Defence pact likely to be centrepiece of EU-UK ‘reset' summit in London
It was believed in Westminster that Monday's top-level summit in London between the
UK
and the
European Union
would be held at Lancaster House, a mansion beside Green Park that is often used by Britain's Foreign Office to host grand diplomatic get-togethers.
Britain's prime minister
Keir Starmer
wanted the meeting to bring a 'reset' in relations with the EU. What better place to cement a reset than the gilded rooms of a stately mansion? For an extra dash of diplomatic conviviality, Lancaster House also includes the UK's state wine cellar.
However, it now seems the meetings between the prime minister and
European Commission
president
Ursula von der Leyen
, as well as a few top officials from both sides, will mostly be held in the more workman-like surroundings of Downing Street.
Why the change of venue? Although Starmer covets the economic opportunities of a far-reaching deal with the EU, he is also wary of the domestic political threat that warmer engagement with the bloc could pose for his Labour government, especially with
Brexit
-supporting voters in working-class heartlands.
READ MORE
'The decision to hold the summit in Downing Street speaks to a desire to keep it low key, as does the reluctance to talk up the chances of an ambitious deal,' say researchers from UK in a Changing Europe, an academic think tank at King's College London.
Nigel Farage, Reform UK leader, greets a member of the public after his party performed strongly in elections in England. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty
Barely two-and-a-half weeks after his party got a kicking in English local elections from
Nigel Farage's
anti-EU outfit, Reform UK, Starmer is mindful of any suggestion he is cuddling up to Brussels or undermining Brexit. A red carpet event at Lancaster House could fuel that perception.
Going into the weekend, both sides were still wrangling over unresolved issues such as fishing rights, defence pacts and a youth mobility scheme. If those issues are not resolved by Monday, the summit could produce only a wafer-thin deal.
For both sides, the risk of failure is too great to ramp up the rhetoric by trumpeting a breakthrough too soon. Sources in London and in Brussels, however, seem quietly confident that a significant deal can be achieved. If it happens, expect both sides to shout it from the rooftops.
The summit, which will also be attended by
European Council
president
António Costa
and the bloc's foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, is the first leader-level summit between the UK and the institution of the EU since Brexit. There will be no other national leaders present.
In the weeks leading up to the summit, Starmer has cited the importance of negotiating quietly.
'When we started this process, the president of the commission and I agreed we wouldn't do megaphone diplomacy,' he said this week. 'We wouldn't go running to the nearest microphone to make our respective arguments and criticisms. Because of that we've made good progress.'
The EU side has also placed an emphasis on discretion. Details about the progress of negotiations have been tightly controlled to prevent leaks to the media.
Diplomats from the 27 EU member states have been instructed to leave their mobile phones outside the door during briefings from commission officials on the state of play. The number of people allowed inside the room during these sessions – aimed at sounding out national governments – have also been heavily restricted.
On the British side, much of the pre-summit negotiations were handled by Starmer's 'EU sherpa' Michael Ellam, a former adviser to the last Labour prime minister,
Gordon Brown
. British sources say Ellam was picked for the role due to his firm yet calm, non-confrontational approach, as Starmer seeks to strike a better tone with the EU compared to his immediate predecessors.
European diplomatic sources confirmed that Ellam's appointment has indeed helped relations. EU sources also said they had underestimated just how much EU institutional knowledge had been lost in Whitehall since Brexit. It has taken Labour 10 months in government to build it up again.
One of the main items on the agenda is a security and defence partnership between the EU and UK, seen as essential for both sides in an era of Russia's power-flexing. The UK side is especially keen to strike an EU defence deal because it would be easy to explain its rationale to a Brexit-weary British public.
Sources in Brussels say a defence deal is also sought by central and eastern European nations closest to the Russian threat.
