BRUSSELS — European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Thursday that EU governments are already asking Brussels to create a second edition of the bloc’s SAFE defense financing scheme, even before the first one has begun distributing money. Speaking at the POLITICO 28 event, von der Leyen said the EU’s flagship Security Action for Europe loans-for-weapons program has become the runaway success of the bloc’s rearmament push.  “I think the most successful is the €150 billion of the SAFE instrument,” she said. “It is so oversubscribed by the member states that some are calling for a second SAFE instrument.” SAFE is designed to help countries jointly buy arms and ammunition from European industry financed by low interest loans. Countries had to file national procurement plans this fall, and demand has exceeded available funds, the Commission president said. The Commission chief used the appearance to argue that the past year has reshaped the EU’s defense role at unprecedented speed.  “If you look at the last year when it comes to defense, more has happened than during the last decades in the European Union,” she said, pointing to the creation of the EU’s first full-time defense commissioner and the publication of its first defense readiness plan. She contrasted the bloc’s limited defense spending in the previous decade, when only €8 billion was invested in defense on the European level, with the surge now underway. “During the last year, we enabled an investment … of €800 billion till 2030,” she said. Von der Leyen’s acknowledgment that capitals want a “second SAFE” is part of an ongoing push to continue ramping up defensing spending. That is likely to create a major political clash for 2026, when countries will reopen negotiations over the next long-term EU budget as there are calls for defense spending to be 10 times larger than under the current budget. Any effort for countries to borrow jointly to fund defense will also spark pushback from frugal capitals.

President Donald Trump’s pursuit of an end to the war between Russia and Ukraine is increasingly being driven by his own impatience — with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders who Trump believes are standing in the way of both peace and future economic cooperation between Washington and Moscow. Trump, who has called for Russia’s return to the G7 and spoken repeatedly about his eagerness to bring Russia back into the economic fold, laid bare his frustrations Monday at the White House with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns for a special episode of “The Conversation.” He derided European leaders as talkers who “don’t produce” and declared that Zelenskyy has “to play ball” given that, in his view, “Russia has the upper hand.” Zelenskyy, who Trump grumbled hadn’t read the latest peace proposal, spent Monday working with the leaders of France, Germany and Britain on a revision of the Americans’ 28-point proposal that he said has been shaved down to 20 points. “We took out openly anti-Ukrainian points,” Zelenskyy told a group of reporters in Kyiv, emphasizing that Ukraine still needs stronger security guarantees and that he isn’t ready to give Russia more land in the Donbas than its military currently holds. With Russia unlikely to budge from its demands, the White House-driven peace talks appear stalled. And as Trump’s irritation deepens, pressure is mounting on the Europeans backing Zelenskyy to prove Trump wrong. “He says we don’t produce, and I hate to say it, but there’s been some truth to that,” said a European official, one of three interviewed for this report who were granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. “We are doing it now, but we have been slow to realize we are the solution to our problem.” The official pointed to NATO’s increased defense spending commitments and the PURL initiative, through which NATO allies are buying U.S. weapons to send to Ukraine, as evidence that things have started to shift. But in the near term, the European Union is struggling to convince Belgium to support a nearly $200 billion loan to Ukraine funded with seized Russian assets. “If we fail on this one, we’re in trouble,” said a second European official. Trump’s mounting pressure on Ukraine makes clear that months of careful management of the president through private texts, public flattery and general deference has gotten Europe very little. But Liana Fix, a senior fellow for Europe at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that the leaders on the other side of the Atlantic “know very well that they can’t just stand up to Trump and tell him courageously that, you know, this is not how you treat Europe, because [of] the existential dependence that is still there between Europe and the United States.” Still, some in Europe continue to express shock and revulsion over Trump’s lopsided diplomacy in favor of Russia, disputing the president’s assessment during his POLITICO interview that Putin’s army has the upper hand despite its slow advance across the Donbas, more than half of which is now in Russian control. “Our view is not that Ukraine is losing. If Russia was so powerful they would have been able to finish the war within 24 hours,” a third European diplomat said. “If you think that Russia is winning, what does that mean — you give them everything? That’s not a sustainable peace. You’ll reward the Russians for their aggression and they will look for more – not only in Ukraine but also in Europe.” Trump has refused to approve additional defense aid to Ukraine, while blasting his predecessor for sending billions in aid — approved by Democrats and many Republicans in Congress — to help the country defend itself following Russia’s Feb. 2022 invasion. Jake Sullivan, President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, said Trump’s brief that Russia is prevailing on the battlefield doesn’t match the reality. “Russia has not achieved its strategic objectives in Ukraine. It has completely failed in its initial objective to take Kyiv and subjugate the country, and it has even failed in its more limited objective in taking all of the Donbas and neutering Ukraine from a security perspective,” Sullivan said, adding that he thinks Ukraine could prevail militarily with stronger U.S. support. “But if the United States throws Ukraine under the bus and essentially takes Russia’s side functionally, then things, of course, are much more difficult for Ukraine, and that seems to be the direction of travel this administration is taking.” The White House did not respond to a request for additional comment. Clearly eager to normalize relations with Moscow, Trump appears to be motivated more by the prospect of cutting deals with Putin than maintaining a transatlantic alliance built on shared democratic principles. Fiona Hill, a Russia expert who served on Trump’s national security council in his first term, noted that the U.S.