Europe Today: Kallas speaks exclusively to Euronews as crucial EU summit kicks off

Good morning, it's Thursday, October 15th. You're watching Euronews, and this is Europe Today. Coming up, spiraling energy prices, the EU's long-term budget and support for Ukraine in the wake of Donald Trump's latest pressure campaign. These are the topics that will dominate the conversation as the leaders of the EU gather for a two-day summit in Brussels today. The meeting will start in a couple of hours with a hotly anticipated discussion on energy prices, which hostilities in the Middle East have since skyrocketed. We'll discuss the issues live with EU High Representative Kaja Kallas, who is in our studio. Diesel markets will remain tight well into next year, and wholesale diesel prices in Europe could rise again in the coming weeks, the International Energy Agency warned. In its monthly report, the Paris-based Energy Watchdog said recovering Gulf oil supplies had failed to resolve the fuel squeeze, with global output still falling short of consumption. Supply rose by 2.5 million barrels a day in September to more than three quarters of pre-war levels, but remains slightly below global demand, the IEA estimated. And 58 members of the European Parliament have urged the EU Commission to shield the International Criminal Court from US sanctions that threaten to disrupt its operations. In a letter seen by Euronews, The members called on Commission President von der Leyen to defend the Hague-based court against what they described as an attack by a foreign power on an entity on EU territory. The Trump administration had announced fresh sanctions against the ICC last Friday, following repeated criticism of the court over its arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Welcome to the program, I'm Stefan Grobe. EU leaders are meeting in Brussels today for a heavy agenda involving the EU's next seven-year budget. The gathering takes place amid deteriorating relations between the US and Europe over Ukraine. And now let's go directly to my colleague Maria Tudeo, who is with a special guest, the EU High Representative Kaja Kallas. Yes, absolutely, Stefan. Good morning. And Madam Kallas, good morning. Thank you for joining us on Euronews. This has been a difficult week, a dramatic week, some would suggest. It started with that diesel deal with Russia, and now there seems to be real operational issues when it comes to the intel on the ground in Ukraine. The president of Ukraine, Zelensky, says this is a betrayal. It feels like a betrayal. Has the U.S. president betrayed Ukraine and, by extension, the Europeans? Well, the diesel deal is definitely a gift to Putin. The question is, what is he giving in return. What we see, he's actually increasing the attacks on the civilian and civilian infrastructure. The ceasefire that was also announced is not really working on the Russian side. And to that point, the president of Ukraine seems to indicate in an interview with the FT that he is prepared and will hit back Russian refineries. There is a clash of visions here. The president of the U.S. says, don't hit them. We need them because there is an energy crisis. It started with the Strait of Hormuz, and Ukrainians say we have to because that is the core of the operation, the moneymaker for Russia. In your view, as a top European diplomat, should Ukraine hit them? I mean, the core issue is that Russia should stop this war, so there wouldn't be any attacks on the refineries either. But, you know, if we look at the big picture, then the majority of the financing for this war comes from oil, And that is why Ukraine is also targeting them, while Russia is targeting the energy infrastructure inside Ukraine to cause as much suffering for the Ukrainian people for the upcoming winter. And this is escalation we've seen since August on the cities. But just to pick up on this point, would you say, yes, the president of Ukraine has a legitimate point. He is right to hit the refineries. Yes. If we look at the international law, it is clear that it is in defense of Ukraine, because that is where the funding comes for this war, to kill Ukrainian people every day. And to me, it seems the administration is looking currently at this scenario, suggesting that the war is now not going to change. That line on the battlefield, that is the end of it, and you have to make a deal. They seem to think that with Russia, it's a matter of business, financial incentives. We see that with diesel reports that they may want to use some of the frozen assets, potentially give them to Russia. Is the administration wrong? Are they just miscalculating fully what Vladimir Putin wants? Well, clearly, you know, we have to see the bigger picture, which is that we have one aggressor and one victim. So pressuring the victim to surrender is maybe bringing the pause to this war, but not, you know, in long term. And that's why the pressure should be on the aggressor, what we are doing on the European side. And if we would do this together with the U.S., then the message to Russia would be clear. Stop this war and all your worries when it comes to oil refineries and whatnot will also stop. To me, from the outside, what it seems, however, is we are at a point of rupture. The U.S. has taken on a very different path compared to that of the Europeans. Do you look at it and you say, we need a wake-up call? it is just a moment of we need to put our own plan and why has that not happened now well uh we have put our own plan and that is a clear message also to russia um that uh you know all these things that they are interested in lifting the sanctions i mean getting uh you know the the release of frozen assets that's actually up to the europeans to decide now russians want to discuss and negotiate with us so that us would deliver them what they want so so yeah you know europe is just a nuisance