France
, however, is adamant that British defence companies should be largely locked out of a €150 billion European rearmament fund, which has proved to be a sticking point. Britain's defence secretary, John Healey, has indicated Britain is prepared to contribute to the funds to allow British companies to gain access to contracts.
Despite the wrangling, both sides expect a deal to be done and for a security and defence partnership to be the centrepiece of a summit agreement.
Ireland and a few other states, such as
Belgium
and the
Netherlands
, want to extend access to British fishing waters for EU boats, beyond a cliff edge approaching next year. Starmer's government wants to offer a short extension, while the EU wants a longer one of perhaps five years.
Some EU states wanted to link the fisheries issue to a defence pact, but eastern states reject this. That view is reflected in recent comments from Kallas, known for her hawkish stance on
Russia
. A former prime minister of
Estonia
, she has said she does not believe a dispute over fishing rights should hold up a wider EU-UK deal.
A big aim from the EU side is agreement on a youth mobility scheme to allow European students and other young people the right to study and work in the UK. Starmer's government is nervous, however, of anything that gives his domestic political opponents ammunition to suggest he is getting soft on immigration. The EU also wants its students to pay cheaper domestic tuition fee rates at British universities, which Starmer is pushing against.
A deal on youth mobility is seen as possible, but not certain – if it happens then it means the summit went well overall. There are also talks over a carbon emissions, the energy market and food standards, which may also be addressed in any final text.
There is frustration in London with the EU coming back with last-minute requests for more British concessions. Meanwhile, it is understood the UK government has been trying to go around the commission to lobby national governments directly in recent days, which has irked some Brussels-based officials.
One former EU diplomat, who was involved in negotiations during the UK's exit from the union, said Starmer had not quite 'put the cursor in the right place' on the reset he seeks. Some in the EU wanted Labour to be more ambitious.
For Starmer, however, the domestic political risks of being seen as too ambitious with the EU are all too real.
Delicate negotiations will continue throughout the weekend as both sides take it to the wire.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Irish Sun
35 minutes ago
- The Irish Sun
Football could introduce new transfer rule to let players buy out their contracts in radical move that would slash fees
MASSIVE transfer fees could soon become a thing of the past — with players' chiefs wanting stars to have freedom to break their contracts for a fixed compensation payment. The international players' union FifPro has accused Fifa of dragging its feet over new transfer rules after the 5 A major case involving ex-Chelsea star Lassana Diarra could make massive transfer fees a thing of the past Credit: Getty 5 The ruling from the European Court means inflated transfer fees could be a thing of the past Credit: EPA 5 The likes of Alexander Isak would be able to buy out their contract rather than being marooned while clubs argue over a transfer fee Credit: Alamy Major agents claimed the October ruling was the But now FifPro has told stars and their lawyers to be FifPro legal chief Alexandra Gomez Bruinewoud said: 'Every worker should have the right to end a contractual relationship. READ MORE IN FOOTBALL 'Knowing how much you will have to pay as compensation is part of that right. 'Also, the fact you leave your job should not prevent you from being hired in another job, which is what was happening in football.' Even the giants of the game may be forced into a major rethink by the repercussions of a row sparked in Moscow a decade ago. Former Most read in Football BEST ONLINE CASINOS - TOP SITES IN THE UK Yet Diarra's win at the European Court of Justice looks increasingly likely to significantly change the way the transfer market works. If FifPro is right, the result will be for all players to have the right to break their contracts. Transfer fees could be SCRAPPED forever after Lassana Diarra wins landmark court case against Fifa It would see players worth £100m on the open market suddenly available for a fraction of that sum. Of course, any new regulations will not be introduced this summer. Fifa rushed through a series of temporary transfer regulations, with dire warnings of the 'collapse' of the transfer market unleashing 'chaos'. But FifPro remains unconvinced the latest moves from Zurich meet the demands of EU law. One insider explained: 'This could be the last few years of the inflated transfer fees we have all seen. 