Prime Minister Xavier Bettel of Luxembourg, the second smallest member state of the EU, was asked on Thursday evening whether his country should not send weapons to Ukraine. Trembled, he replied that the Grand Duchy (with an army of 1,100 men) does not produce them. Sanctions, together with the other EU countries, against Russia. Ever heavier packages. ‘But it takes weeks before the effect is felt.’
The real human suffering this week is, of course, in Ukraine, where President Putin’s troops forcibly waltzed in. But these are not pleasant days for the EU and its member states either: see the failed diplomacy of President Macron and Chancellor Scholz, and the sanctions packages prepared for months, which once they come into effect are obsolete because Putin is more shameless than previously thought.
A German SPD politician called the Russian invasion of Ukraine “a 9/11 moment” for the EU, a wake-up call. It would not be the first time that a crisis has prompted the EU to act unexpectedly. The fact is that if the Polish Prime Minister Morawiecki and his Slovenian colleague Jansa – not friends of Brussels – set themselves up as the Union’s advocate, something is wrong.
Morawiecki was the most outspoken during the emergency meeting of European government leaders on Thursday. “If the EU wants to be relevant, it must act quickly now. The whole world is watching us.’ Putin is paying for the invasion with the billions of euros we pay for Russian oil and gas, he told his EU colleagues. “That has to stop.” Does the EU want to become a geopolitical player? Be militarily stronger? Less dependent on Russian oil and gas?
Sovereign
This ‘strategic autonomy’ was the subject of the nightly discussion between the leaders. Almost all prime ministers and presidents joined the debate. “This war shows that Europe has no choice but to be sovereign,” French President Macron said afterwards.
The EU is nothing militarily, the member states do not want that – no European army. And the EU countries themselves saw the peace dividend after the fall of the Soviet Union as a perpetual windfall, which meant that expenditure also lagged behind NATO. This seems to be turning around, although the question is how long that will take. After all, billions for weapon systems cannot go to healthcare, housing, windmills or agriculture.
The same story applies to the energy supply. Calls from Brussels for more interconnected national networks (power cables, pipelines) were only taken seriously after Putin turned off the gas tap to Ukraine (and thus to Europe) in 2006. The current Russian aggression is forcing the member states to swiftly implement Commissioner Timmermans’ (Green Deal) plans for more (own) sustainable energy. Denial, dismay and then something that resembles development: nothing human is alien to government leaders.
They are difficult decisions. The Commission recently calculated that the green revolution requires an additional investment in EU countries of EUR 520 billion per year. Add that to the hundreds of billions for more defense and security, for the production of European superchips and super batteries, and the desired strategic autonomy comes at a price.
Countermeasures
The same goes for the sanctions against Ukraine, especially if Russia takes countermeasures and boycotts European products. Or supply less gas, causing energy prices to rise even higher. Italian Prime Minister Draghi pointed out to his EU colleagues that his citizens’ purchasing power is under pressure from high electricity and gas tariffs. And the sky-high Italian government debt (more than 160 percent) and rising interest rates. In other words, if you want me to participate in those sanctions and in that strategic autonomy, can those European fiscal rules be cut by an ounce?
Major changes in the EU usually take a long time, especially if member states are asked to cooperate more closely and transfer power to Brussels. The introduction of the euro was discussed thirty years before it was introduced, and then half-baked.
Lithuanian President Nauseda warned that the EU can no longer afford the luxury of operating as a ‘debate club’. Recent history shows that if it really has to be – in existential crises – the EU can act at lightning speed. When the euro was at stake (2011-2012), a ‘big bazooka’ (emergency fund of 500 billion euros) was created and the supervision of major banks was transferred to the ECB. In the migration crisis (2015-2016), the Union suddenly changed its asylum policy by buying off the reception of migrants in Turkey. During the corona pandemic, member states gave the Commission the power to buy the life-saving vaccines and to borrow 750 billion euros from the capital market for a new recovery fund. Putin’s unbridled aggression could become the catalyst for the EU’s strategic ambitions.