Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University Faculty Member Prof. Dr. Mustafa Nail Alkan wrote the agenda of the EU Defense Ministers Meeting in Brussels, security discussions in the EU and the concrete outcomes of the meeting for AA Analysis.
At the meeting of the European Union (EU) Defense Ministers held in Brussels on September 28, 2026, the Russia-Ukraine war, hybrid threats originating from Russia, and the need to identify and strengthen the gaps in Europe's defense capacity came to the fore on Europe's security agenda. Topics regarding Ukraine's defense needs, the development of Europe's common defense capacity and the establishment of a more effective response mechanism at the EU level against new security threats were also discussed at the meeting. In this context, the meeting reveals Europe's quest to both strengthen its current defense capacity and take a more active role in the process regarding the future of the Ukrainian war, which directly affects its security.
Seeking influence in the Russia-Ukraine war
Recently, it seems that the United States of America (USA) has become a more prominent interlocutor in contacts with Russia regarding the Ukraine war. The fact that a significant part of the diplomatic initiatives to end the war are taking shape along the Washington-Moscow line is not just a matter of diplomatic representation for Europe. The Ukrainian war is a war that directly affects the European security architecture and the security of EU member states. Despite this, the fact that European countries remain in a limited position in basic contacts regarding the future of war causes the EU to not be effective enough in a process where its own security interests are determined. Therefore, Europe's quest to become a more direct actor and interlocutor on the Ukraine issue provides an important framework for evaluating the September 28 meeting.
This situation becomes more evident when evaluated together with the meeting held in New York between German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. The meeting, which was held upon Germany's request, took place after the drone attack at Germany's Leipzig-Halle Airport, which Germany considered to be linked to Russia. When Wadephul was asked whether negotiations were being held with Russia, he put forward an approach such as "negotiations are not made with friends, but negotiations are made with enemies." Therefore, rather than reaching a concrete result in the talks, it is important for Germany to keep the channel of direct contact and dialogue open with Russia, even in an environment where tensions rise.
Security discussions in the EU
Before the September 28 meeting, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas stated that Europe's defense investments have increased, but there are still "big gaps" in defense capacity. Stating that member countries allocate an average of 2.2 percent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defense, Kallas emphasized that the main issue now is how investments will close concrete capacity gaps.
When we look at the statements made after the meeting, it seems that the discussion on creating a new security mechanism, as well as the quest to strengthen the EU's defense capacity, has not yet been concluded. No concrete decision came out of the meeting regarding the "Emergency Security Protocol" proposed by EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Kallas stated that the meeting was an exchange of views on this issue at the first and very early stage, that not all member states expressed their opinions and that a majority cannot be spoken of at the current stage. While some countries support such a mechanism for security crises that fall below the threshold of armed attack, many countries are waiting for more concrete explanations on how the mechanism will work. For this reason, Kallas stated that negotiations will continue with member states at different levels, especially through ambassadors and existing EU formats.
Therefore, no final decision was made on this issue at the meeting. The proposed mechanism aims to provide a common response from the European front to security crises such as sabotage, cyber attacks and disinformation, which are considered within the scope of armed attack, regulated in the 7th paragraph of Article 42 of the EU Treaty.
One of the main concerns that come to the fore in the discussions regarding the mechanism is the possibility of duplication with NATO and the emergence of a parallel security structure. Kaja Kallas stated that many member states emphasized that the mechanism should be strictly complementary to NATO and should not create a new structure alongside existing NATO structures. The debate is therefore not only about whether a new EU mechanism is needed, but also how such a mechanism will be compatible with NATO's existing security architecture and work in a complementary manner. The fact that Kallas stated that contacts on this issue are continuing with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte shows that this reservation is an important element in the design of the mechanism.
In the background of the security debate, there are also hybrid threats originating from Russia. Kallas, intelligence data; He stated that it confirms that Russia is planning further acts of sabotage, is trying to weaken support for Ukraine by dividing and intimidating European societies, and is planning attacks on European democracies. Kallas also stated that Ukraine was again exposed to intense attacks and that there was an urgent need for air defense systems.
Concrete outputs: 5 joint projects
One of the concrete outcomes of the meeting in this field is the approval of 5 joint defense projects. These; They can be listed as "European UAV and Anti-UAV Systems Initiative", "Integrated Sea and Seabed Defense" project, "SPACE" project, "EU Federative Integrated Air and Missile Defense" and "Eastern Wing Surveillance" project. Making the projects eligible for financing within the scope of the European Defense Industry Program (EDIP) embodies the quest to close the gaps in Europe's defense capacity through joint projects.
In this context, two different results emerge from the September 28 meeting. First, concrete progress has been made on 5 joint projects to improve Europe's defense capacity. Secondly, there is no common decision yet on Europe creating a new security mechanism. Therefore, while the EU is trying to strengthen its defense capacity with concrete projects, on the other hand, it is trying to resolve differences of opinion on which security crises and through which political mechanism this capacity will be used.
As a result, the meeting reveals Europe's need not only to increase its defense capacity, but also to become a more direct actor in the diplomatic process regarding the future of the Ukrainian war. At a time when Russia-USA contacts come to the fore, Europe's desire to have a say in the future of a war that directly affects its own security can be considered one of the basic elements of this quest.
