Foreign Affairs Council (Defence): Press conference by High Representative Kaja Kallas

Check against delivery!  

Good afternoon.

Good to see you again. We just concluded a meeting of the Defence Ministers, which began this morning with the European Defence Agency’s (EDA) Steering Bboard. Following from the tasking that we got from the European leaders, Ministers today agreed to strengthen the EDA with the dedicated structures for innovation and experimentation. Work will continue to strengthen the Agency even further, also on joint procurement. Ukraine's experience shows how quickly modern warfare evolves, and the lessons learned must shape our policy decisions. Defence innovation has to become a political priority.  

Then, we discussed Ukraine. We had Minister Fedorov joining us, and also NATO Deputy Secretary General Šekerinska. Ukraine will receive the first disbursement of the €90 billion loan already in June, and these funds will go directly to drones, which are the key capability in pushing back Russian forces at the moment. At the same time, it is clear that although the €90 billion loan is there, the bilateral support must continue. The same goes for more sanctions, more pressure on Russia. 

Ministers discussed also the €6.6 billion that is blocked in the EPF, and there was a strong support to find solutions to mobilise these funds. We will come up with proposals in this regard, because of course Member States have different ideas how to mobilise it, and then we need to have a balanced approach to take that all into account. 

We are also advancing our work on the EU security guarantees to Ukraine when the truce is there. This includes strengthening the EU Satellite Centre, so it could also provide support for the ceasefire monitoring, track Russia's shadow fleet and help prevent sanctions’ circumvention. But it is also clear that we need it for Europe ourselves to strengthen this capability. Ministers also discussed the modernisation of the two training centres for Ukrainian military, and I thank those Member States who have already contributed with funding for this.  

Then, turning to the Middle East, the Strait of Hormuz is caught in grey zone between war and peace. We support all diplomatic initiatives to have a way out and prevent further escalation. 

Closure of the world's most important shipping lane is untenable. EU naval operations in the region can play a vital role in restoring energy and trade flows. Operation ASPIDES already makes a crucial contribution in protecting the shipping in the Red Sea, but its activities could also be extended to the Strait. It only requires the change of the operational plan, because the mandate already allows this. Of course, this is when the conditions are appropriate. And this is a discussion we will continue shortly after this press conference, when we have the meeting hosted by the UK and France on the Coalition of the Willing.  

On Lebanon, we discussed also what more can we do there. Europe is doing its part to mitigate the crisis. Thousands of European troops serve part of UNIFIL. We have also supported the Lebanese Armed Forces with €100 million, but it is clear that when UNIFIL’s mandate ends, then there needs to be also something in addition and the Ministers were discussing how that could be. We are currently looking into a new EU mission to help strengthen state control in Lebanon. The stronger we make the Lebanese army, the weaker we make Hezbollah.  

And, finally, we had a discussion on the defence readiness. Russia is gearing up for long-term confrontation with the West. Tanks and missiles are pretty much the only thing that Russia's economy is producing right now. Whether Putin dares to test European defences is really dependent on us. Deterrence works if it is credible; showing weakness only invites aggression.  

Member States have put a lot of funding on the table, but defence industry production in Europe is still not ramped up. So, we need faster arms production, also cheaper and rapid delivery to close those capability gaps. We also had the defence industry representatives present, so we were able to discuss with them as well. Ministers stressed that the industry needs to deliver in time and with volume, and also the industry representatives were then explaining what is hindering them from ramping up. And then we had a discussion of the next steps, how to speed up this effort.   

With that, I take your questions. Thank you. 

Q&A 

Q. On Article 42.7, was it discussed today? What are the scenarios actually on the discussion, also among the Ambassadors? I know there were some exercises or simulations on this. And if you could say what the next steps are, what the timeframe is. 

Thank you. No, Article 42.7 was not discussed today because we will have a discussion in the Informal Meeting of Defence Ministers. You rightly pointed out that we had the tabletop exercise for the PSC ambassadors to really identify the gaps. But before that, we also actually mapped all what could be done on the 42.7. So basically three scenarios. One scenario when Article 42.7 is triggered together with Article 5. So, who does what really, how these two tracks complement each other. Then the other scenario is when you have a Member State that is not part of NATO, so it is only Article 42.7. What could be done then? And then the third is when it is below the threshold. So it is hybrid attacks and threats like this. What could be done? What are the tools that are in the toolbox of the Commission, of the European External Action Service, of the Member States, and how does it work? But so we will have a deeper discussion in Cyprus when we have the Informal Meeting of the Ministers.  

Q. Two things. One is you said that you are going to keep talking about ASPIDES at the Willing call. I would like to know what level is that, is defence ministers? And secondly, what role ASPIDES could play within the Coalition of the Willing operation in Hormuz? Is going to be, in addition could Member Sstates contribute to both or is it something you pick and choose, either I do one way or I do the other. How could that work? Thank you. 

We had very good discussions over the Operation ASPIDES today. So, as I said, it is a naval operation that is already in the region and the area of operation is also covering, so that we only need to change the operational plan. But what it needs is more vessels, more ships. And of course, there were also Member States today actually saying that they will contribute with more ships to this operation. So, it is the fastest way to move forward. We have the call of the Coalition of the Willing, and that is Defence Ministers level this time. And it is clear that the operation ASPIDES could also contribute to the Coalition of the Willing. So, if the idea of the Coalition of the Willing is to have more countries also joining from outside, then we could contribute as one Europe with the operations that we already have. Because we have small Member States, so if you have a Member State that only has one ship, you cannot give it to different initiatives. But I think that, if we operate together under Operation ASPIDES that could be our contribution also to the Coalition of the Willing as Europe. And I really think that this is the way we could do it, the fastest way we could do it, and also the way we could make Europe really strong. Strong in the region, but also strong geopolitically, because also our contribution then, is much bigger if we do it together. Because my favourite quote of Europe only having small countries and those countries who have not realised that they are small countries yet. So doing it together, we are a force. 

