Slovakia won round by new wording on gas transit dispute, but Hungary remains opposed

Jennifer Rankin

Brussels correspondent

Slovakia is expected to support the EU summit text in support of Ukraine, but Hungary is still refusing to sign up, a move that is likely to deepen its isolation.

The EU’s most senior diplomats met on Thursday morning to finetune the language of the final summit text, ahead of the ongoing summit.

Slovakia has been won round, after securing a mention of its gas transit dispute with Ukraine in the text. EU leaders are to call on Slovakia and Ukraine to find “workable solutions to the gas transit issue, including through its resumption,” according to the latest draft text.

Ukraine shut down a pipeline that had been supplying Russian natural gas to Slovakia for decades on 1 January when a transit agreement expired, triggering threats by Slovakia’s prime minister Robert Fico to cut financial support for Ukrainian refugees.

Hungary is not so easily solved.

Viktor Orbán wants the EU to copy Trump’s diplomacy and insists that the UN resolution drafted by the US that makes no criticism of Moscow – and was supported by Russia and Belarus – makes all previous EU declarations redundant.

EU sources suggested it was unlikely EU leaders would be up in the small hours trying to talk Orbán around. As an alternative European Council President António Costa could issue conclusions backed by the other 26 member states, rather than formal council conclusions.

Jakub Krupa

Earlier today I tried to explain the views of Slovakia and Hungary, the two countries indicating their scepticism about the new European strategy set to be endorsed at today’s European Council, so let’s get the latest on that…

In the meantime, Nato secretary general Mark Rutte welcomed Polish president Andrzej Duda to Brussels.

Rutte praised Poland for “lead by example when it comes to investing in defence, with 4.7% defence expenditure pledged for this year.”

Duda picked up this theme, formally suggesting that all Nato countries should raise defence spending to at least 3% of GDP immediately, effective from the alliance’s upcoming summit in The Hague in late June.

“The situation is such that we cannot wait until 2030,” he added.

Duda, who recently met with US president Donald Trump on the sidelines of the CPAC conference in the US, warned against the “revival of the Russian imperialism.”

“That risk is real, particularly … on the eastern flank … One is 100% certain: if the entire Nato does not increase its defence spending, then unfortunately, Putin may want to attack again, because there is not enough deterrence,” he said.

But hitting very similar tones to Kellogg’s, he urged Ukraine’s Zelenskyy to return to the negotiating table with the US and sign the minerals deal.

“If they reach a deal, Ukraine will become a place of strategic importance for the US, because of the minerals sourced from Ukraine for the US,” he said.

“These are very difficult, spectacularly fierce negotiations, but I deeply believe that we are still in talks, and this is the fundamental issue,” he said.

If you read Kellogg’s comments on Ukraine below, but actually prefer to watch him say this over my write up, here are the highlights, courtesy of our fantastic video team:

The issue of what to do with frozen assets, mentioned earlier by Kellogg, appears to be something that divides European allies.

Poland’s Donald Tusk said publicly on the weekend that there was “no unity” on seizing Russian assets in the west, as even as all leaders agreed it was a good idea in theory, some countries “feared the consequences either for the euro or the banking system”.

“Poland is very strongly pressing for this, but, let’s be real, as we are not in the eurozone, our voice in this discussion will not be decisive,” he said.

Belgian prime minister Bart de Wever picked up this theme today, addressing this issue on his arrival for today’s European Council, and presenting the other side of the argument.

He said he “advocated great caution when it comes to those frozen assets.

“At the moment, that is actually a chicken that also lays golden eggs. Those windfall profits are going to Ukraine. As long as that can stay that way, I think, that’s fine,” he said.

But he pushed back on calls for seizing these assets, saying that “countries that are already calling for the confiscation of those funds, they should be well aware of the economic risks they are taking, who will ultimately be the injured party of that kind of operation and the legal risks involved.”

“That is something that can really shock the world financial order. You should not take that lightly,” he said.

US Ukraine envoy Kellogg was also further challenged about the impact of the US decision to stop sharing intelligence with Ukraine, acknowledging the impact, but saying “it was one of the reasons why it was done” for the Ukrainian government to realise how serious the US administration was about ending the war.

The best way I can describe it is sort of like hitting a mule with a two by four across the nose. You get their attention.

