The EU clings to the international order while shying away from the war in the Middle East

After comings and goings. After "realistic" speeches. And faced with a scenario of conflict in Iran that does not seem to be approaching a cessation of hostilities, the European leaders seem to converge towards a common point. The open war is not that of the Europeans, so they should not enter. That has been the tone of the morning at a summit of the European Council in Brussels that promised to be dedicated to the strengthening of the single market and has ended up being an exchange of concerns about the Middle East.

The president of the European Council, Antonio Costa, was one of the first to come out to defend “a rules-based order” when some in the community capital believed it was being called into question. This Thursday, in the room, he had an ally in this position. To the lunch of the Heads of State and Government of the Twenty-Seven has joined the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres.

“I am sure that the European Union will be absolutely central in the efforts to create an international order based on the rule of law,” Guterres has expressed in what will be his last meeting with the continent's leaders of his mandate, which ends in December.

For his part, Costa has stated “that there is no alternative to this order, because the alternative is the war in Ukraine”. “The alternative is the unfair competition in trade, it is a threat to sovereignty in Greenland and in other parts of the world,” he reminded the journalists who were waiting for him in the room where minutes later he would meet with the continent's leaders.

Made in Spain 

That Spain was frontally opposed to the war started by the United States was something that the rest of the delegations present at the summit knew from the first moment. However, during the last few days, statements from the continent's leaders have followed in favor of the de-escalation. Without going any further, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, has defended, upon his arrival in Brussels, “a moratorium on civilian infrastructure and civilian population in this conflict”, as well as the cessation of bombings.

At the start of the war, the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, met in Washington, in the Oval Office of the White House, with his American counterpart, Donald Trump. In the Spanish Government, it did not sit well at all that Berlin did not come out in defense of President Pedro Sánchez when the Republican reproached him for his stance against the start of the bombings. The matter reached such a point that the difficulty of contact between both leaders transcended to public conversation.

Now those frictions have been buried. Merz has made this very Thursday a call for a cessation of hostilities and in favor of an international mandate “which for now does not exist.” “We will only be able to get involved when the weapons fall silent. Then, we will be in close contact not only with Israel, but also with the Gulf States (...). And then we will be able to do many things, including regarding the maritime routes and keeping them open,” he added. For his part, the Spaniard specified that what is important “is that in the private meeting he had with President Donald Trump he explained to him the solidarity of Europe and, of course, also of Germany with Spain in the face of a threat of coercion.”

The man of the dance 

All eyes were on him. He was aware of it. The president of the Spanish Executive has extended more than usual in his statements to the press at the beginning of the summit. He has shown himself convinced that if the continent advocates for a multilateral order it will be able to influence the cessation of the war to “bring to the table those parties that are currently in conflict and find peaceful solutions to conflicts that, unfortunately, are costing human lives”.

More cautious in her words, without surprise on the other hand, has been the head of European diplomacy, who has dodged doubts about the forecasts for an end to the war. Kaja Kallas does indeed redouble her positions by appealing that the war is not protected by International Law.

In La Moncloa they consider that a wide set of countries has ended up joining their position in the conflict and, therefore, they rule out the idea of raising the tone even further against the U.S. administration. Something that, however, the Popular Party continues to criticize. Also from Brussels, the leader of the opposition, Alberto Núñez Feijóo, has been surprised to note that “no other prime minister has confronted the U.S. administration” as Sánchez has done. Government sources, satisfied, smile and exclaim “our position has been clear from the beginning”.

The conversations get stuck in Kyiv 

The unity achieved around the situation in the Middle East is not observed in the Ukrainian issue. According to diplomatic sources, conversations on this point would have already ended without a clear agreement among leaders to lift the veto on the ninety billion euros in funding that Kyiv needs before April. The Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orbán, has launched a new challenge to his partners, alleging that, if a pipeline that supplied energy to his country is not repaired, he would not give green light again to the measure.

Although it is true, the approved conclusions mention the matter and say they welcome “with satisfaction the adoption of the loan by the co-legislators and awaits the first disbursement to Ukraine at the beginning of April”. A text that does not bear the signature of either Hungary nor Slovakia and that underlines the importance of new sustained efforts by the Europeans even to help Ukraine protect its energy and its critical infrastructure.