European Council President António Costa faces internal backlash from EU leaders following his outreach to the Kremlin. While Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez called the contact “understandable,” nine diplomats told POLITICO that behind-the-scenes discontent is high, with some officials comparing Costa’s independent actions to the controversial leadership style of his predecessor, Charles Michel.
Why are EU leaders divided over Costa’s Russia contact?
The friction stems from a disconnect between public diplomacy and private sentiment. In public settings, leaders maintained a unified front. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez defended the contact as “understandable,” and Belgium’s Bart De Wever dismissed the move as “completely normal” to cameras.
However, the reality behind closed doors is different. According to nine diplomats speaking to POLITICO on the condition of anonymity, the discontent is “palpable.” While some leaders joked about the situation, others expressed serious frustration. Specifically, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz reportedly expressed unhappiness regarding the move in private discussions.
This divide highlights a growing tension in how the European Council operates. The President is tasked with acting on behalf of all member states, yet unilateral outreach can be perceived as bypassing the collective will of the union.
The European Council President does not have the power to set EU policy independently; their role is to facilitate consensus among the heads of state and government of the member countries.
How does this move compare to the leadership of Charles Michel?
Several diplomats have compared Costa’s current approach to that of Charles Michel, who led the European Council from 2019 to 2024. One diplomat told POLITICO that “Costa pulled a Michel,” a phrase intended as a sharp critique of his leadership style.
The comparison rests on a specific reputation. Michel was frequently criticized by member states for attempting to set policy without sufficient consultation. This perceived overstepping often led to friction between the Council presidency and national governments. By initiating contact with Russia, Costa faces similar accusations of attempting to drive a diplomatic agenda that has not been fully vetted by the individual leaders he represents.
Comparing Leadership Styles
| Feature | Charles Michel (2019-2024) | António Costa (Current) |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Criticism | Setting policy without consultation | Unilateral diplomatic outreach |
| Member State Reaction | Perceived as “sub-par” by many leaders | Palpable behind-the-scenes discontent |
What are the risks to the EU’s position on Ukraine?
The primary concern for Eastern European members is the potential dilution of the EU’s support for Ukraine. Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal told POLITICO that the outreach was “misguided.” Michal argued that the European Union cannot simultaneously act as a mediator in the conflict and a primary backer of Ukraine.
Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda echoed these concerns. Speaking to Bloomberg, Nausėda stated, “I don’t think right now is the right time to start negotiations with Putin.” This sentiment reflects a broader fear: that early diplomatic overtures might be interpreted as weakness or a shift in the EU’s strategic commitment to Kyiv.
If the Council President is seen as moving toward mediation before the member states are ready, it could fracture the unified stance that has defined the EU’s response to the invasion since 2022.
When evaluating EU news, distinguish between “public consensus” (what leaders say in press conferences) and “private negotiation” (what diplomats report behind closed doors). The real policy shifts often happen in the latter.
What was the official justification for the Kremlin contact?
A spokesperson for António Costa declined to comment on the specific criticisms. However, the President’s office previously clarified the intent behind the outreach. The office insisted the contact was not an attempt to initiate immediate negotiations or act as a formal mediator between Russia and Ukraine.
Instead, the office stated the goal was to “contribute to opening a channel of communication.” The strategy is to ensure the EU is prepared with established lines of contact if Russian President Vladimir Putin eventually pursues serious peace talks. This “readiness” approach is intended to prevent the EU from being caught off guard by sudden shifts in Russian policy.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is António Costa’s contact with Russia controversial?
It is controversial because some EU leaders believe the Council President should not engage in independent diplomacy without first reaching a consensus with all member states, especially regarding sensitive issues like the war in Ukraine.
Which EU leaders have criticized the move?
Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal called the move “misguided,” and Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda expressed that the timing for negotiations is currently incorrect.
Is the EU moving toward mediating with Russia?
Costa’s office says the outreach is about opening communication channels for future readiness, rather than an immediate attempt to mediate or begin peace talks.
What do you think about the EU’s diplomatic approach? Should the Council President have more autonomy, or should every move be decided by consensus? Let us know in the comments below or subscribe to our newsletter for more deep dives into European politics.