here but actually uh you know we have our own requests for russia because uh they have started this war we want to make sure that they don't continue also you know the sabotage acts hybrid attacks that they have on european soil so clearly uh clearly you know the message is there that, you know, you need to talk to the Europeans as well. But it seems to me, and I say this with all due respect because the EU is a complex institution, the capital is too, but there is a lack of leadership. When you are blindsided every four months, when you're not really at the heart of the negotiations, when the hybrid attack escalates, the message I get is that the US does not respect the perspective of the Europeans and that Russia is willing to test them. Why? Where is the failure coming from? Because the calculation is that, you know, if Russia and U.S. agree, then, you know, Russia will get what they want. But they have miscalculated because, you know, when was the Anchorage agreement? It was August last year. So it is more than a year that they have tried to pressure Ukraine. But the calculus has been wrong because Europeans have been supporting Ukraine and Ukraine has not surrendered, even though Americans have been pressuring. And yet I see a very difficult political calendar with the elections that are lining up in Europe. Yesterday, Marine Le Pen was in Brussels and she said, and this is a quote, France is not in a position where it can't pay for Ukraine anymore. If others want to pay, they can't, but France will not pay. They cannot do it anymore. When you hear that, are you concerned? Because it seems to me the political tide is not working in favor of Ukraine. It is true that we are all democracies and a lot of elections are coming up. And also, There are a lot of, you know, the public support is also in a different place than it was, you know, four years ago. That's also very clear. But this is what the Russians are actually, you know, playing at. They are playing at that the Europeans will get tired and then they will get what they want. And what I want to stress is that then we will only have a pause and the appetite for them will grow. And to that point, there is a financial cost, however. However, the Europeans, let's be honest, can they pay 100 billion, assuming maybe that's the number we're looking at to help the Ukrainians? Who is going to finance this? And ultimately, is it not just obvious that you've got to tap into the Russian frozen assets before the Americans do it? Well, the frozen assets are frozen in Europe. And also, I mean, the agreement between the European leaders is that they are going to remain frozen until Russia pays reparations. So, yes, clearly, a lot of member states are pointing at these 200 billion that, you know, we should take this money that Ukraine needs from these frozen assets. And what's it going to take to change dynamics? What's it going to take? It's going to take a clear plan to actually, you know, divide the risk. Because, yes, some member states have the frozen assets. They are afraid of the risk that comes to their way. if all the member states would share the risk. Is that idea still alive? Yes, it is. It is still alive. But, you know, also the clear plan needs to come. And just, High Representative, as a final point, over the past six months, there has been a campaign, something I've not seen in a long time in Brussels, to undermine your work and your institution. What I see today is a High Representative that is determined and is not going anywhere. Are you going to fight for your institution? Of course I'm going to fight, and it's a good institution, meaning that we do a lot of good work. The EU delegations that everybody is very happy with are working well for also the member states. I think this is the moment in time where we need to be effective in our foreign policy. We need to be united, and that's why the discussions, I actually welcome how we make them more effective. And that's your message to the capitals, too, that you will be on top of this dossier? Yes, absolutely. And that has been my message and also the message of my Secretary General, who has been traveling. I see you revitalized this morning. I see you energized. Is that how you feel? Absolutely. I mean, you know, tough times need to have a tough stance. Well, to that point, Kaja Kallas, thank you so much for joining us on Euronews this morning. Thank you. Stefan. Thank you, Maria. And thank you, High Representative Kaja Kallas. Europe is facing a strategic choice over its future borders. With Ukraine, Moldova and the Western Balkans pressing for EU membership, enlargement is back at the heart of the European debate. Austria is proposing a new approach, giving candidate countries access to the single market as they complete reforms, rather than making them wait for full membership. But does it accelerate enlargement or risk creating a permanent halfway house? Yesterday I had a chance to speak to Austria's Foreign Minister Beate Meinl-Reisinger to discuss her proposal. And I started by asking her why the enlargement process is moving so slowly. Is it because the candidate countries are lacking reforms or because of political reluctance inside the EU itself? Here's what she said. There are so many countries now in the waiting room for or have been in the waiting room for over 20 years, especially those countries from the Western Balkans. And you know that Austria is a fierce promoter of Western Balkan accession. I think it's both. First, it's a very complicated and bureaucratic process, and it's hard to do reforms, to reform everything in your country, which is what we ask from these states. But on the other hand, it's also a little bit, well, not only political reluctance, but also bureaucratic reluctance of Brussels not being able to promote ideas like this sectoral integration, this step-by-step membership