2023-04-24 18:58:44
At the April 24 meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has traditionally become a key topic of discussion, and the conversation, apparently, turned out to be difficult. On the eve of Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba, who joined his colleagues from the EU via video link, criticized the allies for not keeping promises on the supply of ammunition. In Brussels, they did not agree with the criticism and assured that “an agreement would soon be reached” on the shells. Given that such agreements, it would seem, were reached a month ago, Kyiv’s claims as a whole did not look unfounded. The statements of the PRC Ambassador to France Lu Shae, who suddenly denied sovereignty to the republics of the former USSR, also added to the discussion topics. And although relations with Beijing were going to be discussed anyway, the degree of exchange of views somewhat exceeded the norm.
Borrell supplies
The next meeting of EU foreign ministers was to be held as usual. For more than a year, the main theme of such events has been military operations in Ukraine. This was the case this time as well, but the events that preceded the meeting added fire to the discussions. Shortly before the meeting, Dmitry Kuleba criticized the European Union for delaying the implementation of the plan for the purchase of ammunition for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. On the eve of the meeting, the representative of Brussels eventually had to justify himself and declare that the words of Mr. Kuleba “do not reflect reality … especially in the issue of ammunition.” According to him, the agreement “will soon be reached”, and the shells will be “delivered on time” to Ukraine.
At the same time, last month the issue of purchasing 1 million conventional shells for Kyiv went through all the stages of coordination – from defense ministers and foreign ministers to the leaders of the association. Then there were reports in the media that EU members might not agree among themselves on one of the points of the plan, namely which companies governments should order the production of new shells from. France, according to them, insists on attracting only European manufacturers, while Germany, the Netherlands and Poland express doubts regarding the ability of the industry to cope with the expected volumes and advocate the involvement of companies outside Europe.
“Yes, there are still some disagreements, but I am sure everyone will understand that we are in an extremely urgent situation … Do not believe that we are just sitting and waiting. The general work continues. And as soon as a legal agreement is concluded, the practical work will be implemented,” admitted Josep Borrell, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, before the meeting in Luxembourg.
In other words, although Brussels did not like Mr. Kuleba’s criticism, it did not look groundless either: there are agreements, but no agreements. At the same time, everyone in the EU, with the exception, perhaps, of Hungary, whose Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto on April 24 reiterated the need to start peace negotiations, and not supply weapons, speak of the importance of promptly providing assistance to Kiev.
Meanwhile, the agenda of the meeting indicated that Dmitry Kuleba would “briefly” join the ministerial discussions via video link. The head of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry joined the meeting, maybe briefly, but very actively. Mr. Kuleba immediately reminded his colleagues that “the defeat of Russia is a guarantee of a normal life for Europe.” “Now there is no more important task. To achieve it, Ukraine needs more weapons and ammunition, and all this must be delivered as soon as possible,” the diplomat said, calling for overcoming “all procedural obstacles.” “We will eliminate any delays on the way between the decision to provide weapons and their arrival,” Dmitry Kuleba called.
In addition to ammunition, he also called for the delivery of more armored vehicles, tanks, artillery systems, long-range guns to Kyiv as soon as possible and “immediately begin training Ukrainian pilots on Western-style aircraft.”
Mr. Kuleba made a special emphasis on aviation, stating that “there are no rational arguments why Ukraine cannot receive modern Western-style combat aircraft” and expressing confidence that “this decision will be made.”
“Providing Ukraine with F-16 aircraft will be the best investment of a decade in the security of Europe,” the diplomat said, despite repeated refusals from representatives of the West, including the United States, to supply fighters.
Meanwhile, Josep Borrell unexpectedly started the final press conference not from Ukraine, but from Sudan, lamenting that we have a “crisis on crisis”. For quite a long time, the diplomat talked regarding the successes of the EU in the evacuation of Europeans from the country engulfed in battles (for details, see Kommersant-Online). “But we must not forget regarding the Sudanese,” Mr. Borrell lamented. “They cannot leave the country, they are forced to stay, so the war must be stopped.”