-Russia diplomacy involves three people with business backgrounds and investment portfolios: special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner on the U.S. side and Russia’s Kirill Dmitriev, the head of Russia’s sovereign investment fund. “Putin’s always thinking about what’s the angle here? How do I approach somebody? He’s got the number of President Trump,” Hill said Monday on a Brookings Institution podcast. “He knows he wants to make a deal, and he’s emphasizing this, and all the context is business, not really as diplomacy.” Additionally, Trump is eager to end Europe’s decades-long dependence on the U.S., which he believes has been saddled with the burden of its continental security for far too long. Ending the war with a deal that largely favors Putin would not only burnish Trump’s own self-conception as a global peacemaker — it would serve final notice to Europe that many of America’s oldest and most steadfast allies are truly on their own. Trump’s new national security strategy, released last week, made that point explicit, devoting more words to the threat of Europe’s civilizational decline — castigating the entire continent over its immigration and economic policies — than to threats posed by China, Russia or North Korea. Asked by POLITICO if European countries would continue to be U.S. allies, Trump demurred: “It depends,” he said, harshly criticizing immigration policies. “They want to be politically correct, and it makes them weak.” Europe, despite years of warnings from Trump and their own growing awareness about the need for what French President Emanuel Macron has called “strategic autonomy,” has been slow to mobilize its defenses to be able to defend the continent — and Ukraine — on its own. At Trump’s behest, NATO members agreed in June to increase defense spending to 5 percent of GDP over the coming decade. And NATO is now purchasing U.S. weapons to send to Ukraine through a new NATO initiative. But it may be too little, too late as the war grinds into a fourth winter with Ukraine’s military low on ammunition, weapons and morale. “That is why they will continue to engage this administration despite the strategy,” Fix said. And while Trump sees Ukraine and European stubbornness as the primary impediment to peace, many longtime diplomats believe that it’s his own unwillingness to ratchet up pressure on Moscow — Trump imposed new sanctions on Russian oil last month, only to pull some of them back — that is rendering his peacemaking efforts so fruitless. “It’s not enough to want peace. You’ve got to create a context in which the protagonists are willing to compromise either enthusiastically or reluctantly,” said Richard Haass, the former president of the Council on Foreign Relations who served as a senior adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell in the George W. Bush administration. “The president has totally failed to do that, so it’s not a question of wordsmithing. In order to succeed at the table, you have to succeed away from the table. And they have failed to do that.” Veronika Melkozerova, Ari Hawkins and Daniella Cheslow contributed to this report.

BERLIN — Europe’s top defense officials used a meeting in Berlin on Friday to send a unified message of support for Ukraine. The main takeaways: Backing for Kyiv will remain open-ended, hybrid threats against Europe are accelerating, and the continent’s biggest military powers intend to take on a larger share of their own defense as the war enters another hard winter. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius opened the session by emphasizing continuity. “Germany is prepared to continue taking the lead in supporting Ukraine,” he said, stressing that Berlin will maintain its multi-year funding for U.S.-made Patriot air defense systems and interceptors under the Ukraine-focused PURL mechanism, which coordinates deliveries of U.S. arms and tech to Ukraine via NATO members. Germany has already financed a €500 million air-defense package through this instrument and will contribute at least €150 million to a new package agreed this week. Berlin, he added, aims to present “something substantial” on joint procurement with the U.K. at the group’s next meeting in Warsaw. France stressed that long-term military and economic pressure on Moscow must intensify. French Armed Forces Minister Catherine Vautrin pledged that Paris “will continue to support Ukraine for as long as it takes,” and pointed to France’s work preparing security guarantees for Kyiv in the Franco-British “coalition of the willing.”  She also called for stricter enforcement of sanctions, warning that Russia’s sanctions-evading “ghost fleet” finances a significant share of its war effort. “We have to increase the pressure to break this economic model,” she said. Italy highlighted its own set of assistance measures. Defense Minister Guido Crosetto said Italy will deliver €800 million in civilian support, including generators needed to navigate winter energy shortages, as well as additional military assistance through its fourth and 12th aid packages. “Our commitment to Kyiv will continue — always,” he said. Representing Poland, Deputy Defense Minister Paweł Zalewski linked Europe’s security directly to Ukrainian resilience. He underlined that Poland provides Kyiv with military equipment, financial support and political backing, insisting: “We believe that the security line of Europe lies on the Russo-Ukrainian front line.”  Warsaw plans to submit more than €40 billion in defense-industrial projects under the EU’s new investment scheme, including joint ventures with Ukrainian defense companies inside Poland to help boost Ukraine’s long-term capacity. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas delivered the meeting’s sharpest warning, citing a surge in “daily” hybrid attacks — sabotage, cyberattacks, drone incursions — and urging capitals not to normalize them.  “It is clear that Ukraine needs more air defense and more ammunition,” she said, arguing that the EU must help Kyiv keep pace with Russia’s escalating strikes. She stressed that EU capability planning complements that of NATO: “We cannot accept this as the new normal.” Threaded throughout the meeting was a shared conclusion: Europe expects a long war, and is preparing accordingly. As Pistorius put it, “Our measures are having an effect — and we must not ease up.”

Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor and a foreign affairs columnist at POLITICO Europe. This winter is shaping up to be the most hazardous of the war for Ukraine — at least since the early months of the invasion nearly four years ago, when Russia’s armored columns were closing in on Kyiv.  Back then, doughty Ukrainian resistance, the 2,000 anti-tank missiles Britain supplied just weeks before the invasion and Russian tactical incompetence saved the day — along with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s defiant refusal of an American offer to evacuate him. Now Ukraine is facing another crunch winter — one that heroism and improvisation might not be able to overcome. That’s in part because the country’s fate won’t entirely be in its own hands. A lot will rest with Western allies as the Ukrainians struggle through the frigid weeks and months to grapple with three huge challenges.  First, Ukraine will face a funding crisis as 2025 turns into 2026 and is on course to run out of cash in February unless Belgium lifts its block on an audacious plan to issue a €140 billion reparations loan using immobilized Russian Central Bank assets held in a securities depository based in Brussels. The proposed scheme would see the EU exchange the Russian assets for zero-coupon AAA bonds, with the cash going to Kyiv. Ukraine would only have to repay in the event Moscow agrees to pay Kyiv war reparations. But as the clock ticks toward a make-or-break EU summit next month, there are few signs of the deadlock being broken between EU officials and the Belgian government, which is worried about legal claims against it and retaliation from Russia. And the problem has only been complicated by Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico announcing last week that he will also oppose using Russian frozen assets to fund Ukraine’s defense spending. Without the reparations loan, the EU will be hard-pressed to come up with the funding Ukraine needs, which is even more urgent now that U.S. financial support has been discontinued under President Donald Trump. Without the reparations loan, it seems highly unlikely that member countries will agree instead to borrow the funds on the market. Cash-strapped governments are not keen on the idea of being on the hook to pay the interest.  That might leave a “coalition of the willing” to try to raise funds against the backdrop of political turmoil in Kyiv and a mounting hue and cry over corruption allegations. This week, a former business associate of Zelenskyy fled the country as independent corruption investigators charged him and six others over an illegal scheme to control key state-owned enterprises, including Energoatom, Ukraine’s nuclear energy agency.  Defense procurement corruption is also in the sights of investigators and, according to people close to the investigation, who asked not to be identified, more raids will take place shortly on the Ukrainian defense ministry as part of a probe into inflated procurement contracts. “All of this is very bad timing just as Brussels has to decide on more funding for Kyiv,” a foreign adviser to the Ukrainian government told POLITICO. “This is causing the Ukrainians tremendous problems in terms of convincing Western allies to continue funding. And it’s ammunition for those in the MAGA crowd and those in Central Europe, the Hungarians for example, to say, ‘Why are we doing this?’” A former Ukrainian official, who also was granted the right not to be identified in order to discuss sensitive issues, said he expected Western funding and weapons would continue as Ukraine is “too big to fail.” But Brussels will communicate very strongly behind the scenes its displeasure and tie more tightly some future project funding to reforms. The second problem is on the battlefield, where Ukraine is coming under increasing pressure from Russian forces and on the brink of losing the town of Pokrovsk, an important logistical and transport hub where fighting has been raging for more than a year.  Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico announcing last week that he will also oppose using Russian frozen assets to fund Ukraine’s defense spending. | Tetiana Dzhafarova/Getty Images Losing Pokrovsk would trigger a new stage in the battle for Donetsk and give the Russians greater leeway in trying to overrun the 25 percent of the region it hasn’t managed to seize. It would put Russian commanders in a stronger position to threaten the strategically significant towns of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. What’s adding to worries is that Ukrainian commanders may have been tactically outmatched in the battle for Pokrovsk, having fallen for a Russian ruse in August when they were seemingly hoodwinked by a Russian offensive on the neighboring town of Dobropillia. “The Russians distracted our generals with a breakthrough at Dobropillia, then used this to break through at Pokrovsk,” said Mariana Bezuhla, a lawmaker who’s a strident critic of the Ukrainian Armed Forces commander, General Oleksandr Syrskyi.  Bezuhla, a former deputy chair of the Parliamentary Committee on National Security and Defense, isn’t alone in thinking Ukrainian commanders made tactical errors in Pokrovsk, including diverting reinforcements to Dobropillia at a key moment.  Now there’s concern that the Russians are seeking to capitalize on Ukraine’s rearguard action in Pokrovsk by mounting forays into Dnipropetrovsk region in the south and Zaporizhzhia. “Despite the heroism and modernity of many people in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the Ukrainian army’s decision-making system simply can’t keep up and is being jerked around within a framework set by the enemy,” Bezuhla added. The battle for Pokrovsk has again highlighted Ukraine’s severe manpower shortage. In some sections of the front line, Russia enjoys a 10-to-1 manpower advantage. In the countryside, that isn’t such a problem as drones and remote-controlled systems dominate the battlefield. But when engagements involve close-quarter combat in urban settings, as in Pokrovsk, the Russians have an advantage.  Aside from worries over funding and what’s happening on the battlefield, there’s the third big challenge of the winter — the energy war.  In past winters, Ukrainians were focused on keeping the lights on as Russian airstrikes relentlessly pummeled its power grid, part of the Kremlin’s strategy to enlist “General Winter” to exhaust Ukrainians’ stubborn spirit of resistance. Thanks to Ukrainian improvisation and engineering ingenuity in patching up the damaged system, along with energy imports from Europe, the lights largely stayed on — albeit with rolling blackouts and outages, among the worst back in October 2022.  This time round, though, the Russian attacks are of much greater magnitude and the Ukrainians don’t have the air defenses to cope, nor are they likely to get them soon. On top of that, Russia has adjusted its tactics by targeting not only the power grid but also Ukraine’s natural gas infrastructure. Sixty percent of Ukrainians rely on natural gas to keep their homes warm.  With the Ukrainian winter just a month away, the country may have lost a third of its natural gas production capacity, possibly more. In early October, Bloomberg reported that 60 percent of domestic production capacity had been disabled in strikes on facilities in Poltava and Kharkiv, Ukraine’s main gas extraction regions. Authorities subsequently claimed that repairs had restored half of what was lost.  But attacks have come thick and fast since, in what Sergii Koretskyi, chairman of Naftogaz, the state-owned national oil and gas company, has dubbed “acts of terrorism.” In just one October week alone, a series of three Russian strikes targeted gas extraction facilities in the regions of Kharkiv, Sumy and Chernihiv. The size of the challenge was highlighted over the weekend with yet another massive attack on Ukraine’s energy and gas infrastructure, which plunged a large part of the country into the cold and dark. Former Energy Minister Olga Bohuslavets has warned: “It is already clear that this winter will be much harder than all previous ones.” It is indeed going to be a hard winter for Ukraine. The big question is whether the country will emerge in good enough shape to resist a bad peace deal being foisted on it. 

