SUMMIT OF DOUBT AND HOPE

The idea of a European political community launched by French President Emmanuel Macron in May 2022, when Paris held the EU Presidency, took shape at a summit in Prague on October 6-7. The idea is to create a kind of "platform for political coordination" between the EU member states and their neighbours. More specifically, the platform is expected to be a format of participation to replace the OSCE, or at least to function as a communicator in the European space without Russia and Belarus, which were left out because of the war in Ukraine.

From idea to summit

First elected president of France in 2017, Emmanuel Macron has always promoted an ambitious pro-European approach and each time has sought to play a key role in global diplomacy.

Macron was re-elected for a second term in April, cementing his position as a leading player in Europe. At the same time, the second leading power, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, is a newcomer who replaced the real heavyweight player of European politics, Angela Merkel.

Macron also held the EU presidency for the first half of the year, which gave him additional opportunities to promote his ambitions on the international stage. The idea of a European political community fits that perfectly.

Since the format was initiated by France and supported by the EU, it appears, in the context of the ongoing war and as claimed by President Macron himself, as the "right answer to stabilise our neighbourhood" and reinforce the candidate status granted to Ukraine and Moldova in the EU.

It also aims to give aspiring EU member states a sense of belonging to the European Club before they formally join the EU. However, Brussels has invited 44 states to the Prague summit, including the UK, Israel and Turkey, not just the countries seeking imminent accession to the EU.

Yet there are deep and even insurmountable differences and open conflict between some of the summit participants.

Among those who met at the historic Prague Castle were also the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

Different topics and different countries

The issue of Russia, which was not invited to the summit, was reigning in the forum as long as discussions focused on the economic and political implications of the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine for European security.

There were quite a few words of support for Ukraine at the summit. In principle, the summit was to demonstrate solidarity among participating states in support of Ukraine's territorial integrity and to discuss pressing issues related to European security, including also important energy aspects.

However, despite the rhetoric, few concrete results were achieved at the summit, except certain topics that received particular attention.

These included meetings between the Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders mediated by the Head of the European Commission and with the participation of the French President, as well as the first meeting between the leaders of Armenia and Turkey in 13 years. They were effective and were very positively received by the participants.

Meanwhile, even before the summit, there was a question in Europe as to whether the format risked becoming a discussion forum without any real influence or impact on the decision-making process. Would the idea of a European political community turn into another OSCE?

The summit is over but doubts about the viability of the format are still there. In addition, the Council of Europe showed some jealousy over its creation. Council’s spokesman Daniel Holtgen tweeted that the new format "has not yet been decided". "In the field of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, such a pan-European community already exists - the Council of Europe," he said.

No official statements or declarations were made at the end of the summit. The EU representative said that this would have required weeks of negotiations, so a direct open exchange was more important in the current circumstances than a single final declaration endorsed by all.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky addressed the summit participants via video link and called on leaders to turn the new political community into a European ‘community of peace’. "Let today be the starting point. A point from which Europe and the entire free world will move to guarantee peace for all of us. It is possible," he said calling on leaders to "direct all possible European forces towards ending the war".

What about expansion?

However, the summit did not offer any concrete and groundbreaking ideas on how to end the ongoing war. In return, Kiev received only a vague promise from Emmanuel Macron to "continue" military and financial assistance.

Following meetings between the French President and Czech Prime Minister Petar Fiala and Moldovan President Maia Sandu, it was announced that subsequent summits would be held every six months in Moldova, Spain and the UK respectively.

The idea is to alternate between EU and non-EU countries as hosts of the summit.

The decision to hold the forum in Moldova, an EU candidate country, is "a sign of support that we appreciate," Sandu told reporters in Prague. "To make Europe stronger and more sustainable, a sustained effort is needed," she added.

Notably, before the opening of the Prague summit, critics argued that the format was nothing more than an attempt to stall EU enlargement. The idea of a European political community can imply a placebo to appease countries that aspire to join the EU but cannot do so in the short term, as there are conflicting voices from the EU regarding the accession of these countries. In particular, the position of Paris, which does not want Ukraine to join the EU on an accelerated basis, is well known.

At the same time, the candidates themselves, especially the Western Balkans and Ukraine, made it clear from the very beginning that they wanted to join the EU as soon as possible and would not remain in prostration between EU membership and the new Membership Action Plan (MAP). At the same time, the president of unrecognised Kosovo, Vjosa Osmani, told reporters that summit organisers Emmanuel Macron and Peter Fiala had "assured" her that the platform "is not a substitute for a European integration process for the Western Balkans".

In search of alternative energy

The forum also discussed key issues challenging Europe, including security, energy, climate, the economy and migration.

According to analysts, the most urgent issue of the day and the only strong topic of discussions was the devastating energy crisis also due to the leakage of gas from the Nord Stream pipeline that connects Russia with Europe via the Baltic Sea.

The day before the French government launched a package of measures to reduce the country's energy consumption to survive the winter without blackouts. One of the measures is to limit indoor temperatures to 19 degrees Celsius. The heat supply for households, businesses and administrations is planned to be two weeks later than usual and cut off two weeks earlier as well.

Germany has announced it will allocate up to 200b euros ($197.50 billion) in aid to consumers and businesses to curb the effects of rising gas bills.

The scheme, however, has caught Brussels and other European capitals by surprise, amid fears that it could cause negative spillover effects across borders and disrupt competition in the single market.

"Without a pan-European solution, we seriously risk being fragmented. It is therefore crucial that we maintain a level playing field," EC President Ursula von der Leyen said.

In addition to the energy talks, the meeting was also intended to send a strong message to the Russian leadership, highlighting Moscow's isolation.

However, many experts warned that the signal of political rejection of Russia could develop into a bloc confrontation on the European continent, which would not help to preserve regional stability but would further worsen the security situation in Europe. For example, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel believes that lasting peace in Europe can only be achieved with Russia's participation.

The vision of the format's prospects was summed up by the head of the European Commission, Charles Michel, who said that despite some differences in approaches, it was important to remain united, firm in support of Ukraine both financially and politically and militarily. "We do not and never will recognise sham referendums and illegal annexations. And, of course, there are side effects and consequences," the politician said.

Yet Charles Michel did not explain what these side effects and their consequences were and how the idea of a European political community could help to deal with them. Apparently, he left it to the hosts of subsequent summits to provide answers to these difficult and challenging questions.