…

I made it very clear when I was in Kyiv, the potential for this [and] it was almost like, ‘Well, OK, we hear you.’ Well, no, we’re serious. We’re deeply serious about this.

We let them know that this President is very serious about it and we’re going to end this war. And this is one way to make sure you understand we’re serious about it.

So is it hard? Of course it is, but … it is not like they didn’t know this was coming. They got fair warning that was coming. I told them, and they were told last week as well.

…

They have an ability with the assets they’ve got to continue to prosecute the fight, to do it, but… let’s be obviously, let’s be clear about it. …

If you take away support like that, of course it, it’s important, we know that. But that’s one of the reasons why it was done.

And I think as a result of that, they realise we’re serious and they need to get serious about it as well. …

That 50 minutes in the Oval Office was entirely preventable.

President Trump was very magnanimous in that for the first 30 minutes, I’d ask you to go back and look at the tape, not once, but two or three times, and everything he did. And then it went … south real quick.

Discussing his understanding of any potential security guarantees for Ukraine, Kellogg offered this explanation:

Well, I think when you look at it, there’s a tendency to default to kinetics. When you talk about a security guarantee, that means 50,000 or 100,000 or 80,000 troops right on the border, right on the line of contact.

It is more complete than that.

I think you have to look at it when you talk about security guarantees. It’s not only the kinetic piece, the military piece, which is clearly important, but it’s also the economic piece, the sanctions.

What do you do with the frozen Russian assets? There’s 300 billions in Belgium right now. What are you going to use those with them? Primarily, that’s oligarchs money.

– Do you want to seize it?

I think… President Putin needs to understand those … can be seized, as long as the Europeans are willing to do it.

He also said one example could be tougher enforcement of existing sanctions, including on so-called “shadow fleet,” “that would really make everybody understand, stand up and say, OK, they’re serious about this, [and] bring them to the table.”

He also said that part of discussions with Europeans was about what they meant asking for US “backstop” for any European help for Ukraine.

Kellogg also defended Trump’s decision to pause aid and intelligence, saying he made it clear “it was not over, it is a pause.”

Look, my experience working with [Trump] is. It’s sort of like, if all of you get a contract. When you sign a contract for a car, for a house. Before you go forward, you have a signed contract. …

The reason he [Zelenskyy] came to the White House was to sign a document that was going to say, this is us going forward. It’s not signed.

My point would be, and my personal belief be, you don’t move forward until you get a signed document, period.

… He had an option to do that when I was in Ukraine, they didn’t do it; they had the option to do it last week, and didn’t do it.

I wouldn’t do anything …

When it was put to him that Zelenskyy has now repeatedly offered to sign the deal, he retorted:

There is a difference between offering to do it and doing it.

Sign the document.

…

Once you signed the document, you want to go forward, that you’re serious about it, then I think you can move forward.

I think we’ve seen too many, you know, starts and misses as we go forward on this, I think that’s part of the issue is, how serious are you to get to peace discussions?

He said that “some people misread the room” with Trump, but he declined it “personal” at this stage.

Kellogg was asked if Ukraine gets aid, intelligence back on once it signs the deal.

That is up to the president of the US. I am not the president. I didn’t get a single electoral college vote. It’s up to the president. …

I would never, ever speak for the president. It is going to be his call.

Speaking at the same event, Kellogg disclosed some of the behind-the-scenes preparation before Ukrainian president Zelenskyy’s now infamous visit to the Oval Office last week which led to the cutting of US intelligence.

This is one of those, very candidly, … they brought it on themselves, the Ukrainians.

I’ll kind of give you the background, a little bit of it.

We talked with President Zelensky before that meeting, there were 13 US senators … we said, okay, this is like stage managing. This is what you want to say. It’s basically going to [go like that:] come in, we have a precious metals deal, you’re going to sign the deal, you’re going to have lunch, have a press conference, exit, stage right, and you’re good to go.

What happened? [It] became a very combative conference that went on for almost, what, 50 minutes, that caught everybody by surprise…

And I think what happened is they said, Wait a second, this is not what we thought this was going to be. You don’t negotiate peace discussions in public. You don’t try to challenge the President of the United States in the Oval Office. In fact, you need to side with me and not the Russians.

