The European Union urgently needs a strategy on Russia. A strategy document that sets out a strong vision and comes with adequate political instruments and financial commitments would signal to the United States that Europe understands the threat posed by Putin’s Russia at a critical moment in relations between Washington, Brussels and Moscow.
The coming Trump presidency will shape EU foreign policy and redefine transatlantic ties. A second Trump administration will undoubtedly demand more from Europe, including on issues such as Europe’s defense spending and its support for Ukraine. Even as defense budgets across Europe grow and the EU takes a more advanced role in supporting Ukraine, the lines Washington sets will shift. This challenge could create a positive opportunity for the EU if it develops a European strategy toward Russia.
The bloc currently has no formal strategy on Russia. This is inconsistent, as the EU has adopted formal strategies for relations with a number of countries and regions, including China, the Indo-Pacific and Central Asia, and is developing a strategy for the Middle East. But it is more than inconsistent. The failure to develop a strategy on Russia shows a lack of seriousness and undermines the credibility of the bloc’s geopolitical ambitions.
The biggest obstacle to the EU-Russia strategy has traditionally been the inability of member states to agree on interests and priorities. Countries closest to Russia and those that have recently been bullied by Moscow have a more acute threat perception, while other European countries often still view Russia as essentially a regional problem.
But Russia’s challenge to Europe is clearly no longer regional. It literally surrounds and permeates the EU. Russia has waged the continent’s largest land war since World War II. To ease sanctions, it has created a “shadow fleet” of oil tankers that threaten to create a major environmental disaster in European waters. From the Western Balkans to the Sahel, Russia is competing for influence, generating disinformation, and seeking to destabilize governments. Elsewhere in Africa, Moscow is using mercenaries to prop up friendly governments and secure access to resources.
Inside the EU, intelligence agencies say Putin is actively involved in efforts to undermine the political stability of member states. Russia is accused of spreading disinformation, fomenting political conflict and even sabotage, such as the recent attempt to plant explosive devices on European planes flying to the US.
Faced with growing Russian threats and growing US demands, the EU needs a unified approach to Moscow. In response, the new European Commission should prioritise developing an EU-Russia strategy aimed at creating a more forward-looking, ambitious and cohesive European approach.
This would have many advantages. First, it would provide EU members with a forum to jointly develop a vision for future Russia policy. Second, the strategy would allow the EU to paint a holistic picture of how Moscow’s various tactics are interrelated and threaten the entire bloc. The EU would also be in a better position to apply tougher enforcement. Formulating a long-term Russia policy would consolidate the hard-won gains of recent years, helping to ensure that countries like Germany do not return to problematic practices such as reliance on Russian energy.
The EU now has the right people to lead this effort. The new foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, a hawk on Russia, could push for an ambitious and forward-looking stance on Russia. Other senior officials, including Defence Commissioner Andreas Kubilius, could lend credibility to the strategy, which would naturally be prepared in close cooperation with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, herself a strong supporter of Ukraine.
Any possible strategy towards Russia must begin with Ukraine. Support for Kyiv is a central element of Europe’s Russia policy, so a successful strategy must chart a path forward on key issues related to Ukraine, including financial support, defence-industrial cooperation, reconstruction and possible EU membership for Ukraine. Likewise, any strategy must also consider regions such as the Western Balkans, Moldova and the South Caucasus to help counter Russian influence.
Economic governance should be a key focus. The EU has gradually adopted a more ambitious sanctions policy towards Moscow, but implementation is lacking. For example, the EU will need to develop a realistic plan to combat Russia’s shadow fleet and ensure that Russian energy does not flow into the EU through backdoor routes.
To be effective, the EU-Russia strategy must not fall victim to the tendency to blur or adopt too narrow a view of the task at hand. Previous EU foreign policy documents, such as the Strategic Compass, have proposed many initiatives and legislative projects, but have struggled to project a broader vision.
Crafting a strategy towards Russia will be politically challenging but rewarding. It will be difficult to develop an EU strategy that is sufficiently ambitious and necessarily forward-looking while maintaining the support of all member states, especially given that some countries have a history of obstructing EU support for Ukraine.
However, it would be an important step toward addressing today’s changing realities. In addition to enhancing the EU’s potential as a geopolitical player, a comprehensive and practical strategy toward Russia would signal to the United States that Europe is stepping up its game and would strengthen transatlantic ties.
The incoming US administration should support the EU in developing its strategy towards Russia. An EU that is willing to lead efforts to counter Russia both within Europe and across the wider region is exactly what transatlantic relations need.
Ian Cameron is a Young Global Professional at the Atlantic Council's European Center. James Batchik is Deputy Director of the Atlantic Council's European Center.
Source: Source
