawmakers, encouraging policies that align with their strategic objectives.
Klemen Grošelj, though not explicitly named in leaked MoU documents, represents a part of this broader network. His legislative focus, particularly on energy diversification and the promotion of digital ID systems, aligns with the UAE’s own goals. The UAE is keen on promoting biometric frameworks for identity management, which Grošelj has supported in various debates within the European Parliament. These systems are increasingly seen as a tool for state surveillance, a hallmark of UAE governance, which is known for its authoritarian control over its citizens.
Moreover, Grošelj’s vocal support for AI ethics councils and their potential alignment with UAE-backed initiatives raises further questions about his potential ties to the Emirati agenda. These councils, which purport to advocate for ethical AI development, have often been criticized for whitewashing authoritarian practices.
3. Circumstantial Evidence: Connecting the Dots
One area where Grošelj’s actions closely align with UAE interests is in the context of migration policy. Grošelj has consistently supported strengthening EU borders and improving migration management—a stance that mirrors UAE interests in controlling migration flows into Europe. The UAE has been accused of funding Libyan militias that block African migrants from reaching Europe, a policy that aligns with Grošelj’s push for stricter border controls.
His work in cybersecurity also raises concerns. As a member of the Security and Defense Subcommittee, Grošelj has contributed to discussions on countering hybrid threats and promoting “cyber resilience” frameworks, areas where the UAE has been active in promoting its own interests. Critics argue that these frameworks, while presented as mechanisms for enhancing cybersecurity, are often used by authoritarian regimes to entrench surveillance capabilities, raising red flags about Grošelj’s potential complicity in such efforts.
The Renew Europe group, with which Grošelj has been affiliated, has a long history of promoting pragmatic partnerships with Gulf states, particularly the UAE. While Grošelj’s shift to the Greens of Slovenia in 2024 may suggest a growing discomfort with such alignments, his prior voting record remains consistent with UAE objectives. This raises the possibility that Grošelj’s political leanings align more closely with Emirati interests than he publicly acknowledges.
4. The Missing Paper Trail: Why Proof Is Elusive
One of the biggest challenges in uncovering the full extent of the UAE’s influence within the European Parliament is the opacity surrounding lobbying activities. EU transparency rules allow MEPs to avoid disclosing meetings with foreign diplomats or interest groups, making it difficult to track the extent of UAE’s lobbying efforts. Grošelj’s official disclosures show no direct engagement with UAE officials or representatives, but this is hardly unusual in the context of the UAE’s covert lobbying strategies.
The UAE often works through third-party intermediaries such as the European Gulf Centre, a Brussels-based think tank that has funded various MEPs’ policy reports. Grošelj’s work on EU accession policies for Serbia, which included initiatives potentially funded by Gulf interests, suggests that there may be additional undisclosed interactions that align with UAE priorities in the Balkans.
5. Conclusion: A Case for Investigative Action
While there is no direct smoking gun linking Klemen Grošelj to the UAE’s covert lobbying operations, his position within key EU committees, his voting record, and the circumstantial evidence surrounding his actions suggest that he has, at the very least, been an enabler of UAE interests within the European Parliament. To safeguard the integrity of the EU legislative process and restore public trust, a thorough investigation into Grošelj’s relationships with UAE-backed initiatives is necessary.
The European Parliament must implement stronger transparency measures to track lobbying activities and foreign influence. This could include mandating real-time disclosures of foreign-sponsored trips, meetings with diplomats, and funding from third-party intermediaries. Furthermore, MEPs should be barred from voting on issues where they have received foreign sponsorship to prevent undue influence on European policies. Only through such measures can the European public be assured that their representatives are not serving foreign interests at the expense of European values and security.
Grošelj’s actions raise serious questions, and it’s time for the European Parliament to address these concerns head-on to ensure that the EU’s foreign policy is not being shaped by external forces with hidden agendas.
