The European Union (EU) has deployed a huge mission composed of 200 individuals, including 72 long-term observers, to observe the conduct of the 12 May midterm elections for an urgent reason that would be hard to fathom.

According to the EU, members of the group, representing experts from all 27 EU member states, will observe the polls in pairs and cover all regions, including the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM).

Given the volatile environment until the balloting and the days after, this will represent a security nightmare for the Philippine National Police (PNP).

The PNP will have to secure all of the supposed guardians of democracy while maintaining peace and order during this period.

The EU said the huge contingent was unprecedented and was in response to the government’s “openness” to the bloc’s offer to monitor the polls.

The suggestion of “long-term” watchers means the bloc will forever be observing our national elections.

The EU said the election observer mission (EOM) aims to enhance transparency and democratic standards. But does it really need 200 delegates, which could interfere with the smooth conduct of the polls?

The unprecedented scale raises legitimate concerns about a perceived intrusion, political polarization, security challenges, and geopolitical implications.

The EU must tread a fine line between avoiding being seen as an overbearing foreign presence and fulfilling its mandate to promote transparency.

First, the EU should be transparent about the purpose and method of deploying the observers.

Will they receive enhanced training on cultural and political dynamics, particularly for deployments in sensitive regions like the BARMM, to minimize misunderstandings during interactions with communities they would be assigned to?

An observer presence in election hotspots is tricky due to the security risks and escalated local tensions.

There is also the question of the propriety of the mission members issuing statements that may fuel disputes.

The EU’s observers must proactively communicate their role, emphasizing their neutrality and observational mandate to counter misinterpretations. Engaging local media and civil society early is needed to establish their role in the polls.

With the number of established poll watchdogs like the National Movement for Free Elections, the 200 EU observers may affect the elections themselves.

The EU should instead partner with independent poll monitoring groups to reduce the perception of foreign influence in the observation process.

The EU’s focus on issues like disinformation, foreign interference, and election-related violence addresses fundamental challenges in the electoral landscape. Still, it may introduce the danger of overreach since those are functions for law enforcers.

As Chief Observer Marta Temido highlighted, the EU is deploying social media and media analyst units supposedly to identify manipulative tactics that could undermine voter trust.

While the EU observations could offer valuable insights to improve future elections, considering the immense size of the contingent there could be a geopolitical backlash.

The deployment occurs against the backdrop of geopolitical tensions, particularly concerns about Chinese influence on the midterms.

The National Security Council recently flagged potential Chinese interference in the 2025 elections, and the EU’s focus on monitoring foreign interference aligns with these concerns.

While this alignment may strengthen EU-Philippines relations, it also risks antagonizing China and complicating the Philippines’ delicate balancing act in its foreign relations.

Worse, groups could weaponize the EU’s presence to advance their own agendas, such as portraying the mission as a Western counterweight to Chinese influence.

The drawbacks to the frequent and ever-growing presence of “observers” outweigh the benefits, so thanks but no thanks, EU.