EU’s Kallas Faces Growing Friction with Member States After Defence Initiative Collapses

Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, has encountered another significant political setback after member states blocked her latest proposal to establish an expert group on European defense. This development comes at a time when the European External Action Service (EEAS) faces increasing demands for structural reform.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

On Sunday, the European External Action Service (EEAS) abruptly canceled the launch of a high-level expert group intended to identify strategic investment gaps and propose ways to enhance the EU’s defense capabilities.

Kallas, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, had announced the initiative just days prior, stating that it aimed to bring together leading experts in security and defense to offer innovative, out-of-the-box solutions.

“We have decided not to proceed with the initiative,” an EU official told Euronews on condition of anonymity. “Some member states felt that this was not the appropriate path to pursue at the current time.”

This episode highlights the challenges Kallas faces in advancing initiatives without robust political support, even as backing from member states—particularly smaller nations—remains crucial for maintaining the relevance of the EEAS.

Diplomatic misstep

Italy led the opposition to the initiative, firmly rejecting it after the proposed group included a representative viewed as a major political adversary of Defense Minister Guido Crosetto.

According to the Italian news agency ANSA, the individual in question was Roberta Pinotti, a former defense minister under the center-left administrations of Matteo Renzi and Paolo Gentiloni, both of whom hold political views opposing the current Italian government.

France and several other member states also raised objections to the expert group, emphasizing that the initiative had not been discussed at the ministerial level and had caught most European governments off guard.

The intense pressure ultimately forced the EEAS to cancel the initiative altogether.

From the EEAS’s perspective, the advisory nature of the expert group did not require universal representation, and former political and military officials were considered natural choices.

Nevertheless, the initiative sparked opposition on multiple fronts: represented countries objected to the specific names selected, while excluded nations resented being left out of the process.

Three EU officials, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, described the initiative as “mismanaged,” “unfortunate,” and “a complete mess,” reflecting widespread frustration over the handling of the process.

Sense of urgency

For the diplomatic service, the EU must accelerate its defense preparedness to avoid being caught off guard, yet some member states seem to be hindering progress rather than proposing constructive solutions.

The goal was to foster a sense of urgency, accelerating efforts to address Europe’s defense capacity gaps and establish a clear direction ahead of the Munich Security Conference in February, especially as the US government prepares its troop review by the end of the year.

“While everyone agrees on the urgency of the topic, the overall execution was somewhat unfortunate,” an EU diplomat noted.

At the same time, the EEAS is frequently criticized for inefficiency, which contrasts with the argument that European capitals must be constantly consulted, even regarding the appointment of experts for an advisory body.

“As a former prime minister, she may be underestimating how much member states desire consultation on foreign policy matters,” a second diplomat remarked, adding that the incident highlights the hypersensitivity of some countries regarding procedural matters.

Ironically, this lack of consultation with her core constituency occurs at a time when Kallas’s role is facing growing challenges from Brussels and other key European capitals.

Pressure to reform

The EU foreign policy chief has repeatedly clashed with Commission President Ursula von der Leyen over the direction of the bloc’s foreign policy. Von der Leyen has pursued what she termed a “geopolitical Commission,” periodically testing her authority on international matters, with relations with Israel serving as a key flashpoint.

This personal and institutional clash has increasingly aligned with recurring calls to reform EU foreign policy-making. The latest Franco-German proposal suggests placing the EEAS under the Commission’s authority, albeit with an expanded portfolio.

Following an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers in Ireland last week, Kallas pushed back against the proposal, asserting that there is broad support for the current institutional framework, even though all agree it could be implemented more effectively.

“The concern raised by many member states is that transferring all authority to the Commission would cause small member states to lose control over foreign policy,” Kallas stated.

“Member states have made it clear that they do not want to lose the steering wheel of foreign policy.”

Small countries’ scepticism

Streamlining the bloc’s external action and centralizing it under the Commission would effectively allow only the largest member states to meaningfully shape decisions made in Brussels.

Kallas’s role was specifically designed with this duality in mind, serving simultaneously as a Vice-President of the Commission and as the EU High Representative, following the political direction of the member states, thereby ensuring every country has a seat at the table.

However, while small member states are currently protecting Kallas’s institutional role from being absorbed into an all-powerful Commission, her recent misstep has managed to alienate this very constituency.

“Member states want to view the EEAS as a service to them, rather than an independent institution that initiates actions without prior consultation,” a third EU diplomat from a small nation skeptical of the reform told Euronews on condition of anonymity.

This is not the first time Kallas has moved forward without sufficient political backing from member states. Last year, she proposed a €40 billion military support package for Ukraine, which was ultimately rejected by EU leaders.

A row of incidents

Kallas has a history of diplomatic missteps. In May, she claimed the US had evacuated its embassy in Kyiv due to warnings of an imminent Russian attack, a statement later disputed by Washington. That same month, she faced backlash after appearing to compare China to a disease.

In June, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar severed all contact with her following media reports that she had privately compared Israel to apartheid-era South Africa, a move that elicited mixed reactions from EU leaders.

The High Representative has also drawn criticism for her insistence on utilizing frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine, as well as for her strained relations with the US administration.

However, as large member states and an increasingly centralized Commission question the current institutional setup, any further missteps that alienate support from member states could prove fatal for both Kallas and her institution.

“There is overall dissatisfaction with how Vice President Kallas handles issues of this nature,” a fourth EU diplomat remarked.

Source link