In the talks between Ukraine, Russia and the United States, Europe will be represented by a team including Germany, France, Poland, Italy and Great Britain, as well as the European Commission and the European Council. Agreements on this matter were made on Friday during the EU summit in Dublin.
Different competences, different interests
As described by Politico, some European leaders supported the appointment of a single, strong negotiator.
"Some European leaders wanted to appoint a superhero negotiator who would stand up to Russian leader Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, ensure a fair peace agreement for Ukraine and guard the security of Europe itself," the portal wrote.
Such a model would emphasize the unity of Europe and facilitate negotiations. However, Medium points out that in practice this would be difficult to implement. The European Commission is responsible, among others, for sanctions and issues related to Ukraine's integration with the EU, while matters relating to the security of the continent, NATO or the deployment of troops remain the responsibility of countries and the North Atlantic Alliance.
"The European Commission cannot negotiate on the future security architecture in Europe, because it falls within the competences of NATO and the capitals. On the other hand, NATO, France and Germany cannot negotiate on EU sanctions or Ukraine's entry into the EU, because these issues fall within the competences of the EC. Moreover, it would be unrealistic to expect that the E3, i.e. the economic and military powers: Germany, France and Great Britain, would allow the Commission, the European Council or NATO to negotiate on its own behalf in all these matters," the portal emphasizes.
Politico also emphasizes that non-EU countries, including Norway, Turkey and Moldova, should be included in any possible arrangements.
The reason Europe has not yet found one person to represent it as a whole is because Europe is not a superstate, an anonymous EU diplomat told Politico.
Dispute over security talks
According to the portal, the most difficult task for the European team will be to agree on a position on Russian demands regarding a new security system in Europe.
Ukrainian representatives reportedly noted that the Russian delegation softened its approach somewhat when the opportunity to talk about Moscow's broader expectations regarding the security of the continent arose. However, Europeans still disagree on whether such issues should be discussed only after peace is concluded in Ukraine or in parallel with the war negotiations.
The head of EU diplomacy, Kaja Kallas, is in favor of starting talks on the future of NATO, the presence of troops and contacts with Russia only after reaching a peace agreement on Ukraine. Some EU representatives are ready to conduct both processes simultaneously.
According to the portal, it will be crucial to arrange the talks in such a way that Russia can present its demands regarding regional security, but so that their fulfillment does not become a condition for concluding peace in Ukraine. If the technical negotiations prove fruitful, leaders could join the talks at a later stage and approve the final agreement.
Russia's greedy demands
According to the media, including the New York Times and the German Bild, Russia presented a document during recent talks with Americans and Ukrainians in Abu Dhabi, the so-called non-paper, in which she unofficially presented her demands regarding the post-war "security architecture" in Europe. Many of Moscow's demands coincided with what the Kremlin demanded before a full-scale attack on Ukraine. It was about, among other things, for the withdrawal of NATO forces from the Baltic countries and Finland's exit from the Alliance.
Piotr Strach from Poland 2050 spoke in Saturday's program Checking! on RMF FM that Russian demands to limit NATO's presence in Europe should be treated as a threat to the entire continent, not just Ukraine.
Former deputy head of the Ministry of National Defence, Michał Dworczyk, who was also a guest of the program, pointed out that the interests of individual European countries are not always consistent with Polish ones.