China suspended a ban on exporting some dual-use materials to the U.S., the Chinese Ministry of Commerce announced on Sunday, following the easing of trade tensions between the two sides. The move covers exports of gallium, germanium and antimony, which are used in the production of advanced semiconductors used in smartphones and computing. The materials are also used in military technologies such as electronic warfare and surveillance systems, and, in the case of antimony, also missile systems and ammunition. Beijing suspended a measure introduced last year that restricted exports of those materials and imposed stricter checks on dual-use items that include graphite. The suspension will be in effect “from now until Nov. 27, 2026,” the ministry said in a statement. China’s President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump recently agree to lower tariffs and ease other trade measures for one year, providing relief to global value chains after a trade war that threatened to escalate. Beijing has relaxed checks on exports of rare earths and lithium battery materials and agreed to resume shipping key chips for Europe’s manufacturers.

Czechia — one of Ukraine’s staunchest allies — is considering cutting the flow of much-needed arms and ammunition to Kyiv’s forces when its new government takes control in the coming weeks, according to a key leader of the incoming coalition. Filip Turek, the president of the right-wing populist Motorists party that this week signed an agreement to help form a national government, said that his country will “maintain NATO commitments and adherence to international law.” However, he went on, “it will prioritize diplomatic efforts to end the war in Ukraine and mitigate risks of conflict in Europe, shifting from military aid funded by the national budget to humanitarian support and focusing on Czech security needs.” The Motorists party was founded in 2022, and clinched six seats in parliament during last month’s nationwide election, making it a pivotal kingmaker in efforts by prime minister-designate Andrej Babiš and his populist ANO faction to form a government. Turek is under consideration to take on the role of foreign minister in the new administration. Babiš has previously publicly cast doubt on the future of a major program led by the current Czech government to provide tens of thousands of artillery shells to Ukraine, but has avoided publicly committing to a position since the election. Responding to the comments, first reported in POLITICO’s Brussels Playbook, outgoing Czech Foreign Minister Jan Lipavský said, “the limitation of Czech military aid to Ukraine is news that will surely bring great joy to Russian soldiers on the front line. Let’s consider it a Christmas gift from Babiš to Vladimir Putin.” According to Lipavský, whose broad center-right platform suffered defeat in October’s election, the new coalition’s policy statements “do not mention the word Russia even once,” and fail to face up to the Kremlin’s aggression. “The new government will be undermining the security of the Czech Republic,” Lipavský said. Turek added that the new Czech government would deal with Moscow in a manner “guided by pragmatic protection of national interests” and avoid “escalation that could endanger Czechia’s energy security or economic stability.” A “broader focus on sovereignty and non-intervention suggests a cautious, interest-based approach,” he said. While the Czech government may change the types of aid it provides to Ukraine, the EU’s main plan to finance Kyiv next year hinges on the use of Russian frozen assets currently held in Belgium. Brussels is in the process of deciding whether to support those measures, and it’s unclear whether Prague would oppose such a move. Babiš, tasked with forming a government within the next month, may face opposition from President Petr Pavel over Turek’s nomination. The likely next foreign minister has faced police investigation over inflammatory social media posts, some of which he has apologized for and others of which he has denied authorship. EU STANCE At the same time, Turek said Prague would prioritize being “a sovereign, confident member of the EU and a firm ally in NATO,” but simultaneously “resist further transfers of powers to Brussels and advocate for a union based on unanimity, mutual respect, and pragmatic policies that avoid overburdening citizens with regulations.” The former racing car driver, who until last month served as a member of the European Parliament and campaigned on an anti-Green Deal platform, branded eco-conscious policies “unsustainable,” calling for a reversal of the 2035 ban on the sale of cars with combustion engines and for emissions trading systems to be dropped altogether. “Real change requires Brussels to prioritize factory floors and family budgets over ideological agendas that only accelerate the offshoring of sophisticated European production to China,” Turek said, “where less efficient plants and long-distance shipping generate higher global emissions, paradoxically contradicting the very climate objectives Brussels claims to pursue.” Babiš will have to present his proposed list of ministers to Czech President Petr Pavel in the coming days before a vote of confidence in the new government can be held.

Suspicious drones spotted above Belgian military bases over the weekend are meant to spy on fighter jets and ammunition, Belgian Defense Minister Theo Francken said Sunday. “They [the drones] come to spy, to see where the F-16s are, where the ammunition are, and other highly strategic information,” he told Belgian outlet RTBF. Francken earlier Sunday announced that an investigation was launched after reports of unmanned aerial vehicles flying over the Kleine Brogel military base in northern Belgium. The base is key to Belgium’s defense and includes an American presence. That’s where Belgium’s U.S.-made nuclear-capable F-16 fighter jets are currently stationed, and where F-35s will be located as well. This weekend’s incident is one of many recently in Belgium and elsewhere in Europe. In the past weeks, Russian drones were intercepted and shot down over Poland. Another Russian drone was tracked over Romania and drones of unknown origin — but with high suspicion toward Russia — disrupted air traffic at airports in Denmark, Norway and Germany. Francken stopped short of attributing the latest drone incursions in Belgium to Moscow, but he hinted there were few other obvious culprits. “The Russians are trying to do this in all European countries,” he told RTBF. “Is it the Russians now? I can’t say that, but the motives are clear and the ways of doing things like this are also very clear,” he said. “War is truly a drone war, and the Defense Department really needs to prepare for that,” Francken added. The Belgian defense minister is expected to present next week a €50 million plan to deploy a national counter-drone system. Speaking on Radio 1, he previously said the package will fund detection systems, jammers and drone guns to protect key installations.

