Europe
EU revives ‘military Schengen’ plan to speed up troop and equipment movement
The EU is once again preparing for a “military Schengen.” A “military Schengen” zone within the EU, where weapons and soldiers can move as freely as civilians, has been under discussion for years.
On November 19, the European Commission will present its latest initiative to achieve this goal by the end of the decade.
A preliminary draft seen by RFE/RL outlines two paths to accomplish this: first, spending cash on hundreds of “bottlenecks” across the continent—such as railway lines, ports, and bridges—which are considered crucial for integrating EU candidates Ukraine and Moldova into the EU’s military transport structures.
Second, it involves removing bureaucratic obstacles to ensure that differing national laws and red tape do not hinder the rapid and easy movement of military assets from one EU country to another.
In 2017, the idea of a “military Schengen” became a priority, and the European Commission prepared action plans in 2018, 2022, and 2024, but very little progress has been made.
EU diplomats, speaking to RFE/RL on condition of anonymity, said the minimal progress was not for lack of trying. They noted that the topic often tops the agenda when EU-NATO cooperation is discussed, but neither organization has ever truly embraced it.
NATO has long hoped that the EU would allocate more legislative authority and cash resources for military mobility. The war in Ukraine has further increased the urgency on all defense-related matters.
At the same time, there is frustration in the EU that NATO is too focused on spending money on expensive military equipment and far less on how to transport that equipment and make it available to other alliance members.
NATO’s goal of dedicating 3.5% of gross domestic product (GDP) to military equipment and 1.5% to non-military investments like military mobility by 2035 is a step toward partially resolving this issue.
However, as highlighted in the European Commission document, this matter remains largely under the jurisdiction of individual countries. The document states, “While member states can freely decide whether to allow foreign armed forces to pass through their territory under the scope of national security and defense, the EU must have a military mobility framework that balances military and civilian needs.”
The goal for the European Commission, whose term ends in 2029, is emphasized as “creating an EU-wide Military Mobility Area by the end of 2027 as a first step to gradually achieve a ‘Military Schengen’ in the dimensions of regulation, infrastructure, and capabilities.”
The question is whether the cash will be available this time. The last multiannual EU budget (2021-2027) allocated approximately €1.7 billion ($2 billion) for dual-use civil/military transport infrastructure, focusing on 95 projects in 21 countries. But according to the document, “the demand for EU funds significantly exceeded the available resources, and all calls were oversubscribed.”
Therefore, for the next long-term budget (2028-2034), the European Commission has proposed €17.65 billion for dual-use transport infrastructure, focusing on 500 “key projects” where military equipment needs to be moved more quickly and smoothly.
But there are doubts about whether the plan will work. Notably, member states always dilute the Commission’s initial proposal, preferring to direct EU funds to “vote-winning” sectors like agriculture, fisheries, and other social spending.
Railways are the most heavily funded mode of transport for military mobility, a trend that is likely to continue. Earlier this year, the EU agreed on four priority multimodal military mobility corridors: north, south, east, and central.
The northern corridor, connecting the Netherlands to Germany and Poland and then on to Ukraine, is the most developed.
The Commission’s document highlights the 22-kilometer railway line with a European-standard gauge that opened in September, connecting Western Ukraine with Slovakia and the rest of Central Europe.
The document also states that “preparatory work is underway for the use of the European nominal standard rail gauge on the European Transport Corridors connecting Moldova and Ukraine to EU member states.”
The idea is that the entire EU, including candidate countries, will operate with the same railway gauge in the future.
The European Commission is also willing to allocate funds for other items vital to military mobility, such as large-scale cargo air transport, dual-use ferries, and flatbed wagons for trains to carry heavy military equipment like rockets and tanks.
But the biggest change the EU can make is legislative, to facilitate the movement of soldiers and equipment. It can take up to 45 days to obtain permission for a military transport to pass from one EU country to another.
The target set by Brussels is three days. Surprisingly, the EU’s “harmonized” rules for transporting dangerous goods do not apply to military shipments, which often means that temporary arrangements must be negotiated.
