Special summit in Brussels: In itself: Does Trump’s policy split the EU now?

Does the policy of US President Donald Trump also split the European Union? Or does the State Association succeed in combining and effectively countering something? These questions arise more urgently than ever in the past few days. At a crisis meeting of the EU heads of state and government, there could be the first answers today.

The Ukrainian President Wolodymyr Selenskyj is also on his way to Brussels. Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) takes part for Germany, it is likely to be one of his last EU peaks. What is overview:

What is the starting point?

Trump and his team have been making it clear for weeks and clearly that they want to force negotiations on an end to the Russian attack war – it costs what they want. So far, this has been the case that Trump, for example, called the president of the attacked Ukraine a dictator and had the US military aid stop for Ukraine. In addition, from Trump’s point of view, Ukraine has to make strong concessions in negotiations with Russia.

The Europeans have so far been out of the question in all the conversations. It is also unclear whether you get a place at the negotiating table for possible peace talks. According to Trump’s will, however, they should be responsible for securing a possible peace deal and in the future they should also be responsible for conventional deterrence in Europe.

What does that mean for the EU?

The Europeans have to upgrade – and that is massive and fast. Secret services assume that Russia should be able to start a further war at the latest in 2030. It may only be deterred from this if the EU countries significantly expand their military skills by then. At the moment, many forces are in a rather poor condition because defense spending were drastically shut down in the years after the end of the Cold War.

The EU countries largely agree that defense spending must be increased significantly. For many governments, however, the question arises where the money should come from – especially since the additional investment requirement by the EU Commission was recently valued to a high three -digit billion sum of euros and countries such as France and Italy are already in debt.

The EU Commission responsible for proposals and legislative initiatives has created a plan called “Rearm Europe” (such as upgrading Europe) and hopes that he will receive the necessary approval at the EU summit. With several measures, a total of almost 800 billion euros could be mobilized, President Ursula von der Leyen hopes.

According to the agency, there should be an EU loan of up to 150 billion euros – for example, for the purchase of air and rocket defense, artillery systems and drones. The European Investment Bank (EIB) should also change its rules for lending in such a way that pure armaments projects can also be promoted.

The Commission also suggests that the individual Member States can use a special rule for the EU debt rules for a period of four years in defense issues. This could make new loans for the upgrade without risking an EU deficit procedure.

How is Germany’s position?

Germany wants a different solution in the debt rules. As can be heard from EU diplomatic circles, the constant representative of the federal government brought a long-term solution instead of a temporary exception for armaments investments at a meeting with its EU colleagues on Wednesday. A spokesman for the federal government did not want to comment on this.

Chancellor Scholz had spoken out in mid-February for a targeted change in the current EU debt rules in order to enable higher investments in defense goods within a clearly limited framework. Such a procedure could therefore create clearer conditions than that would be the case through the special rule – the so -called alternative clause.

What does Chancellor Scholz bring to Brussels?

The loosening of the debt brake for defense spending that Union and SPD agreed on Tuesday in their exploratory negotiations. Germany thus also shows the ability to act between two governments in the transition phase. That is also necessary. Germany has already been pushed to the edge of the diplomatic efforts to peace in Ukraine. Great Britain and France are now in charge of Ukraine at a European peace plan.

What are the difficulties?

The EU is currently not much different from supporting Ukraine in its difficult situation as well as possible and US President Trump repeatedly pointed out what consequences a bad deal could also have to end war for himself and his country. It is difficult that far-reaching EU decisions have to be made unanimously and in particular with Hungary Prime Minister Viktor Orban a politician who is entirely on the line of Trump.

Orban has already announced a blockage of support decisions for Ukraine for the summit. His Slovak counterpart Robert Fico also signaled resistance to a joint declaration of summit in favor of Ukraine. Both support Trump’s course in the Ukraine conflict and maintain close relationships with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.

Could there still be further support from the EU?

Among other things, further commitments for military aid are planned, which could also be given on a voluntary basis in the event of a Veto of Hungary. First of all, it is about the fact that Ukraine does not have to go into possible conversations with Russia in a position of weakness – and it is also prepared for the situation that Putin doesn’t really want to negotiate.

In addition, in the EU it is advised on how Russia could be held after a possible ceasefire to attack Ukraine again. In addition to the international troop presence, which is primarily considered by France and Great Britain, is the so-called porcupine strategy (Porcupine Strategy). For example, it would mean delivering Ukraine weapon systems with which it could relieve significantly more in the event of new Russian aggression than before. This could also include German Taurus marching aircraft, which Chancellor Scholz has always denied Ukraine.