BRUSSELS — Romania wants Europe’s rearmament push to benefit all EU nations, not just the largest ones. The massive increase in defense spending and weapons orders that is foreseen in the coming years should translate into new factories and jobs in his country, Romania’s Defense Minister Liviu-Ionuț Moșteanu told POLITICO. “If we spend people’s money on defense, it’s important for them to see that part of it is coming back to their country, for example via factories. It’s not just about buying rockets abroad,” he said in an interview at NATO headquarters. “We aim to have a part of the production in the country. We want to be part of the production chain,” he added. “Every country wants to have a big share, but so far only a few do.” Western nations such as France, Germany, Italy and Sweden have the bloc’s best-developed arms industries and are grabbing the majority of lucrative arms contracts. Former eastern bloc countries like Romania tend to have smaller defense companies without the technological know-how to produce the full array of weapons needed to rearm, meaning they are more dependent on external suppliers. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has opened the money taps for defense. NATO countries agreed this summer to boost their defense spending target from 2 percent of gross domestic product to 5 percent by 2035. According to the European Commission, reaching the new target will require an additional €288 billion spent on defense each year. Romania is spending 2.3 percent of its GDP on the military this year and plans to raise that to 3.5 percent by 2030. One of its main challenges is to modernize its armed forces, which have operated for decades largely with obsolete Soviet-era military kit. The country, which borders Ukraine, Moldova and the Black Sea as well as EU countries, is key to regional security in southeastern Europe and hosts a NATO battlegroup led by France that also includes American troops. LOANS FOR WEAPONS Bucharest is set to be the second-largest user of the EU’s €150 billion SAFE scheme, and is asking for €16.7 billion in low interest loans for defense. Moșteanu said two-thirds of that money will be spent on military equipment and the remaining third on infrastructure; it also includes military aid to Ukraine and Moldova. The condition for any procurement under SAFE — which is open mostly to European companies — would be industrial returns in Romania, the minister told POLITICO. The condition for any procurement under SAFE — which is open mostly to European companies — would be industrial returns in Romania, the minister told POLITICO. | Thierry Monasse/Getty Images In one example of the country’s push to ensure some defense cash stays at home, an ongoing €6.5 billion tender for more than 200 tanks sets a condition that final assembly happen in the country. “It’s very important for the years to come that when we talk about spending money, we spread [the industrial return] evenly throughout the continent,” the minister said, referring also to countries further from the frontlines such as Portugal. “It’s a negotiation with the producers,” he said, adding that if European manufacturers don’t accept domestic production requirements, Bucharest will take its money to companies outside the EU that are willing to do so. “If some programs don’t look good under SAFE, we’ll move them under the national budget,” he stressed. The Romanian government is already a big customer of foreign weapons manufacturers, especially from the U.S., Israel and South Korea. It recently purchased American-made Patriot air defense systems and F-35 warplanes, as well as K9 self-propelled howitzers from South Korea’s Hanwha Aerospace. Last year, Hanwha Aerospace executives told POLITICO that Romania could become a weapons production hub for Europe, the Middle East and Africa. WHAT ROMANIA BRINGS TO THE TABLE Romania, which is one of Europe’s most industrialized countries, has assets to offer arms-makers, Moșteanu argued. Romania, which is one of Europe’s most industrialized countries, has assets to offer arms-makers, Moșteanu argued. | Andreea Campeanu/Getty Images It’s already luring in some of Europe’s largest defense companies: Bucharest and German giant Rheinmetall signed an agreement earlier this year to build an ammunition powder plant that will be partly funded by EU money under the Act in Support of Ammunition Production scheme. In the near future, manufacturers will need to open new factories to meet demand, and Romania could easily host some of them, Moșteanu said: “We have defense production facilities with all the necessary approvals. They’re not up-to-date but it’s a good starting point.” Another strength of the country is its robust automotive sector, which could help weapons manufacturers swiftly ramp up manufacturing. Defense companies across the bloc are teaming up with carmakers to benefit from their mass production expertise. “We have a very strong automotive industry in Romania that can switch to the defense industry,” the minister said, adding that the machinery, production lines, expertise and supply chains are already in place. Romania is also looking to cut red tape. “We’re looking to change the legislation to speed investments in the defense industry. I know there is the defense omnibus in Brussels,” Moșteanu said, referring to the European Commission’s simplification package, “but I don’t know when it’ll come, I prefer to have something quick.”