This is set to change, and the European Commission plans to demand even more.
Another proposal is that permission granted for moving military equipment between member states will no longer need to be renewed annually. Permits will remain valid until canceled, and non-EU countries could also be part of this change.
The key to this will be the “European Military Mobility Enhanced Response System (EMERS),” which can be activated within 48 hours upon the proposal of the European Commission or an EU member state.
Once this system is activated during a potential military emergency, cross-border military transport will only require prior notification of the movement. Most standard procedures, except for customs formalities, could be bypassed.
All these proposals will require consensus among EU member states, and in many cases, unanimity will be necessary.
Europe
Fico accuses Merz of blackmail over threat to veto EU budget
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has hit back after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz threatened to veto the EU budget unless funding for Ukraine is secured.
Merz said he would block the EU’s seven-year budget if no agreement is reached on financial assistance for Ukraine.
The chancellor’s intervention has angered Central European leaders who are net beneficiaries of EU funds but do not want to take part in the next round of funding to support Ukraine’s war effort.
“What the chancellor is doing is typical blackmail, and I will not bow to it,” Fico told reporters in Bratislava.
Fico spoke alongside his Czech counterpart, Andrej Babiš, whose government has refused to participate in a future loan to Ukraine.
“I do not know why he said this,” Babiš said, referring to Merz’s stance.
Merz wants EU leaders to discuss Ukraine’s financing needs at a summit in Dublin on Friday.
In a letter to European Council President António Costa, who will chair the meeting, obtained by The Guardian, Merz wrote:
“We must maintain our support for Ukraine in its struggle to defend itself. This is our shared vital interest. Yet bilateral aid provided to Ukraine is distributed unevenly, with the burden shouldered mostly by only a few member states.”
The EU agreed last year to provide a €90 billion loan to Ukraine, intended to cover two-thirds of its military and civilian spending for 2026 and 2027.
Since then, however, Russia’s relentless bombardment has placed a heavier financial burden on Kyiv, prompting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to ask for €70 billion to plug the budget deficit.
The EU has endorsed Zelenskyy’s figures and pledged to find €45 billion. Ukraine’s other allies, such as Britain and Canada, are expected to cover the rest.
Last year, Merz launched an initiative to tap €210 billion in frozen Russian state assets held in the EU, but the plan fell through due to opposition led by Belgium, which holds most of the funds in Brussels.
The €90 billion loan was the backup plan. Having opted out of that loan, Hungary, Slovakia, and Czechia indicated that they would not take part in the next round either.
Bulgaria joined these three member states following the election of Prime Minister Rumen Radev last April.
The question of funding for Ukraine is now spilling over into the fraught negotiations on the 2028-34 EU budget.
Germany, the largest net contributor, wants substantial cuts to the proposed budget and opposes the EU providing generous funding to member states that refuse to contribute to Ukraine’s financial needs.
Merz states in his letter that a “collective commitment without exceptions” is a “fundamental prerequisite” for closing Ukraine’s financing gap and for “discussing other matters, particularly those with financial implications.”
He also notes that, in the context of the EU’s next seven-year budget, known as the Multiannual Financial Framework, all member states must contribute to a “robust” financial perspective for Ukraine from 2028 onwards.
A German government official said:
“For the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) to be successfully concluded, it is vital that all EU member states provide financial support to Ukraine.”
Berlin is also aiming to shift decision-making on funding for Ukraine from unanimity to qualified majority voting, in an effort to prevent a single government from blocking EU decisions.
The letter reflects mounting frustration among the EU’s northern member states, Ukraine’s most generous backers, over lower contributions from other EU countries in Central and Southern Europe.
The task of brokering an agreement on the budget falls to Costa, the former Portuguese prime minister.
Costa wants a deal by the end of the year, ahead of elections in France, Poland, and Italy in 2027 that could complicate the process.