as we introduced now into the discussion. On that point, Austria has proposed to give EU candidates access to parts of the single market before they become members. Isn't this essentially EU membership à la carte? No, it's not à la carte, because this is not a membership only in a single point, and that's it then. The target, the goal, is always full membership. But what we have seen now over the last two decades is that those exceeding countries, they do reforms. In some countries, on a faster pace, and some a little bit more slowly, but they do reforms. But it has been always everything or nothing. So, if you do all the reforms, you get eventually the full membership. And now this idea of step-by-step membership, it's a development out of our gradual integration approach, means that if you do reforms in a specific area, you can enter the single market there. So, it's not like, I don't know, an elevator you take. It's not getting any faster, but you see the effects of the reforms immediately. Now, there are fewer than half of Austrians who currently support EU enlargement. Why should Austrian taxpayers and voters see another enlargement as being in their interest? Well, actually, that is our communication job. And I see the numbers as well. And I'm a little bit wondering what has been the communication over the last two decades, because Austria is among the top investors in nearly all acceding countries, especially in the Western Balkans, but also take, for example, Ukraine. I think Austria has been the sixth largest investor there. More than 200 companies are already there. With every enlargement round we made, after Austria was a full member of the European Union, And we saw that Austria benefited enormously so that wealth in our own country and jobs have been created. Now, finally, if the EU doesn't offer the Western Balkans a credible path to membership now, are we effectively handing the region to Russia and China? Yes, we are. I always say there is no such thing as a vacuum in EU politics. politics. And the enlargement is the most powerful and important strategic instrument the European Union has. So it is primarily, in my opinion, a political decision to be taken that we say, no, this is our backyard. We want the countries of the Western Balkans. We want also So Ukraine, Moldova be part of the European Union. But apart from that, we are not only an internal market. We are also a union created out of values. So they have to do the reforms, but we have to find possibilities how to make it much quicker than in the past. Once again, for Western Balkan countries, there has been more than two decades and they're losing the population there. And if the population is getting frustrated, it's very easy for Russia or China or the U.S. to enter those countries. Also as Foreign Minister Beate Meinreisinger. And now to the Middle East, but not to Iran. Jordan is looking to turn its partnership with the European Union into a major economic opportunity. With billions of euros on the table, Amman wants European investment in everything from energy and infrastructure to technology and logistics. But beyond the money, this is also about geopolitics. As wars and instability reshape the Middle East, Jordan is positioning itself as a stable gateway between Europe, the Gulf, and the wider region. So what does Jordan want from Brussels? And what can it offer Europe in return? To learn more about this, I'm now joined by Jordan's investment minister, Tarek Abu Ghazaleh. Good morning, sir, and welcome to the program. Good morning, Chef. So, you're in Brussels asking Europe to invest more in your country. What is the single biggest reason for a European investor to put money in Jordan? Simply, any investor is looking for predictability. And due to what's happening, not only in the region, in the whole world, growth is questionable now. And Jordan, and Europe is working hard to elevate the comprehensive and strategic partnership to a level where a productive investment opportunity is available for investors to yield more growth and prosperity at the end of the day for all related nations. So the EU has committed around 3 billion euros to Jordan through 2027. What do you want from Brussels now that you're not getting from that package? Actually, we are having good talk with Brussels and we are working closely to make things happen properly. Now, Brussels is helping us on the technicalities of the investment opportunities, etc., and supporting us in bringing to the conference high-level officials, interested investors to make sure that dialogue is transforming from only talks to potential deals that will support as well the continuity of businesses and the modernity of the economical situation in Jordan and the region. Plus, as you mentioned, Jordan is becoming the safe gateway to support all neighbouring countries, ensure there is more cohesion between the plans and the economic integration in the Middle East. If I may, on that point, as you say, Jordan sees itself as a hub, a wider gateway into the Middle East. But for investors, it's also a very unstable region. So why should they choose Jordan rather than avoiding the region altogether? Because the region has a lot of potential in the future. and instability will fade out soon. So you have to be ready in order to ensure you seize the opportunity from now. Plus, Jordan has eventually showed all the investors that we have a resilient economy. For example, our capital market grew 40% in the last year, despite all the instability in the market. and was named by Bloomberg as the first Arab productive and performance capital market. Our economy is growing steadily at 3%. All right. Sorry, Minister, I have to stop you here. That's all the time we have for today. Thank you for coming on the show. And that's it for today. Thank you for watching. I'm Stefan Grobe and I'll see you tomorrow.