Ursula von der Leyen urges ‘emergency mindset’ in response to US decision to enter bilateral talks with Russia

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.”

MBFC
Archive

  • TsarVul@lemmy.worldEnglish
    34·
    5 days ago

    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:

    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 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.

    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?

    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.

    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?

    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.

    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.

    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.

    We’re brainstorming, right? If America isn’t selling drones anymore, gotta get 'em from somewhere. You’re just arrogantly writing off a supplier.

    No you’re a drunken land bridge to Greece with a language without grammatical exceptions, because for there to be exceptions there would have to be rules in the first place. 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.

    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.

    • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
      54·
      5 days ago

      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.

      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”.

      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?

      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”.

      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?

      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.

      It was never about strategic relevance, because then Romania, Bulgaria and Greece would have been invited.

      Strategy is not just military tactics.

      We’re brainstorming, right? If America isn’t selling drones anymore, gotta get 'em from somewhere. You’re just arrogantly writing off a supplier.

      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.