A spokesperson for Costa confirmed receipt of the letter without elaborating on details. “President Costa will dedicate time to the Ukraine issue at the informal European Council meeting in Dublin this week,” the spokesperson said, adding that funding for Ukraine would be addressed at a dedicated summit on the EU budget scheduled for 26-27 November.
Europe
EU expects next Israeli government to adopt less aggressive posture
The EU expects the next Israeli government to mend its “difficult relationship” with Brussels and adopt a more constructive approach toward Gaza and illegal settlements.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog tasked Gadi Eisenkot, the leader of the anti-Netanyahu bloc, on Sunday with forming a government.
Eisenkot stated that the country faces a “catastrophic diplomatic crisis” as traditional allies begin to reassess their relations with Israel.
Speaking to Rapporteur, several European diplomats stationed in Tel Aviv said they expect ties to get back on track.
“Whatever government comes in, we can try to revitalize relations because Israel is clearly a very important partner,” one European diplomat said, adding that Brussels expects the next administration to be “less aggressive”.
The diplomat noted that relations with Europe are currently “not very good”.
Israel cut off communication with Kaja Kallas, the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, after Rapporteur revealed in June that she had compared Israel to apartheid-era South Africa during a visit to Mexico.
The diplomat stated that this decision, taken ahead of elections, was political in nature. A second European diplomat based in Brussels explained that the announcement came only a few days before an official visit by Dubravka Šuica, the European commissioner for the Mediterranean.
“This could have been interpreted as a tactic to divide Europe, but Israel had asked Kallas to deny the report; she did not do so,” the second diplomat said.
Brussels has repeatedly voiced its frustration with Israel over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the expansion of West Bank settlements.
However, EU governments blocked almost all sanctions proposed by the European Commission.
A third diplomat said opposition parties would “almost certainly take the issue more seriously” when it comes to tackling violence by West Bank settlers:
“We see Palestinians being expelled from their homes and new illegal settlements being built in the West Bank. There is a reluctance on the part of the current government to address this issue, which causes problems in our relations.”
The new government is expected to ease pressure on Palestinians and halt construction of the E1 settlement project, a controversial plan to build settler housing in the West Bank east of Jerusalem.
“They will probably try to deal with the problem of extremist settlers in the West Bank,” the diplomat added.
On Gaza, the diplomat described the situation as “a complete nightmare”, with two million Palestinians crowded into an area that accounts for roughly 35% of the territory.
“There are not enough tents for the winter, and not enough vaccines are reaching the area despite an increase in diseases,” the diplomat said.
The European official argued that Donald Trump’s peace plan met all the conditions for Europe. Although the EU had much to offer, neither the US nor Israel appeared interested in EU involvement in the process.
“We are currently training Palestinian police in the West Bank, and if permitted, we could do the same in Gaza,” the diplomat said.
The diplomat disclosed that Israel had agreed with Šuica that Europe would finance two projects aimed at improving sewage and water infrastructure in Gaza, continuing:
“However, none of these projects has started yet because there is a serious problem with dual-use goods. Getting materials into Gaza is very difficult because the Israelis say they could be misused if they fall into the wrong hands of Hamas.”
Israel insists that Hamas must be disarmed before subsequent phases of Trump’s plan can proceed.
With disarmament unlikely to happen in the near term, the EU argues that certain measures can be carried out in parallel.
“We can begin rebuilding sanitation systems in Gaza. We can start building desalination plants. We can begin providing energy and water to Gaza,” one diplomat said.
While Brussels hopes for progress on Gaza and the West Bank, it maintains that expectations regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state need to be “managed”.
The EU continues to advocate a two-state solution, yet most leading Jewish parties oppose the creation of a Palestinian state.
The diplomat noted that the next Israeli government will likely have “a very slim majority and not much room for manoeuvre”.
There is also a “major misunderstanding” between the EU and Israel that must be addressed. According to the diplomat, Europeans fail to recognize the “psychological impact” of 7 October on Israelis.
“This event changed the country and made the two-state solution even more distant than before,” the diplomat said.