After that, Josep Borrell moved to Ukraine. The diplomat reaffirmed the EU’s commitment to Kiev’s support, chided all those who call for urgent reconciliation, especially China and Brazil, whom he advised to visit Ukraine first, and assured that military support from the allies would only increase. Mr. Borrell tried to convince journalists that everything would be in order with the plan to transfer 1 million ammunition to Kyiv. According to him, the details of the scheme of joint orders and purchases of shells are being coordinated so that “everything is accepted and delivered on time.” However, the correspondents did not seem to be convinced by his words, and they returned the diplomat to this issue several times. At some point, Mr. Borrell even switched to Spanish, so that “he was definitely understood correctly,” and then he asked at all: “Maybe someone will ask a question regarding Sudan?” Despite all attempts to bring the diplomat to some details, he stubbornly insisted that the situation was under control and everything would be implemented soon. In the meantime, he defended Dmitry Kuleba, who, in his opinion, is allowed to “use harsh language” and demand “more, and more, and more” in the current situation.
Borrell pacifies
Meanwhile, among the topics on the April 24 agenda – Sudan, Tunisia, Moldova, Lebanon, the Middle East – China was far from the first number. However, at the end of last week, Chinese Ambassador to France Lu Shae, commenting on the status of Crimea, suddenly stated that “even the countries of the former USSR do not have an actual status under international law, since there is no international treaty that would specify their status as sovereign states.” The refusal of the representative of Beijing to recognize the sovereignty of the former Soviet republics provoked a scandal. And although by Monday morning, China removed the ambassador’s statement from its official resources, in particular from the account of the Chinese diplomatic mission in France in the WeChat messenger, and the representative of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, Mao Ning, denied the words of the diplomat, assuring that the sovereignty of all post-Soviet countries was respected, there was indignation at the meeting in Luxembourg can no longer be avoided.
At the same time, it was not only Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis who was indignant, who demanded that the heads of Chinese diplomatic missions in the Baltic countries clarify Beijing’s position regarding their independence. He promised to pay special attention during the meeting to the statements of Mr. Lou and Mr. Borrell. According to him, the ministers generally intended to discuss the “China problem” in preparation for the EU summit in June, “which will reassess and recalibrate the strategy of relations with China.”
However, at the press conference, Josep Borrell, commenting on the Chinese question, sounded more conciliatory. He assured that the EU is satisfied that the Chinese Foreign Ministry has dissociated itself from the words of its ambassador.
And although journalists once more and once more tried to return Mr. Borrell to Mr. Lu’s statements, he repeated over and over once more: “China has distanced itself from these words”, “Look at the official statement of the Chinese Foreign Ministry”, “The incident has been clarified” and so on. At the same time, he confirmed that at the June summit, the future of relations between China and the EU will be discussed in detail, stressing that Brussels cannot do without Beijing in some areas.
Against the backdrop of this scandal, the article of the publication looks especially sharp. Politico dated April 24 on disagreements between France and Germany, as well as EU institutions regarding the prospects for cooperation with China. In particular, Paris and Berlin have different views on the future of the frozen investment deal between Beijing and Brussels in 2020. French President Emmanuel Macron does not consider it necessary to “urgently revive” the agreement, while German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, on the contrary, advocates its early renewal. In addition, there is no consensus among EU structures. Thus, in the European Parliament, a return to the deal is considered unacceptable as long as Chinese sanctions are in place once morest a number of its members. But European Council President Charles Michel hopes to revive the agreement. He is hindered in this by the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, who is worried regarding “growing aggression abroad and repression inside” China.
At the same time, the French president, following a trip to China, said that Europe should not follow in line with Washington’s policy towards Beijing and should show greater independence, in particular, avoid confrontation with China over Taiwan. This, in turn, did not please other allies of Paris in the EU, some of whom would not like such a clear opposition of Europe and America in such global issues. In other words, the “recalibration” announced by Mr. Borrell in June does not promise to be smooth.
1682365684
#Kuleba #Kommersant