And he was forewarned. It’s not like President Zelenskyy was not made aware that this is what we wanted out of the Ukrainians to basically go here, set the next stage. It opens up, it goes forward.

So I don’t blame the President of the United States at all.

US Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg is speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations event in Washington just now.

He was just asked about Donald Trump’s decision to suspend aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine, and what was required of Ukraine to get them back.

Here is what he said:

I believe the push is to get them to engage in diplomatic activities … [to get] for lack of a better their term sheet, to get this to the table and say, this is an approach to going forward.

We know that both sides are going to have disagreements and agreements as well.

…

So, more of anything, it’s a forcing function to get to the realisation that we wanted to go to a peace discussion, a peace deal.

Former Ukrainian commander-in-chief, who now serves as the country’s ambassador to the UK, Valerii Zaluzhnyi spoke earlier today at a conference organised by the international affairs thinktank, Chatham House.

In unusually blunt remarks, he said the US under Donald Trump was “destroying” the world order, long questioned by Russia and other actors.

“The failure to qualify actions of Russia as an aggression is a huge challenge for the entire world, and Europe in particular, because we see that it’s not just the axis of evil and Russia trying to revise the world order, but the US is finally destroying this order,” he said.

He also said he was concerned by with “a number of talks between the US and Russia – Russia being headed by a war criminal – we see that the White House makes steps towards the Kremlin, trying to meet them halfway,” potentially opening up the risk of further Russian aggression in Europe.

“It’s obvious that the White House has questioned the unity of the whole western world, and now Washington is trying to delegate the security issues to Europe without participation of the US. So we can say that in the near future, Nato … can stop existing,” he said.

“In the backdrop of the Nato’s inability or unpreparedness to stand up to this axis of evil, the position of Ukraine becomes very important. Ukraine does not have its own nuclear weapons, it pays for its freedom with its blood,” he said.

But he stressed that Europeans should realise that “Ukraine is de facto defending not just the eastern border of Nato, but definitely the eastern border of Europe, which can become a confrontation line” in near future.

“The existence of independent Ukraine today is indeed one of the critical factors for you, for the European security and safety,” he said.

Speaking on his preferred scenario to end the war, he said “Ukraine should get very realistic security guarantees, and it can and should hope for the full recovery of Ukraine at the expense of the aggressor state that attacked Ukraine.”

Greek government under pressure over handling of deadly Tempe train crash

Helena Smith

in Athens

Over in Greece the government continues to face immense pressure over its handling of the country’s deadliest ever train crash, which left 57 mostly young Greeks dead and scores injured two years ago.

With MPs debating a vote of no confidence in the centre right administration of Kyriakos Mitsotakis – filed by four leftwing opposition parties on Wednesday – protests are also continuing with thousands once again amassing in front of the parliament last night, before clashes erupted, amid mounting demands for the prime minister’s resignation.

Indicative of the tensions spurred by the 28 February 2023 crash in the valley of Tempe between a Thessaloniki-bound passenger train and a cargo train heading south, were the slogans protesters elected to chant: “We are the voices of all the dead, the crime in Tempe will not be covered up” and “State–murderer, rotten society, it was not an accident, it was murder.”

Inside the parliament the rhetoric was just as fiery as Mitsotakis accused the political opposition of “weaponising” the tragedy. “Kyriakos Mitsotakis and the government are dangerous,” fumed the Syriza party leader Sokratis Famellos. “You must listen to the universal demand of society and resign immediately. You are delegitimized.”

A GPO poll also released yesterday – and the first to be conducted since hundreds of thousands took to the streets on the second anniversary of the crash in the biggest demonstrations to be held in Greece in decades – showed 71.9% of respondents believed the government was involved “in a cover-up of responsibilities.”

Equally worrying for Mitsotakis was the growing demand for early elections – 52.5% told pollsters that elections should be held before the government’s term expires in 2027. Despite the vast majority also believing that opposition parties were exploiting the disaster the survey also reported a surge in support for anti-systemic parties on the left and right.