In return, some Israeli politicians believe Europe has betrayed Israel despite what they view as a fight against “Islamist terrorism”.
“Their argument is that European politicians are somewhat afraid of the Muslim population in Europe,” the European diplomat said.
Europe strongly opposes Iran and the possibility of Tehran acquiring nuclear weapons, imposing sanctions in response.
However, the diplomat argued that the EU would not participate in a war because it lacks a common army:
“We are a diplomatic and economic power, which is why we resort to sanctions and diplomacy. The expectation that we would take part in a military operation is unrealistic.”
Europe
Germany threatens EU budget veto over long-term Ukraine aid
Germany has threatened to veto the European Union’s joint budget for the 2028-2034 period, which is currently under negotiation, unless every member state commits to providing financial support to Ukraine in 2027 and subsequent years, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz warned.
According to a report by the Financial Times (FT), Chancellor Merz set out Berlin’s condition for the budget talks in a letter addressed to European Council President António Costa.
In his letter, Merz wrote: “A collective commitment that every single one of us, without exception, will make a fair contribution to closing Ukraine’s budget deficit is an indispensable prerequisite for resolving this budget issue and, in particular, for addressing subsequent matters that carry financial implications.”
The German Chancellor stressed that a formula backed by all member states must be established to provide Ukraine with a reliable, multi-year financial perspective starting from 2028.
Merz also insisted that any agreed solution must cover the interest payments on debts incurred to finance the assistance provided to Kyiv.
Conversely, several countries within the bloc have cut financial aid to Ukraine, and the number of capitals adopting this stance is projected to rise next year.
In December 2025, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic approved the EU’s 90 billion euro loan package for Kyiv only on the condition that they would not contribute to its costs themselves.
Alongside these three countries, Bulgaria has also stated that it does not plan to participate in subsequent financial assistance packages for Ukraine.
In France, far-right leader Marine Le Pen, who could potentially win the presidential election scheduled for spring 2027, recently told the FT that Paris has run out of funds.
Le Pen assessed: “The honest approach is to tell Mr Zelensky clearly, and even warn him: ‘Look, we cannot do more. We have already allocated the 90 billion euro EU loan, in which France’s share amounts to 18 billion euros. 18 billion euros is genuinely a huge amount of money.'”
The EU’s 90 billion euro loan, covering the 2026-2027 period, aims to meet two-thirds of Ukraine’s financing requirements.
Brussels expects the remaining 45 billion euros to be covered by other partners, including Canada, the UK, Norway, Japan, South Korea, and Australia.
Germany remains the largest net contributor to the EU budget.
In contrast, the four Eastern European countries seeking to avoid financing Ukraine rank among the largest net beneficiaries of the bloc’s budget.
Leveraging this balance, Chancellor Merz aims to use his influence in the EU budget negotiations to secure uninterrupted support for Kyiv in 2027 and the years beyond.
According to the FT, Berlin is also demanding that future aid packages be decided by qualified majority voting rather than unanimity, which is required under the current system.
A German government spokesperson told the newspaper:
“The issue of Ukraine’s financial needs must be resolved within the framework of the next EU budget. Financial support for Ukraine from all EU members is decisive for the successful conclusion of the budget talks.”
-
Diplomacy1 week agoSecular dress code dispute exposes deeper Türkiye-Azerbaijan strains
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russia weigh energy deals and corporate return in peace talks
-
Europe5 days agoEU urges citizens to prepare 72-hour survival kits for crises
-
Middle East2 weeks agoUS warns Gulf allies of possible Iran strikes after midterms
-
America2 weeks agoBolsonaro reportedly leaves Brazil on jet linked to scandal-hit firm
-
Asia1 week agoChina expands Africa arms sales, displacing France and Western rivals
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoSteinmeier seeks to de-escalate German-Chinese tensions on visit
-
Europe2 weeks agoEU prepares Ukraine peace mission to Abu Dhabi led by Björn Seibert