Q. Just to follow up on the Strait of Hormuz, some countries are indicating that they will be pre-positioning ships near the region. Do you think the EU could take part in this pre-positioning? And also on Ukraine, since President Putin says that he thinks the war is coming to an end; do you think the EU is ready to provide all the security guarantees necessary to Ukraine in a scenario of a ceasefire starting soon. 

First on the Strait of Hormuz. Our Operation ASPIDES is already in the region. So, currently operating in the Red Sea, but the operation area is much wider. But it does not have enough ships right now. So, the Member States are putting their contributions to the Operation ASPIDES, then we can also have more ships and really to escort, and also, if we need to change the mandate to also cover the demining activities, then we can also do that.  

On your second question, Putin can end this war immediately, if it just stops bombing civilian infrastructure and withdraws its troops. It is that easy. But what his statement really shows is that he is not in a strong position. So, I think there is an opportunity for ending this war. Of course, the security guarantees that we need to see is also, concessions from the Russian side. Because they are always the ones who are attacking their neighbours. How we can make sure, that we do not only have ceasefire or truce that would give them possibility to regroup and get their army in a better shape than it is right now and then, to go on attacking But it would be sustainable or lasting peace that they would refrain from attacking other countries. And that is why we have the discussion with the Foreign Ministers coming up of what kind of concessions we need to see from the Russian side. It is coming up already the end of May. 

Q. It is on Ukraine. Washington Post reports that the EU allies are concerned about the viability of the PURL, the US arms supply initiative to Ukraine. Since you had an exchange with Ukrainian Minister and Deputy Secretary General of NATO, can you please confirm that the EU allies are concerned about that? And if you can share more, if the EU is ready to replace some key weapons that US delivered to Ukraine, selling, actually, to Ukraine lately? 

Yes, there was such concern, but the Deputy Secretary General of NATO said that the PURL is functioning, delivering, and there is no reason for concern, so I stick to her  

words. 

 
Q. You said this morning, the defence industry is not ramping up their production, so we need to see what is the problem. But after four years of war in Ukraine you had many, many opportunities to talk to the industry and Member States and you had an opportunity even today meeting the CEO of Saab, so have you finally found the problem, and are you in a position to solve it? Apart of putting more money on the table, which does not seem to work very well.  

Yes, I share your frustration, because I have this same feeling somehow, we have not seen the industry ramping up as we would have expected. And of course, some things have come no better. I mean, the industry was also showing how much they have actually increased their production: when it comes to ammunition, when it comes to air defence, when it comes to critical capabilities. The problem is just that the needs have also grown by the Member States. And some of the things we already know, we are working on them, and some of the things that clearly, we need to develop further. One of the things, I bring you one example that was raised today and really needs to move faster, is the Procurement Directive. Many were raising this. You know, the clear rules, because the industry was saying, also, you have different rules everywhere, and it is hard to operate. Also, the standards, every Member State is tweaking things a bit, so everybody has different orders. You cannot really produce in line like this. But I mean, on the positive side, we have done a lot, and we have managed to solve some of the issues. But still, there is a lot to do. So, yes, I share your frustration. 

Q. On Ukraine. Have you discussed the issue of burden sharing among Member States?  

Since we are hearing that €60 billion of the loans will not be enough to support military for the next two years. And could European Peace Facility play a role now that one of the obstacles have been removed by democracy? And a second question, if I may, on Article 42.7. There is a fourth scenario, which is not so hypothetical. It was not so hypothetical in January. It is NATO Member States attacking a European NATO Member State and Member of the European Union. Why this scenario is not among the three you are discussing? Thank you. 

First, the burden sharing issue comes up every time. So of course, those Member States who are really contributing more are raising this every single time, and if we look at the numbers, it is clear - the burden is not equally shared. So today, again, EPF could play a role and is actually there, €6.6 billion has been blocked, but now there are also different views of how to proceed with this. That is why my services need to come up with options, really, to cater for those who say that we need to use the EPF for reimbursement, as it was initially, and those who say that we should be looking to the future, what more can we do. So, I think we need to find the balance there.  On the 42.7, I still think and hope, wish  

that this is a hypothetical scenario and so I mean it would benefit our adversaries immensely if we would start to discuss something like that. 

Q. You mentioned back at the beginning about the need for bilateral contributions to continue, because the €90 billion is not enough to fulfil Ukraine's needs on its own. I am wondering if also there was discussion about third countries and the need for them to also contribute, and maybe about the EU doing some pressure campaign to make that happen. And specifically with regards to the UK and Canada, they have both said that they want to be part of the €90 billion to kind of gain access to some defence procurement, but that would not actually increase the envelope of support for Ukraine. So, I was wondering if that might feature in the discussion, somehow, if there might be a push on these two countries, in particular, to do more than they are already doing. Thank you. 

Thank you. No, not concretely, but it is clear when we go around the world, then we are actually raising this issue, and especially now the countries who are actually benefiting from the cooperation with Ukraine that they could also help them more. Even if they cannot help them with the military means, also energy infrastructure reconstruction needs. And I know that some of those countries, where we have been pushing this, have also contributed. So also to share the burden, that you know, if we are providing support for the defence capabilities, then some other countries who share the views of the United Nations Charter, and who also understand that what is at stake, could also contribute to other fees to take the burden away from us. 

Link to the video: https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/media/video/I-289470