“There is a growing sense that this government is not telling the truth, that it has to go because it is dangerous,” said Panos Natsis, a hospital nurse who had joined last night’s protests. “This is not only about the train crash now but day by day is becoming a much bigger crisis because everything in Greece is sub-standard and people are simply tired. “

More protests are planned tomorrow ahead of the no confidence motion being voted. “The government will win the vote because it controls parliament but it can’t control what goes on outside,” said Natsis.

Belgian prime minister Bart De Wever is not the only EU leader who separately met with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the EU summit.

Turns out French president Emmanuel Macron also sat down with the Ukrainian leader to go through the latest ideas and plans for Ukraine as they continue working on a proposal that could satisfy the US administration under Donald Trump and help achieve a just and lasting peace that European leaders call for.

Merz’s plans for German emergency defence, infrastructure spending face hurdles – snap analysis

Kate Connolly

Berlin correspondent

Even as there appears to be growing domestic consensus over the plans of Germany’s chancellor-in-waiting Friedrich Merz to massively boost spending on defence and infrastructure with a multi-billion Euro fund and relaxing Germany’s notorious debt brake, he faces considerable hurdles.

Merz will seek to push the legislation through the existing parliament this month, where his conservative alliance and the SPD, prospective coalition partners in the new government, still have the necessary two-thirds majority required, along with the Greens.

This is because under the new parliamentary constellation, a third of the seats will belong to the left and right-wing fringes, Die Linke and the AfD, whose support is either nigh-on impossible or far from guaranteed.

The far-right AfD have said they are looking into the legality of what Merz is attempting.

The far-left Die Linke has not excluded voting for the plans. Its co-leader, Jan van Aken said this morning it would consider doing so “under certain conditions”.

On the one hand the party is in favour of more money for Germany’s ailing infrastructure by relaxing the rules of Germany’s debt brake, but it is against the “incredibly high level of military build up” being proposed, he said.

The huge challenge Merz has set himself in trying to shoehorn the legislation into this tight time frame includes still having to win over the Greens to the plan. The party is due to go into opposition and some members are smarting at the brazen way in which they have been dealt with by the conservatives, who have often been disdainful towards them including ridiculing and blaming them for Germany’s current economic woes.

Britta Haßelmann, the party’s parliamentary leader has said it is far from certain whether Merz can rely on the Greens’ support for his multi-billion euro financial package, referring today to the “very complicated intervention in the Basic Law” that he is planning.

“How we vote is completely open, because there are still many questions in the room,” she said.

Noticeably missing so far from the cut and thrust of the debate, or it seems, even wanting to be seen to actively rally their party colleagues, are the Greens’ leading figureheads, and stalwart supporters of Ukraine, Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck, the current foreign and economics ministers respectively, both of whom have announced they are to step down from frontline politics.

As an indication as to how tight Merz’s timeline is: Germany’s new parliament is set to convene on 25 March.

The two special sessions of the existing Bundestag at which he hopes to get the required support for his deal are to take place on 13 and 18 March.

All smiles at UK-Ireland summit; Martin now off to Brussels

Lisa O’Carroll

UK prime minister Keir Starmer has described the first annual British-Irish summit as “a really successful” meeting “where a huge amount of progress was made”.

His Irish counterpart Micheál Martin is now on his way to Brussels to join the EU emergency council meeting.

Let’s hear more from Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán as his team just posted an update on his meetings in Paris, where he was before today’s summit and where he spoke with three political heavy-hitters: Emmanuel Macron, far-right leader Marine Le Pen, and former president Nicolas Sarkozy.

In a social media post, Orbán said:

My meetings in France confirmed that while we may disagree on the modalities of peace, we do agree that we must strengthen the defence capabilities of European nations, & these efforts should empower member states rather than Brussels bureaucrats.

He hailed “exceptionally close” cooperation with France, and said he expected French companies to be a “significant investor” in Hungary.

But, in a pointed endorsement, he also posted a picture with Le Pen, saying:

After meeting with both the former and current Presidents of France, it was a pleasure to meet with the future President. Thank you for the insightful discussion @MLP_officiel!

Protesters rallied outside the US embassy in Kyiv on Thursday to bring attention to the fate of Ukrainian prisoners of war and ensure their inclusion in any deal to stop the conflict with Russia.

The US had been Ukraine’s biggest backer until president Donald Trump initiated a complete shift in his country’s foreign policy and halted US support to Ukraine, Reuters noted.