Europe Begins to Organize Its Power

 

The Dublin agreement deserves a welcome
— and a clear test of what it can deliver.

R.M. Westerink; November 13, 2026 

Europe has spent too long insisting that it must have a voice while struggling to agree who should speak. The decision in Dublin to organize a European negotiating team therefore deserves recognition.

Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Poland, together with EU institutions, will form Europe’s team for Ukraine peace talks. This is a meaningful step towards Europe organizing its power. Whether it becomes an effective instrument depends on the mandate, cohesion and resources behind it.[1]

For those who would prefer stronger leadership by the European Commission and its High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, the arrangement may feel incomplete. But supporting this development and seeking stronger European institutions are compatible ambitions. The immediate task is to make the delegation work for Europe as a whole.

Bringing Europe’s strengths together

The arrangement offers a practical basis for influence because it brings national military capabilities and EU institutions into the same framework.

A durable settlement will require more than diplomatic wording. It will raise questions about military assistance, security guarantees, sanctions, financing, reconstruction and Ukraine’s European future. No single European capital can credibly manage that entire agenda. A delegation connecting governments’ capabilities with the Union’s collective instruments has a better chance.

Including Britain is particularly sensible. European security extends beyond EU membership, and Britain’s military and diplomatic capabilities belong in any serious effort to secure the continent. Brexit should not prevent Europeans from organizing around their shared security interests.

The opportunity is substantial: Europe can begin to connect what it says at the negotiating table with what it can actually deliver.

A delegation must represent a common position

A group of powerful countries does not automatically constitute a European voice.

Without a shared mandate, the delegation could reproduce Europe’s divisions inside a smaller room. Separate national priorities could produce competing messages, while governments outside the group might reasonably question whose interests were being represented.

The delegation must therefore derive its authority from an agreed European position. Its members need sufficient discretion to negotiate, alongside clear limits on what they can concede or promise.

Smaller countries must have confidence that their security will not become a bargaining instrument. Ukraine must retain control over decisions concerning its own future. And neither Moscow nor Washington should be able to obtain different European answers by approaching different capitals.

Europe’s seat at the table becomes valuable when it carries a position that its members can sustain.

Four tests of seriousness

The delegation should be judged against four practical tests.

First, a common mandate and agreed limits on concessions.
Europeans must establish what they seek, what remains negotiable and which principles cannot be traded away. Ambiguity within the delegation would become an advantage for its counterparts.

Second, a clear spokesperson and a procedure for resolving disagreements.
A team can draw on several sources of authority, but negotiations require an intelligible voice. Internal differences need a route to resolution before they become competing public positions.

Third, accountability to the wider EU membership.
Regular consultation and reporting are essential to maintain trust. Countries outside the room must remain participants in shaping the position represented inside it.

Fourth, credible commitments on military support and security.
European influence depends partly on whether Ukraine can continue to resist aggression and whether Europeans can sustain their commitments. Diplomatic ambition must be backed by resources and decisions.

These tests would turn a useful organizational compromise into a serious instrument of European policy.

The institutions must help it succeed

The Commission, European Council and Kallas have essential roles in making this arrangement coherent.

The Commission must connect negotiations to the Union’s economic and financial instruments. The European Council must maintain agreement among governments. Kallas should help bring diplomatic continuity, foreign policy coordination and the perspective of the wider Union into the delegation’s work.

The Dublin formula does not, by itself, demonstrate that disagreements over her personal role have been conclusively resolved. Leaving those relationships unclear would invite renewed institutional competition.

Europe needs an explicit division of responsibilities that allows its representatives to reinforce one another. The negotiating team should strengthen the Union’s capacity to act collectively and give all member states confidence in its direction.

Merz’s opportunity: make collective action possible

Friedrich Merz has an opportunity to exercise European leadership through this process.

His Dublin remarks supported established European negotiating formats and urged leaders to settle representation behind closed doors.[2] That suggests a pragmatic focus on getting an effective team into place. It does not establish that he engineered the agreement.

The more consequential test lies ahead. Germany can help build coalitions, connect diplomatic commitments to material support and sustain confidence across Europe.

Merz would demonstrate leadership by using Germany’s weight to make common action possible. That requires listening to smaller states, working closely with European institutions and helping ensure that agreed commitments are fulfilled.

Germany’s influence can become a European asset when it increases Europe’s collective capacity.

Costa has stated the foundation

António Costa’s Dublin statement provides a clear foundation: Ukraine must remain free to choose its alliances; Europe’s security cannot be decided without Europeans; and sovereign equality, territorial integrity and the rejection of force must guide negotiations.[3]

Those principles matter because the talks concern more than the terms for ending a war. They also concern whether military aggression can secure lasting authority over another country’s choices.

Europe should enter negotiations prepared to pursue peace while defending the conditions that make peace sustainable.

Dublin deserves a welcome. Europe has taken a practical step towards organizing its power. Its leaders must now give the delegation the common purpose, authority and resources needed to exercise it.

References

1. Reuters, “EU settles on five-nation group to speak for Europe at Ukraine peace talks,” 13 November 2026.

2. German Federal Government, Chancellor Merz’s press statement in Dublin, 12 November 2026.

3. European Council, President Costa’s remarks following the European Political Community meeting, 12 November 2026.