On Tuesday 28 May, European defence ministers were divided over whether to lift the restrictions imposed on Ukraine’s use of their military equipment to allow Kyiv to strike military targets in Russia.
While the Dutch minister, Kajsa Ollongren, and the Estonian minister, Hanno Pevkur, said they were in favour of lifting the restrictions, because it was not normal for Ukraine to fight “with one hand behind its back”, on the same day the Belgian Prime Minister, Alexander De Croo, explained to the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, that the Belgian equipment supplied to Ukraine had to be used on Ukrainian territory. Germany also imposes restrictions.
At the end of the Council, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, acknowledged that the Member States were divided. “It’s a decision for each Member State, and it’s up to each of them to take responsibility for lifting the restrictions or not”, he said.
According to Mr Borrell, some States have made progress in their positions. “Some Member States were against it, but they have changed their minds and today they have agreed to lift the restrictions”, he explained, without saying to how many countries this related.
For his part, he felt that it was possible to lift the restrictions so that Ukraine could defend itself. “It is clear that this is a legitimate action (by Ukraine to strike Russian targets, editor’s note) under international law, if it is used proportionately”, he said. According to Mr Borrell, “we need to balance the risk of escalation with the need for the Ukrainians to defend themselves”.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who was invited to the Council, also reiterated his call to the Allies to lift the restrictions. Recalling that fighting was taking place in Kharkiv, close to the Ukrainian-Russian border, Mr Stoltenberg felt that it would be very difficult for Ukraine to defend itself if it could not strike military targets on the other side of the border.
Developing military support
Over and above this issue, the ministers reiterated their military support for Ukraine, several of them stressing the need to supply more equipment and more quickly, particularly ammunition and anti-aircraft defence systems.
In conclusions adopted the previous day (see other news), the Council stressed that it was “essential to accelerate and intensify deliveries of military equipment to meet Ukraine’s urgent needs, including ammunition, in particular for artillery, missiles, air defence and artillery systems, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles, while continuing to meet the country’s medium- and long-term needs”.
The Dutch minister announced that her government had proposed to rapidly assemble a Patriot air defence system in close cooperation with several partners and to deliver it to Ukraine. The Netherlands will be supplying components and basic parts from its stock, and the minister has invited European countries to do likewise.
“We are in talks with partners to develop a Patriot system, including training for Ukrainian crews. Thanks to our offer and our consultations with partner countries supplying several essential parts and munitions, we can provide Ukraine with at least one fully operational system in a short space of time”, she explained.
Strengthening training
The High Representative also announced that there was a “growing consensus” among ministers to increase the level of ambition of the EUMAM Ukraine training mission, but refused to give a new target figure.
“We have to adapt our capabilities and training offers to Ukrainian needs”, he explained. To date, 50,000 soldiers have been trained and 60,000 are expected to have been trained by the end of the year. On his arrival at the Council, the Estonian minister called for the target to be raised to 100,000.
In the conclusions adopted the previous day, the Council welcomed the extension of the scope of training to maritime and air and stressed the importance of continuing to focus on the quality of training for Ukrainian soldiers and their contribution to operational effectiveness.
Mr Borrell warned that there was no common European position on training carried out by EUMAM on Ukrainian territory. According to him, some Member States have explained that this would avoid the need to move Ukrainian soldiers for the training, but others point out that this would involve sending military personnel, with the risks that this could entail.
As on the previous day, following a meeting of foreign affairs ministers (see EUROPE 13417/7), the High Representative regretted Hungary’s veto on the adoption of seven legislative acts that would make it possible to release €6.6 billion for military support to Ukraine. He explained that he did not know when the objection would be lifted.
According to a European source, this includes three tranches of aid for Ukraine under the European Peace Facility, totalling €1.5 billion, €600 million unused in the context of joint purchases of ammunition and missiles, and €4.5 billion from the Ukraine Assistance Fund.
Despite this stalemate, the Luxembourg minister, Yuriko Backes, felt that the €5 billion from the fund was not enough. (Original version in French by Camille-Cerise Gessant)