After Months of Hesitation, Europe Signals Readiness for Direct Talks With Russia

After months of hesitation and internal disagreement, Europe is sending its strongest signals yet that it is ready to speak directly with Russia to end the full-scale invasion of Ukraine and settle the future of the continent's security architecture.

Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre moved first, holding a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss the imminent restart of the peace process.

Although Stubb and Støre had no mandate to speak on behalf of Europe and acted as "leaders of their respective countries," their overture on Tuesday immediately positioned the Nordic pair as leading interlocutors.

In its readout, the Kremlin said the three leaders had "agreed to maintain direct telephone contact in the future."

Meanwhile, the European Commission and the European Council are preparing a joint team of senior officials to send to the next round of talks, expected to take place in Abu Dhabi in early November. The exact date has yet to be announced.

Bjoern Seibert, the influential chief of cabinet to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, is tipped to lead the delegation.

"We are adamantly committed not just to putting an end to the war but to achieve peace that will be just and sustainable. That is our aim and that is the stance we are defending in the ongoing talks," a Commission spokesperson said.

It is notable that Brussels is now openly stating its intention to hold the upcoming negotiations in a multilateral format, which would mean having Europeans, Ukrainians, Americans and Russians at the same table at the same time.

This has never happened before in the peace process. Until now, it was primarily the US that spoke with Russia, with occasional trilateral talks that also included Ukraine. (Kyiv and Moscow have a parallel track to release prisoners of war.)

It is even more notable that Russia has not flatly rejected European participation, as it has done repeatedly in the past. This time, it appears to seek it.

"It's not enough to talk only to Kyiv. We need to talk to the whole of Europe, which fully supports Kyiv," Yury Ushakov, a close aide to Putin, said last week.

Elusive consensus

Whether to break the diplomatic isolation imposed in February 2022 and speak directly with Russia has long been a divisive topic among European leaders.

The debate came to the fore earlier this year, when French President Emmanuel Macron and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni issued back-to-back calls in favor. The idea of appointing a special European envoy unleashed a flurry of possible names.

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Luxembourg and Slovakia gradually endorsed the strategy, arguing the stakes were too high for Europe to be absent.

By contrast, Germany, Poland, Sweden, Denmark and the Baltics resisted it, warning that Russia's positions remained as maximalist as on the first day of the war.

The lack of consensus was laid bare in June when European Council President António Costa unexpectedly opened a channel of communication with the Kremlin. Costa's decision drew political backlash and was quietly put on hold.

The Stubb-Støre call with Putin also raised eyebrows in some quarters.

"I am very sceptical about this independent initiative by Norway and Finland," Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said in a rare moment of Nordic division.

"I honestly don't know what they think can be achieved by this."

Poland's Donald Tusk advised Stubb and Støre to be "vigilant" and proceed with caution in their newfound engagement with Putin.

"Russia's agenda and interests are quite precisely defined, and one should not harbor any illusions about getting an agreement," Tusk said.

There was an obvious point in their warnings. The Kremlin's readout, with its evergreen references to the "root causes" of the war and Europe's "confrontational policies," left no doubt that Russia's maximalist demands were still intact.

A turn for the worse

But things are no longer what they were in June, when Costa was rebuked.

Back then, European allies were fresh from a successful G7 summit in France that saw US President Donald Trump promise to reimpose sanctions on Russian oil and discuss licences for Patriot missiles with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Now, they are in shock as Trump cuts a diesel deal with Putin, lifts long-standing sanctions on Russia, lambastes Zelenskyy and demands new elections in Ukraine.

Sudden limits on Kyiv's use of Starlink technology and the early warning system, both crucial to its defence, set off alarm bells. Overnight, the dreaded scenario that Trump will push Ukraine into a take-or-leave-it capitulation crystallised.

The rapid deterioration prompted Stubb and Støre to hastily organise a new round of talks in Oslo. Following the meeting, Zelenskyy emerged with a tempered attitude. Starlink speeds and the early warning were restored afterwards.

Still, anxiety over Trump's turn to Putin remains palpably high.

European officials have realised the contacts between Washington and Moscow are more extensive than they had previously thought.

The two sides are reportedly discussing more deals involving the Lukoil assets, nuclear technology, Arctic LNG and, most controversially, the restart of the Nord Stream pipeline and the release of immobilised Russian assets.

For Europeans, the US approach is fundamentally flawed because it ignores Putin's fixation with territorial conquest, the core reason why he launched the invasion. No deal, however lucrative, can replace Ukraine's annihilation in Putin's mind, they say.

Adding to the sense of urgency is the blockade in the Black Sea, which has disrupted global supply chains, and the upcoming winter in Ukraine, which Russia plans to make insufferable. The two crises threaten to spur a migratory wave towards Europe.

The need to achieve a ceasefire, even if targeted to the Black Sea and energy facilities, has never been more pressing since February 2022. Putin is certain to demand further sanctions relief in exchange for anything it considers a concession.

This helps explains why Europe, after months of hesitation, is now willing to step up its role and speak directly with Russia: being at the table has become indispensable to defend Ukraine's position, increasingly fragile; counter the US approach, increasingly emboldened; and safeguard the European interest, increasingly side-lined.

Støre said as much as he defended his call.

"If one assumes that the current situation – where communication from the American administration to Moscow serves as the sole channel for discussing Ukraine outside of Ukraine – is the only way, then one is entitled to that view," he said.

"I believe it is important that other voices are heard as well."