Anchal Vohra is a Brussels-based international affairs commentator. Last month, the South Korean Ambassador to the EU took a gentle bow and launched a Korean movie weekend at an independent theater in Brussels. The opening film was inspired by the true story of the abduction of 23 Korean missionaries by the Taliban in 2007 — a reminder of the risks South Korea has taken to prove its worth to its most important strategic partner, the United States. Currently, however, Seoul’s ties with Washington are under stress. And as South Korea concentrates its energies on greeting its relations with the U.S. on surer footing, the country has little time for its allies in Europe. Since returning to office, U.S. President Donald Trump has adopted a mercantilist approach to trade, leaving Seoul increasingly trapped between the U.S. and China. He has demanded that Seoul pay $550 billion in investments “upfront” if it wants tariff relief, and that it substantially increase its defense expenditure if it wants to keep the U.S. forces (USFK) deployed as a bulwark against North Korea. America’s European allies are battling identical dilemmas, being forced to up their defense spending, accept tariffs and promise more than $600 billion in investment from EU in the U.S. Yet, it seems they’re unable to keep their key Asian ally interested in the bloc or NATO in the process. “The current government is very occupied” with sorting out economic issues at home, and is busy with “the Trump situation,” said Wooyeal Paik, a professor of political science and international studies at Yonsei University. “NATO-AP4,” he said, in reference to NATO’s four partners in the Indo-Pacific, “is not on the table.” This is surprising given that over the last three years, Seoul’s ties with NATO had advanced exponentially. Former President Yoon Suk Yeol wanted Seoul to be a global player, and had deemed further cooperation necessary to confront common security threats: “South Korea should no longer be confined to the Korean Peninsula but rise to the challenge of being what I have described as a ‘global pivotal state,’ one that advances freedom, peace, and prosperity through liberal democratic values and substantial cooperation,” he wrote. Under his leadership, South Korea shared intelligence with NATO on Moscow’s deployment of North Korean soldiers against Ukraine, enhanced cooperation on seemingly benign but increasingly charged files like hybrid warfare, and indirectly supplied much-needed ammunition to Ukraine when Europe fell short. There was even talk of an Asian NATO. This pro-NATO policy was in part intended to limit Moscow’s revanchism and to discourage China from invading Taiwan. But more importantly, from Seoul’s perspective, it was meant to curtail Moscow’s growing ties with Pyongyang. Seoul has long been worried about Russia supplying military technology to Pyongyang and employing North Korean soldiers and laborers who send money back home, thus aiding the cash-strapped regime. U.S. President Donald Trump has adopted a mercantilist approach to trade, leaving Seoul increasingly trapped between the U.S. and China. | Pool photo by Allison Robbert/EPA However, in a dramatic turn of events earlier this year, Yoon tried to impose martial law and was impeached soon after. Subsequent elections then paved the way for Lee Jae-myung — a leader with a rather different worldview, seemingly more open to rapprochement with Moscow and downgrading ties with NATO. So far, Lee has said he’ll pursue a “pragmatic” foreign policy centered on national interests, a part of which is maintaining ties with China — the country’s biggest trading partner. And to the surprise of NATO’s European members, Lee didn’t attend their high-stakes summit at The Hague this year. It appears the South Korean leader has prioritized the national economy rather Europe’s security concerns, and he appears reluctant to see security in the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific theaters as linked. Plus, there were already murmurs of dissatisfaction in Seoul with a foreign policy that sanctioned Moscow during Yoon’s tenure, with Lee himself reportedly warning against taking a side in the Russia-Ukraine war. He also described Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a “novice politician,” asking: “Why should we get involved in someone else’s war?” Lee sees Russia as a neighbor it must, somehow, reconcile with, not as an enemy. Along these lines, Russian Ambassador to South Korea Georgy Zinoviev had already predicted better ties between Moscow and Seoul once Yoon was impeached, and he was right: South Korea invited Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, for this week’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit. But this doesn’t necessarily mean Lee intends to stop defense cooperation with Europe. South Korea will continue to sell weapons that free up European supplies for Ukraine. And Seoul’s supplies of ammunition to the U.S., which freed up American ammunition to be sent to Ukraine, were also critical to Ukraine’s war effort.  “South Korea wants to preserve the option of reopening relations with Russia in the future when conditions allow. This is why assistance was deliberately channeled indirectly, mainly through European partners and industrial contracts, rather than by direct lethal deliveries to Ukraine,” observed Arnaud Leveau, president of the civil society research institute Asia Centre. “Going forward, indirect support will remain the most realistic scenario. Contracts with Poland and the Czech Republic will continue, and these [will] allow Europe to free up stock for Ukraine,” he added. There is a sense, however, that the policies of South Korea’s new president are still taking shape. That even if domestic compulsions, and the fact that Trump has often expressed warmth toward his Russian counterpart, might have influenced Lee’s calculus, all is not lost. “For NATO and the EU, the way to keep Seoul engaged is through practical, low-visibility cooperation,” explained Leveau, listing cybersecurity, resilience, and industrial partnerships and discreet intelligence dialogues on maritime Southeast Asia as possible areas for collaboration. “These concrete areas matter more than big political slogans,” he said. And they may be the key to keeping one of Europe’s most crucial partners in Asia on-side.

