EU defense lines against Russia gain momentum after Copenhagen talks
EU leaders gathered in Copenhagen under a heavy cloud of Russian hybrid threats. Fresh breaches of airspace and mysterious drone activity across several member states underscored the urgency to accelerate Europe’s rearmament. “They threaten us and test us, and they will not stop,” said Danish prime minister Mette Frederiksen after the meeting.
On the table were several long‑standing proposals from the European Commission to strengthen both the union’s own defense and its support for Ukraine. Two points dominated the discussion: a flagship project for a high‑tech “drone shield” and a plan to offer Ukraine a loan of up to 140 billion euros, secured by frozen Russian assets. The leaders tasked the Commission with moving forward with the plans, but the meeting also exposed fractures within the bloc. The crucial decisions were postponed to the formal Brussels summit in three weeks.
The drone shield: a fast‑track shield for Europe
The Commission’s proposal for a new flagship program, “Eastern Flank Watch,” aims to counter the full spectrum of threats at the EU’s eastern border. A central element is a so‑called drone shield—a system for rapid detection, interception, and, if necessary, neutralization of hostile drones.
Commission president Ursula von der Leyen explained that the EU must learn from Ukraine, which stops hundreds of Russian drones every night. Although the need for a drone defense is undisputed, opinions diverge on the design. Several Southern European nations, along with heavyweights like France and Germany, voiced skepticism about a unilateral focus on the eastern border and urged a holistic approach that protects the entire union. Frederiksen downplayed naming tensions, saying she doesn’t care what it’s called as long as it works, but insisted the threat is broader than just the eastern flank. Von der Leyen made clear that while the immediate priority is the east, the vision is a shield for the entire continent, including efforts that could extend to the south.
Debt financing for Ukraine: a controversial plan with legal hurdles
Another hot topic was the Commission’s proposal for a so‑called reparations loan to Ukraine. The idea is to use more of the frozen Russian central bank assets—together worth over 200 billion euros—to finance a large loan to Kyiv. The plan would not confiscate the assets outright; if Russia later pays war damages, Ukraine would use those funds to repay the loan. “It is only fair that Russia pays for the destruction it causes in Ukraine,” Frederiksen argued.
However, the proposal encounters legal and political resistance. Belgium, where most of the assets reside, worries about legal repercussions and the country’s financial reputation. Von der Leyen attempted to calm nerves, saying that risks cannot be shouldered by a single member country and that a broader sharing of responsibility is essential. The debate also highlights broader questions about how Europe funds Ukraine’s defense and reconstruction while upholding the rule of law.
Ukraine’s path to EU membership and the Hungarian veto
Another sticking point is Ukraine’s path toward EU membership. While the other 26 leaders expressed support, Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, continued to hold back, a position confirmed by Politico. The bloc’s 26 other leaders reaffirmed their backing for Ukraine’s EU course, but Orbán’s stance remains a hurdle. The autumn EU summit in Brussels will revisit these issues and, officials hope, set a clear course for the bloc’s approach to Kyiv and to the wider security architecture.
Europe’s leaders agreed to a three‑week window before the formal Brussels gathering, with António Costa, the European Council president, stating that it would be time to take decisive decisions. The Copenhagen meeting revealed both a sense of urgency and the deep divisions that could shape Europe’s security posture for years to come.
Looking ahead: deterrence, unity, and the road to Brussels
In Copenhagen, the EU signaled that it will not back away from strengthening defenses or backing Kyiv, even as questions linger about scope, cost-sharing, and legal guardrails. The deliberations reflect a continent striving for deterrence and unity while navigating divergent national interests. With three weeks until the Brussels summit, Europeans await a plan that can win both security and legitimacy across the union.
