EU Strengthens Defense Against Russia as Copenhagen Talks Open
EU leaders gathered in Copenhagen under the shadow of Russian hybrid threats, signaling a renewed push to harden Europe’s defenses. Fresh airspace restrictions, mysterious drone activity across several member states, and a shared sense of urgency framed the discussions. As Danish prime minister Mette Frederiksen put it, the threats “hurl themselves at us, test us, and will not stop.”
At the heart of the talks were two long‑term proposals from the European Commission designed to bolster the Union’s own security while speeding support to Ukraine. The debate centered on a flagship project for a high‑tech “drone shield” along the eastern edge and a plan to finance Ukraine with a loan of up to €140 billion backed by frozen Russian assets. The leaders told the Commission to press ahead, but they also highlighted deep divisions that will require resolution at the formal EU summit in Brussels in three weeks’ time.
Two flagship proposals dominate the agenda
One plan, branded as a strategic package called “Eastern Flank Watch,” envisions a comprehensive defense layer for the EU’s eastern border. A central component would be a drone shield—an integrated system for rapid detection, neutralization or neutralisation of hostile drones when necessary. Commission president Ursula von der Leyen framed the idea as a shield for the entire continent, noting Ukraine’s nightly battles against Russian drones and underscoring that the shield should extend beyond a single flank.
While the need for robust counter‑drone defenses is widely acknowledged, views diverge on the project’s scope and design. Several Southern European states, along with heavyweights like France and Germany, voiced concerns about concentrating resources strictly on the east and urged a holistic approach that protects all of Europe, including the southern flank. Danish prime minister Frederiksen signaled pragmatism over optics, saying the name matters less than the outcome—but warned that a narrowed focus could leave other regions exposed.
Von der Leyen sought to bridge the gap, emphasizing that the anti‑drone system is meant as a continent‑wide shield, with potential extensions to southern as well as eastern borders. The proposal remains under discussion as negotiators seek a balance between capability, interoperability, and broader strategic coverage.
Financing Ukraine with frozen Russian assets
A second hot topic was the Commission’s proposal for a so‑called reparations loan for Ukraine. The idea would be to mobilize more of the frozen Russian central bank assets held in the EU—reportedly totaling over €200 billion—to back a large loan to Kiev. The loan would not confiscate assets outright; Ukraine would repay using future settlements or the proceeds from any wartime damages Russia pays later. The moral and legal rationale is to ensure that Moscow bears the cost of its aggression, and that Kyiv has access to funding for reconstruction and defense alike.
However, the plan has met legal and political headwinds. Belgium, home to much of the relevant asset holdings, warned of possible legal consequences and reputational risks. Von der Leyen pressed for shared responsibility, arguing that Belgium or any single country cannot shoulder the risk alone. The controversy underscores the broader challenge of aligning legal frameworks, national interests, and EU solidarity in a high‑stakes policy area.
Internal rifts and the path forward
Even as the Commission’s proposals attract broad support, Hungary’s veto on Ukraine’s path to EU membership remains a stubborn hurdle that could complicate broader security backing. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s resistance complicates consensus, though most other leaders voiced support for Ukraine’s EU trajectory. The EU leaders stressed that three weeks remain before the formal Brussels summit to resolve these rifts and finalize a unified stance on both defense investments and Ukraine funding.
What happens next and why it matters
The Copenhagen meeting underscored a central tension in European security policy: the imperative to act decisively against evolving Russian threats while also managing internal legal and political constraints. The drone shield aims to deter and, if necessary, neutralize drones that could threaten critical infrastructure. The reparations loan concept seeks to align moral accountability with financial stability, yet it must pass legal muster and distribute risk equitably among member states.
For Ukraine, the outcome will shape both immediate military and longer‑term economic support. For EU citizens, the decisions will influence perceptions of Europe’s readiness to defend its own values and borders. And for transatlantic partners, the moves signal how Europe plans to coordinate with NATO and partner governments on deterrence, resilience, and shared burdens in a volatile security environment.
Bottom line
EU leaders left Copenhagen with a clear sense of urgency but also with a reminder that unity is harder to achieve than consensus in theory. The two flagship proposals—an eastern drone shield and a large reparations loan for Ukraine—are moving forward in principle, yet their fate now hinges on the Brussels summit in three weeks and on overcoming internal legal and political obstacles that could either accelerate or delay Europe’s defense ambitions against Russia.