BRUSSELS — Heard the one about the 12-and-half-hour meeting of 27 national leaders that succeeded in agreeing very little apart from coming up with quite a lot of “let’s decide in a couple of months” or “let’s just all agree on language that means absolutely nothing but looks like we’re united” or “let’s at least celebrate that we got through this packed agenda without having to come back on Friday”? No? Well let us enlighten you. And if that makes you question how we’ve managed to squeeze 29 things out of this, well let’s just say one of these is about badly functioning vending machines… 1 . STRAIGHT OUT OF THE BOX WITH A QUICK WIN ON SANCTIONS … The day was off to a flying start when Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico lifted his veto over the latest raft of Russia sanctions on the eve of the summit — allowing the package to get formally signed off at 8 a.m. before leaders even started talking. Fico rolled over after claiming to achieve what he set out to do: clinch support for Slovakia’s car industry. He found an unusual ally in German Chancellor Friedrich Merz who he met separately to discuss the impact of climate targets on their countries’ automotive sectors. 2. … BUT AGREEMENT ON FROZEN RUSSIAN ASSETS WAS LESS FORTHCOMING There was a moment earlier in the week where the EU looked to be on the cusp of a breakthrough on using Russian frozen assets to fund a €140 billion loan for Ukraine. Belgium, the main holdout, appeared to be warming to the European Commission’s daring idea to crack open the piggy bank. But Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever stuck by his guns , saying he feared taking the assets, which are held in a Brussels-based financial depository, could trigger Moscow to take legal action. 3. BELGIUM DIDN’T MOVE ON ITS BIG THREE BIG DEMANDS The Flemish right-winger’s prerequisites were threefold: the “full mutualization of the risk,” guarantees that if the money has to paid back, “every member state will chip in,” and for every other EU country that holds immobilized assets to also seize them. Leaders eventually agreed on that classic EU summit outcome: a fudge. They tasked the European Commission to “present options” at the next European Council — effectively deciding not to decide. “Political will is clear, and the process will move forward,” said one EU official. But it’s uncertain whether a deal can be brokered by the next summit, currently set for December. 4. DE WEVER REJECTS THE ‘BAD BOY’ LABEL After POLITICO ranked the Belgian leader among its list of “bad boys” likely to disrupt Thursday’s summit (rightfully, might we add), he protested the branding. “A bad boy! Me? … If you talk about the immobilized assets, we’re the very, very best,” he said. The day was off to a flying start when Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico lifted his veto over the latest raft of Russia sanctions on the eve of the summit. | Olivier Hoslet/EPA 5. URSULA VON DER LEYEN ALSO CONCEDED THEY’RE NOT QUITE THERE YET The high-level talks “allowed us to identify points we need to clarify,” the Commission president said tactfully. “Nobody vetoed nothing today,” European Council President António Costa chimed in. “The technical and legal aspects of Europe’s support need to be worked upon.” Translation in case you didn’t understand the double negative: The EU needs to come up with a better plan to reassure Belgium — and fast. 6. UKRAINE: EVER THE OPTIMIST Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ― a guest of the summit ― told reporters Russia must pay the price for its invasion, calling on the EU to follow through with its frozen assets proposal, adding he thought the leaders were “close” to an agreement. “If Russia brought war to our land, they have to pay for this war,” he said. 7. AND ZELENSKYY IS STILL HOLDING OUT FOR TOMAHAWKS “We will see,” was Zelenskyy’s message on the topic of acquiring the long-range missiles from the U.S., which Donald Trump has so far ruled out selling to Kyiv. “Each day brings something … maybe tomorrow we will have Tomahawks,” Zelenskyy said. “I don’t know.” 8. UKRAINE WANTS GERMANY TO SEND MORE WEAPONS TOO Merz held a meeting with Zelenskyy about “the situation in Washington and the American plans that are now on the table,” a German official said, adding Zelenskyy made “specific requests” to the chancellor about helping Ukraine with its “defense capabilities.” After the summit, the German leader said Berlin would review a proposal on how German technologies could help to protect Ukrainian’s energy and water infrastructure. 9. THUMBS UP TO DEFENSE ROADMAP! EU leaders endorsed the Defense Readiness Roadmap 2030 presented last week by the Commission, which aims to prepare member countries for war by 2030. One of its main objectives is to fill EU capability gaps in nine areas: air and missile defense, enablers, military mobility, artillery systems, AI and cyber, missile and ammunition, drones and anti-drones, ground combat, and maritime. The plan also mentions areas like defense readiness and the role of Ukraine, which would be heavily armed and supported to become a “steel porcupine” able to deter Russian aggression. As leaders deliberated, a Russian fighter jet and a refueling aircraft briefly crossed into Lithuanian airspace from the Kaliningrad region, underscoring the need for the EU to protect its skies. 10. KYIV IS PROMISING TO BUY EUROPEAN — MOSTLY Ukraine will prioritize domestic and European industry when spending cash from the proposed reparation loan funded by Russia’s frozen assets, Zelenskyy told leaders at the summit — but wants to be able to go across the pond when necessary. 11. MUCH THE SAME FOR SPAIN Spanish leader Pedro Sánchez said the country had committed to contributing cash to a fund organized by NATO to buy weapons for Ukraine from the U.S. | Nicolas Tucat/Getty Images Spanish leader Pedro Sánchez said the country had committed to contributing cash to a fund organized by NATO to buy weapons for Ukraine from the U.S. “Today, most of the air defense components, such as Patriots or Tomahawks … which Ukraine clearly needs, are only manufactured in the United States,” he said. Madrid has been a thorn in Washington’s side over its lax defense spending. 