'The European Court has said that football must operate within EU law. 5 'Football is the outlier. There's no other industry — other than maybe thoroughbred horses — where you see employees change hands for millions of pounds and it is time for the game to be brought in step.' Gomez Bruinewoud added: 'The judges in the Diarra case explained why the system was against EU law. 'I'm not afraid to say the same Fifa rules are probably also against most national labour laws.' Top players will benefit from higher wages and longer deals, though with budgets finite, that would mean less cash and shorter deals for players further down the pecking order — and limited job security in the lower tiers. Prem club bosses also fear the consequences, arguing the effective abolition of fees would blow up the entire footballing pyramid as money would no longer 'trickle down'. It is likely that, as with the Jean-Marc Bosman courtroom saga that turned European football on its head 30 years ago, it will need another player to be the test case to break the current system. But it seems that challenge is a matter of time from being made. And with the players' union backing, the most fundamental change the game has ever seen. 5
Irish Independent
12 hours ago
- Irish Independent
The Sunday Independent's View: Innocents pay the price for Middle East power games
Micheál Martin and Simon Harris have been among the most acerbic critics of Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing government, but followed other EU leaders in falling short of outright condemnation, settling instead for carefully-worded calls for restraint and dialogue. There could scarcely be a starker illustration of Iran's diplomatic isolation. Irish leaders might not directly support strikes, but nor can they be seen to be batting for the ayatollahs, whose own poisonous ideology has contributed to keeping the region permanently teetering on the brink. Israel's argument has always been that the West faces the same enemies as it does; Israel just happens to be surrounded by them. Being confronted with this uncomfortable realpolitik was always the risk from burning diplomatic bridges with Israel, as the Irish Government has done lately. If it came down to a wider war between Israel and Iran, Western leaders were bound to stand on the side of the former. France has already pledged to defend Israel from Iranian retaliation. To acknowledge as much is not to say Israel was right to target Iran. No one knows how close Iran is — or was, before last week, at least — to developing nuclear capabilities. It has been rumoured to be nudging closer to that goal for many years. However, advanced or not as its nuclear ambitions may be, it is not in the interests of the world that it achieves them. At the same time, Israel's recklessness cannot be accepted as normal either. The problem with such actions is that at some point someone is going to get hurt — innocents usually, who have little to do with the political tensions for which they always pay the price. The best hope is that Iran, having symbolically hit back, quickly climbs down President Trump will be criticised for backing the attack on Iran, even as his own lack of influence with Israeli hardliners is humiliatingly exposed. The truth is that every US president would probably have done the same. If Trump can be taken to task for anything, it is calling for the people of Iran to overthrow the regime that has ruled the country since 1979 (Libya has hardly been a model of stability since the Western-led coalition deposed Colonel Gaddafi). Attempts to topple Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad similarly led in turn to all-out civil war and the emboldening of Islamic State. Another war in the Middle East would undoubtedly lead to millions more fleeing the region in search of a safe haven in Europe, where tensions over mass immigration are already dangerously inflamed. The best hope is that Iran, having symbolically hit back at the wave of attacks by Israel, quickly climbs down. The Iranian people, if the ayatollahs even care about them at this stage, have nothing to gain from war, and less still from widening it to include the US. Tehran is already weak. The reality of power in the region inevitably means defiance invites disaster. Israel has refrained from attacking Iran's oil refineries, which would plunge the country's fragile economy into crisis. They may not hold off for long if the tit-for-tat of missiles escalates. The world can only pray that Mr Trump was telling the truth when he promised US voters in November that the era of America getting involved in foreign wars had come to an end.
