Why a new format for the European leaders’ summit was needed
All of Europe — from Iceland to Azerbaijan–gathered in England at Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire. As everyone keeps reminding, Winston Churchill was born there, adding a special historical flavor to the meeting, although the President of Serbia has his own view on this detail.
«Of course, everyone refers to Churchill. I wanted to ask them — are you serious? Everyone thinks they are Churchill, but there was only one Churchill. I wanted to remind them about Yalta and to whom Churchill left all of Eastern Europe. But you pretend not to know, you act dumber than you are, sometimes it’s useful for your country. I’ve seen and heard at least a dozen Churchills over these days», said Aleksandar Vučić in an interview with Serbian television.
This is the fourth meeting of the European Political Community, an informal assembly of state leaders conceived by the President of France. It seems the first three were not particularly successful, especially the previous one held in Granada in October. There, the leaders of the Netherlands, Italy, France, and the United Kingdom suddenly secluded themselves and began discussing the issue of immigration, which was not on the agenda at all.
But the very idea of organizing such summits is precisely so that the leaders of small countries can informally talk with the heavyweights, as there may not be another opportunity. Such behind-the-scenes discussions show the limits of this format of communication and restrict their added value, so to speak.
The agenda for the meeting at Blenheim Palace formally included four topics: defense, protection of democracy, migration, and energy cooperation. But still, all discussions shifted to Ukraine.
The host, newly-appointed British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, initiated a discussion about introducing special sanctions against the so-called «ghost fleet» or «Putin’s ships» — vessels transporting oil circumventing existing sanctions. Everyone nodded in agreement, but most likely, such sanctions will initially be introduced only by Britain.
The European Political Community particularly emphasizes that it does not intend to subsume the structures of the European Union or influence the process of admitting new members. Indeed, the EPC has faced criticism for allowing candidates or aspirants for EU membership to speak on equal terms with the EU’s founding countries. But that’s the essence of such a communication platform. Even among themselves, it’s easier to meet. For example, Pashinyan proposed a meeting with Aliyev, but the Azerbaijani side declined.
In this context, Turkey’s participation is particularly noteworthy. Each time, Erdogan is invited, he agrees, but at the last moment, reasons are found not to attend, as happened this time. The presence of the Turkish leader generally doesn’t bother anyone, but it turns out to be a rather delicate issue.
Firstly, knowing Erdogan’s character, everyone understands that he will set conditions for his presence, and why should he? Secondly, everyone knows his stance towards Hamas and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and he might be asked for clarifications at the summit, as this position isn’t widely understood in Europe. And thirdly, for Turkey itself, such a format of communication outside the formal EU frameworks is an excellent opportunity to discuss issues it constantly stumbles upon in Brussels — visas, customs union, the right to asylum, etc. In the EU, representatives of Turkey are still spoken to as rejected candidates. Well, no means no.
For the new British Prime Minister, this summit had special significance, not just because it was one of his first «public outings». Starmer tried at this meeting to mend the broken relations between Britain and the EU four years after leaving the EU.
He immediately stated his government’s position: we are not returning to the Brexit question, but now Britain aims to restore economic relations and remove, or at least ease, the insane restrictions that have arisen and hinder everyone. But again, these possible reforms should not lead Britain back to the single market.
As his main interlocutor on these issues, Starmer chose Macron. It seems the new Prime Minister intends to kill two birds with one stone. To use the French President as a mediator in restoring relations with Brussels and to simultaneously revive the former bilateral partnership, the once “L’entente cordiale” — a cordial agreement that has long since broken down.
At first, there was nothing to talk about with Boris Johnson. Then his successor, Liz Truss, asked her aides, «Is the French President our friend or foe?» (Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, mind you). And only with Sunak did the British remember that there are smart people across the Channel too.
«Endless disagreements, for example, on migration or fishing licenses, led us to complete discord», said Patrick Chevallereau, a specialist in Franco-British relations. «Even the traditional bilateral summits, held every two years, have disappeared from the agenda».
The EU, with which Starmer hopes to restore relations through Macron, is now Britain’s main trading partner. More than half of the trade turnover is with EU countries, and Paris ranks second in this regard after Germany.
But the bone of contention in Franco-British relations now is defense. France and Britain have the largest armies in Europe, and they have the Lancaster House Agreement, which includes cooperation on nuclear and conventional arms.
«In the context of the fighting in Ukraine, defense and armaments become the most serious priority for the United Kingdom», said Sebastian Maillard, an adviser at the Jacques Delors Institute and Chatham House. «Keir Starmer wants to return to the decision-making center and participate in European military operations. And here he counts on France’s help, because he has no closer allies, and he sees France as a mediator to achieve this goal».
It is noteworthy that the EPC summit took place against the backdrop of the US Republican Party’s national convention. Regardless of who becomes the new occupant of the White House, the key issues discussed at Blenheim, as whispered in the castle’s corridors, will still need to be sent there for approval.