12. THERE WAS A MERCOSUR SURPRISE Merz stunned trade watchers when he announced the leaders had backed a controversial trade agreement with Latin American countries. “We voted on it today: The Mercosur agreement can be ratified,” the German chancellor told reporters, adding that he was “very happy” about that. “All 27 countries voted unanimously in favor,” Merz added on Mercosur. “It’s done.” The remark sparked confusion amongst delegations, as the European Council doesn’t usually vote on trade agreements — let alone one as controversial as the mammoth agreement with the countries of the Latin American bloc of Mercosur, which has been in negotiations for over 25 years. One EU diplomat clarified that it’s because European Council President António Costa sought confirmation from EU leaders that they would agree to take a stance on the deal by the end of this year — and no formal vote was taken yet. 13. CLIMATE TALKS PASSED WITHOUT A HITCH One of the hotter potatoes ahead of the summit passed surprisingly smoothly. Leaders ultimately refrained from bulldozing the EU’s climate targets, agreeing to a vaguely worded commitment to a green transition, though without committing to a 2040 goal, which proposes cutting emissions by 90 percent compared to 1990 levels. In the words of one diplomat: “Classic balance, everyone equally unhappy.” 14. AT LEAST ONE LEADER SEEMED PLEASED, THOUGH Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called the summit a “turning point” in Europe’s approach to green policy, adding he succeeded in inserting a “revision clause” into the EU’s plan to extend its carbon-trading system to heating and transport emissions that will give member countries the option to delay or adjust the rollout. “We’ve defused a threat to Polish families and drivers,” he declared, calling the change a signal that “Europe is finally speaking our language.” 15. BUT THE ISSUE WON’T STAY BURIED FOR LONG Ministers are set to reconvene and cast a vote on the 2040 goal on Nov. 4, described by one diplomat as “groundhog day.” 16. MEANWHILE, THERE WAS NOTHING ON MIGRATION … Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called the summit a “turning point” in Europe’s approach to green policy. | Thierry Monasse/Getty Images Aside from promising to make migration a “priority,” the EU’s leaders failed to make any kind of breakthrough on a stalled proposal for burden-sharing. Reminder: The EU missed a deadline last week to agree on a new way of deciding which member countries are under stress from receiving migrants and ways of sharing the responsibility more equally across the bloc. 17. … BUT THE ANTI-MIGRANT BREAKFAST CLUB LIVES ON Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen and the Netherlands’ Dick Schoof have kept up their informal pre-summit “migration breakfasts” since last June, swapping innovative ideas on tougher border and asylum policies. They met again on Thursday with von der Leyen, who updated them on the EU’s latest plans for accelerating migrant returns, and the trio agreed an informal summit will take place next month in Rome. 18. NOR DID THE EU’S SOCIAL MEDIA BAN GET MUCH OF A LOOK IN As expected, the leaders endorsed a “possible” minimum age for kids to use social media, but failed to commit to a bloc-wide ban, with capitals divided on whether to make the age 15 or 16, as well as on the issue of parental consent. 19. THERE WAS A WHOLE LOT OF WAITING FOR NEWS… Journalists were frantically pressing their sources in the Council and national delegations to find out what was happening at the leaders’ table as the meeting dragged into the late hours. It eventually finished at 10.30 p.m. ― 12 and a half hours after it began. 20. … AND THE GREENS SEIZED THEIR MOMENT The EU Parliament’s Greens group co-chair Bas Eickhout wandered the hallways of the Justus Lipsius building ready to brief bored journalists about the wonders of the Green Deal — while leaders debated how to unravel it in the other room. 21. THE COMBUSTION ENGINE BAN FELL FLAT One of the pillars of the EU’s green transition, its 2035 de facto combustion engine ban, was set to play a major role in the competitiveness and climate discussions, with Merz and Fico spoiling for a fight over the proposal — yet it barely registered as a footnote. Slovakia used the climate talks to oppose the ban, and the Czech Republic chimed in to agree, but in the end the summit’s official conclusions welcomed the Commission’s proposed ban without mentioning how it should be watered down. 22. THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL’S VENDING MACHINES AREN’T VERY, ER, COMPETITIVE Officials and journalists alike found that the vending machines in the EU’s Justus Lipsius building, which incidentally is due for a €1 billion renovation, about as efficient as a roundtable of 27 national leaders lasting 12 and a half hours. 23. THE BLOC IS WORRIED ABOUT CHINA… Beijing’s export controls on rare earths came up in the talks on competitiveness, according to two EU officials, with some leaders expressing their concerns. 24. … BUT THEY’RE NOT READY TO GO NUCLEAR — YET One of the officials said the EU’s most powerful trade weapon, the Anti-Coercion Instrument, was mentioned, but didn’t garner much interest around the table. 25. HOUSING GETS 40 MINUTES — NOT BAD FOR A FIRST RUN Leaders spent a chunk of time discussing the continent’s housing crisis. A solid start for the topic, which made it onto the agenda for the first time at Costa’s behest. The EU executive “is ready to help,” von der Leyen said after the summit, announcing a European Affordable Housing Plan is in the pipeline and the first EU Housing Summit in 2026. | Dursun Aydemir/Getty Images During talks, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis called on the Commission to create a database tracking which housing policies work — and which don’t — across Europe. Most leaders agreed that, while housing remains a national competence, the EU still has a role to play. 26. AND THE COMMISSION WANTS TO ROLL UP ITS SLEEVES The EU executive “is ready to help,” von der Leyen said after the summit, announcing a European Affordable Housing Plan is in the pipeline and the first EU Housing Summit in 2026. 27. LEADERS ENJOYED A FEAST OR TWO For lunch, langoustine with yuzu, celeriac and apple, fillet of veal with artichokes and crispy polenta, and a selection of fresh fruit. For dinner, cannelloni with herbs, courgette velouté, fillet of brill with chorizo and pepper, and fig meringue cake. Yum. 28. THOUGH A FEW COULDN’T MAKE IT Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán was the most notable absence, rocking up several hours late due to a national holiday in Budapest. Portugal and Slovenia’s leaders were also absent at one point. 29. AND COSTA KEPT HIS PROMISE … JUST The European Council president pledged to streamline summits under his watch, making them one-day affairs instead of two. And with just a couple hours to spare, he was successful. Okay, breathe. Did we miss anything? (Don’t answer that.) Gerardo Fortuna, Max Griera Andrieu, Jordyn Dahl, Gabriel Gavin, Hanne Cokelaere, Clea Caulcutt, Hans von der Burchard, Kathryn Carlson, Tim Ross, Jacopo Barigazzi, Gregorio Sorgi, Eliza Gkritsi, Carlo Martuscelli, Nicholas Vinocur, Saga Ringmar, Sarah Wheaton, Louise Guillot, Zia Weise, Camille Gijs, Bartosz Brzezinski and Giedre Peseckyte contributed to this report.