Europe’s security is “at a turning point”, the president of the European Commission has said, as leaders from major European powers prepared to meet in Paris for emergency talks on their role in an eventual ceasefire in Ukraine.
After last week’s shock move by the US to sideline Kyiv and its European backers from peace negotiations, Ursula von der Leyen said the issue was “about Ukraine – but also about us. We need an urgency mindset. We need a surge in defence. And we need both of them now.”
The British prime minister, Keir Starmer, echoed her sentiments, telling reporters before heading to the French capital: “This isn’t just about the frontline in Ukraine. It’s the frontline of Europe and of the UK. It’s about our national security.”
Starmer added: “We need to step up in terms of our collective response in Europe. And by that, I mean capability, by that I mean playing our full part when it comes to the defence of the sovereignty of Ukraine if there’s a peace agreement.”
Did you just call the meeting where EU decides their approach to the conflict in Ukraine with waning American support a fucking brainstorming session? This is not fantasy football. People’s lives are at stake, both in Ukraine and otherwise. If the world wants for the EU to show a united front, then why not have a fucking summit, instead of cherry-picking?
Adding to my answer, it is just as I said. The reps of only those 8 countries were invited, plus Ursula von der Leyen, Antonio Costa and Mark Rutte. This is not an EU summit. That’s the entire problem.
The EU is deciding jackshit at that meeting since when are the Brits part of the EU. The foreign affairs council has a regular meeting on the 24th. General affairs, informally today and tomorrow, 25th formally… EU summits are a dime a dozen.
Go, call for an emergency EU summit. What you’ll hear back is “what is the agenda, what precisely are we talking about, what are the proposals you’re making”.
Which is why I said brainstorming: They’re figuring out, in a non-EU format, because the UK is supposed to be part of this, what to propose at an actual EU summit.
OK if they’re a dime a dozen, then why not drop a dime and call a god damn EU summit? The agenda is pretty fucking clear, no? What are we doing about Ukraine? Why leave us in the cold? The fact that the UK is invited but Eastern EU isn’t is so fucking insane. Actually, let’s go a step further. Why wasn’t Turkey invited? It’s not EU and Erdogan is a piece of shit, sure, but I’m betting those Bayraktar drones would prove pretty useful during wartime, no? Add to that the fact that it also shares the Black Sea with Ukraine. Really ask yourself the question: What was the criteria for an invitation? The UK was invited so it’s not about being in the EU. All of Eastern EU + Turkey wasn’t invited, so it must not be about military might and strategic relevance. So what are the criteria?
I’ve said it once, I’ll say it again: If you want a united EU, then stop treating us as if we’re just a buffer zone between Western Europe and Russia. Enough is enough.
I just invited you (well, presumably, the Romanian government) to do that. And also mentioned how that’s kind of a foot in the mouth moment:
You can’t decided on a “what” question, only on a concrete proposal. A plan. Can you field such a thing? Do you have it somewhere in a drawer? Why have a prominent, high-stakes summit if there’s nothing to decide. Press will be there, expectations high, results are expected. So make sure you can deliver results. Things must be hashed out beforehand using the usual diplomatic channels.
Do you want UK boots next to EU boots on Ukrainian ground? Then include the UK. It can’t be a EU summit because the UK is included. It must be done before the EU thing so we know what the UK is ok with, what not, what its whole idea of the thing is. Outside perception wise, this summit (as opposed to diplomats having a zoom call) is about signalling: The UK is in the fray.
Oh. Good one. But the reason is simple: Because Turkey is a giant PITA both-sides’ing the whole thing. You’ll never get a firm stance out of them, for the simple reason that they don’t do firm stances. They juggle. “Zero problems with any neighbour to bring about the justice that Allah commanded” and they do consider Russia a neighbour.
Not terribly relevant right now, no. It’s not like Turkey wouldn’t be selling them… or that Ukraine didn’t, by now, have actually equally capable to superior drone tech themselves.
No you’re a drunken land bridge to Greece with a language based on whims instead of grammar. If you want to be useful right now, yes, do summit with EU neighbours and Moldova and non-EU Balkans, then bring that to the EU table as France will bring the UK’s stance to the table.
I can’t disprove that I’m part of the Romanian government without revealing personally identifiable information. This is called arguing in bad faith and violates the rules of this community. Read the tab on your right. Furthermore, this is an attack on my character, not my argument.
You are speaking nonsense. If we had to have a plan precooked before we could be invited, what’s the point of the brainstorming session? Did all those 8 countries have a fucking plan too?
If it’s just about signaling that the UK is in the fray, why invite a bunch of EU members to the backdoor meeting? We would have seen each other in the regularly scheduled summit, right?
They consider Russia a client, not a neighbour. Much like anyone else who is willing to dish out some money. I’m not saying they’re morally correct. I’m saying that they are strategically relevant and yet were not invited.
We’re brainstorming, right? If America isn’t selling drones anymore, gotta get 'em from somewhere. You’re just arrogantly writing off a supplier.
Your overt bigotry aside, I bring forth to you again the question, if it’s just about signaling that the UK is in the fray, why invite a bunch of EU members to the backdoor meeting? Much less ignore a bunch of other EU members.
OK so at this point you have sufficiently demonstrated my point. It was never about strategic relevance, because then Romania, Bulgaria and Greece would have been invited. If it was about being in the EU, then they wouldn’t have invited the UK. If it was about military might, they would have invited Turkey. What I can only surmise from here on is the fact that we in Eastern Europe were never part of the equation. We are only here as a buffer. They could have invited our reps just for show, but they couldn’t be assed to do that.
Dude, you’re speaking as if you’re representing all of Romania. IDGAF if you’re in government or not, I assume, and assumed, you to be not.
The point stands, though: “Romania is complaining that there should be a EU summit, well then Romania should bloody call one”.
Before you can do A EU summit. This 8-country one is not a EU one. At a EU summit, actual results will be expected, not everyone wailing, in chorus, “oh, what should be done, what should we do”.
How close are your ties with the UK? I presume France prepared the list together with the UK, those are the ones the UK would want to be on one page before getting serious. In particular, the UK wants boots on the ground, Poland doesn’t want to do that themselves – to, honestly, my surprise. They’ll have to at least agree on a rationale for a difference in stance that doesn’t look silly.
Strategy is not just military tactics.
America is very unlikely to stop selling: Their military-industrial complex is already worried about losing arms sales, blocking arms sales now would cement that, they’d never get the market back. Generally speaking the EU also doesn’t need suppliers to defeat Russia, wouldn’t even have to switch to a war economy, just tax some billionaires.