European Central Bank president next year and replace up to two-thirds of the bank’s six-member executive board in an intricate game of political chess among the bloc’s 21 countries.
The following explains who gets replaced, how and why this matters for the euro zone’s most powerful financial institution and the future of Europe.
WHO IS GOING?
Germany’s Isabel Schnabel, the executive board member responsible for market operations, is leaving to take up a position at the International Monetary Fund.
The term of Ireland’s Philip Lane, the ECB’s chief economist, ends on May 31.
ECB President Christine Lagarde’s term runs until October 31, 2027, but she has been a subject of persistent rumours — which she has not fully denied — that she will step down early.
WHO COULD REPLACE THEM?
That is the key question.
Executive board members are appointed by euro zone leaders, usually one at a time. But with several positions opening in quick succession, officials are more likely to negotiate a broader package of appointments.
Because the board is expected to maintain political and geographic balance, each appointment affects the others.
The process is likely to begin with the presidency before moving to the remaining roles.
Frontrunners to succeed Lagarde are Bank for International Settlements General Manager Pablo Hernandez de Cos and former Dutch central bank chief Klaas Knot. However, ECB appointments are highly political and often form part of wider negotiations across European institutions, meaning other candidates could still emerge.
HOW DOES DOMESTIC POLITICS COME INTO PLAY?
In theory, it should not. In practice, politics is likely to be a major factor.
France holds a presidential election next spring and far-right leader Marine Le Pen, a critic of European integration, is currently leading opinion polls. That could increase pressure on President Emmanuel Macron to secure an ECB deal before a new French leader takes office.
In Germany, growing support for the far right has weakened Chancellor Friedrich Merz, potentially limiting the political capital he can devote to ECB negotiations.
Spain is also approaching a 2027 election and has made clear it will push for the ECB presidency.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Schnabel’s departure has already created a vacancy, allowing euro zone finance ministers to launch a formal selection process as early as next month.
The other positions will not become vacant until later, but discussions about a broader package are likely to begin informally beforehand.
Because the appointments are interconnected, officials are expected to agree an overall framework first and then implement it as vacancies arise.
WHAT ARE THE UNWRITTEN RULES?
Any euro zone country can compete for one of the six executive board seats.
In practice, however, France, Germany and Italy have long held de facto permanent seats. Spain is also arguing it should have a permanent seat, suggesting that 17 euro zone members could be splitting the remaining two spots.
A country can have only one representative on the board. If Knot becomes president, fellow Dutch board member Frank Elderson would need to step down, creating another vacancy.
HOW MIGHT IT PLAY OUT?
Several scenarios are possible.
If the hawkish Knot becomes president, the chief economist role could go to a candidate from a country with a softer stance on public spending, such as France.
Germany could then seek Schnabel’s market operations portfolio, while Spain could secure banking supervision after Elderson’s departure.
Under a Spanish president, Germany would likely push for the chief economist job, with France potentially taking the market operations portfolio.
WILL IT AFFECT POLICY?
Yes, but not immediately.
Monetary policy is set by the ECB’s 27-member Governing Council, so personnel changes alone are unlikely to alter the policy path.
But the president’s leadership style matters. Lagarde is widely seen as a consensus-builder who manages the debate and seeks broad agreement, brokering political deals along the way. Supporters say this has helped keep the ECB united, although critics argue it can slow decision-making.
Her predecessor Mario Draghi took a more directive approach, often driving debates and limiting room for compromise. Critics said that left smaller countries feeling marginalised and occasionally prompted public dissent from more conservative policymakers.