Irish Examiner
13 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Maria Walsh: Polish election result shows we cannot take trust in Europe for granted
Earlier this month, Poland elected Karol Nawrocki as its new president as he edged out his opponent by the narrowest of margins in a record-breaking 73% voter turnout. His defeat of liberal Warsaw mayor Rafał Trzaskowski stands in stark contrast to the centrist coalition currently governing in Poland's parliament — and could signal a pivot backwards in one of the EU's most strategically important member states. With his Maga-style politics and growing nationalist platform, Nawrocki resembles a number of other right-wing populist leaders elected in recent years. His victory arrives at a fragile moment for the EU, a moment when European unity is being tested by war on its borders, institutional reforms in Brussels, and a steady undercurrent of far-right momentum across the bloc. This is a result that will have consequences far beyond the Polish borders — reverberations of the June 1 election will be felt across the EU and will undoubtedly arrive on Irish shores. Conversations in Brussels this week have centred around the reasons underpinning Nawrocki's victory. It appears Poland's membership of the EU played a pivotal role in the end result. For some Poles, there is a growing feeling the European Union has "diluted" the Polish national identity. This feeling has been matched by a growing wave of nationalism, which is linked to a similar sentiment around migration and open borders. Polish citizens, who have gained considerably from EU membership, much as we have done in Ireland, have elected a resident who is far from a fan of the European project. While the impact of Nawrocki's victory might not be felt immediately in Brussels — he will not directly dictate Poland's decisions taken across the EU institutions — the presidential role is much more than a ceremonial footnote. As president, he holds veto power over legislation and has already forced prime minister Donald Tusk — who leads a pro-European government — into calling a parliamentary vote of confidence. Given his power over the prime minister, a legislative stalemate surrounding Tusk's pro-European reforms is highly likely. Fine Gael MEP Maria Walsh: 'We must ensure Irish citizens continue to see and understand the value of the European project — because trust in Europe cannot be assumed, it must be earned.' Since Brexit, the EU's centre of gravity has shifted eastward. Poland has been at the heart of this transition, with its influence in the EU continuing to increase thanks to its economic growth, geographic position and strong defence capabilities. Since joining the EU in 2004, Poland has become the fastest growing economy in Europe. Alongside its fiscal success, Poland has emerged as a military frontrunner in the EU. The size of its army outweighs that of the UK, France, and Germany, with annual investment in defence reaching almost 5%. Given its proximity to Kaliningrad and Russia, and past history of occupation, it is no surprise Poland has prioritised its security and defence, and in recent months it has played a central role in the Coalition of the Willing. Nawrocki's victory puts into question how Poland will now be able to collaborate with the EU on issues of security, and crucially on the Russia-Ukraine war. As the commander in chief, Nawrocki can shape foreign and security policy, and his current position on Ukraine is nuanced. On the one hand, he does not support cutting off weapons to Ukraine and has not been as pro-Russia as some other Maga-style politicians. However, Nawrocki has demonised Ukrainian refugees in his country, claimed Zelenskyy 'treats Poland badly', and opposes Ukrainian integration into European-oriented bodies, such as the EU and Nato. Without a strong ally in Poland, the EU is significantly weaker in pushing ahead with its defence agenda. Perhaps most notable about Nawrocki's victory is what it tells us about the European political climate. With recent gains by right-wing parties in the European parliamentary elections and across France, Germany, and Italy, the Polish result feels less like an anomaly and more like a bellwether. The election of Romania's Nicușor Dan last month offers a glimmer of hope, but given Nawrocki's close ties to Donald Trump and Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán, we cannot ignore the steady erosion of the centre-ground. In Ireland, we have been fortunate the centre has held in recent elections — underpinned by strong support for European cooperation, inclusion and democratic values. But Poland has shown us how quickly the tide can change. In less than two years, a shift in public sentiment has deepened divisions on the EU's eastern flank and raised urgent questions about whether our institutions are still connecting with the citizens they represent. The Polish election has practical implications for Ireland — we must push harder for EU cooperation and commit to a more serious role in European defence. Just as importantly, we must ensure Irish citizens continue to see and understand the value of the European project — because trust in Europe cannot be assumed, it must be earned. Maria Walsh is a Fine Gael MEP for the Midlands-North West constituency
