• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Gymnich: press remarks by High Representative Kaja Kallas after the meeting

European External Action Service (EEAS)

29.08.2025
Copenhagen
EEAS Press Team

Check against delivery!

Good afternoon, everybody. Glad to see so many of you here.

We just concluded a productive meeting with European defence ministers. Thank you, Troels, once again, for hosting us here in Copenhagen.

We had three main issues today on the agenda. First, the defence of Ukraine. Second, European defence readiness. And third, EU military missions and operations.

So first, Ukraine. The past weeks, we have seen diplomatic efforts to end Russia's war. It is clear that Europe wants peace. America wants peace. Ukraine wants peace. Who does not want peace is Russia.

It is clear, because Russia responds to these peace efforts with missile attacks. Wednesday's attack on Kyiv shows how deliberate the choice of Russia is to escalate and also mock the peace efforts. President Zelenskyy has clearly expressed already several months ago to be ready for the talks. But Putin is stalling by any means possible, and therefore Ukraine needs to be supported by military aims. This remains crucial.

The EU and our Member States have already provided over €63 billion in military support to Ukraine since the war began, and in 2025 €25 billion. I welcome that several EU Member States have made new pledges just in the last days - aid to Ukraine saves lives.

We must continue to step up. The European Peace Facility can provide funding to support this effort. It can reimburse Member States for weapons purchased for Ukraine, including for supporting NATO's PURL initiatives, so the continued blocking of the EPF is not justified. Resolving this swiftly is important for the work between Europe and also United States to support Ukraine. And bilateral issues must not block the aid.

Today, Ministers also discussed the European Union's role in security guarantees, and it is clear that Europe will fully pay its part. I welcome that there is a broad support today to expand our EUMAM, military mission [in Ukraine], mandate to provide training and advice inside Ukraine after any truce.

We are the largest provider of training to Ukraine's military. We have trained over 80,000 soldiers so far, and we must be ready to do more. This could include placing EU trainers in Ukraine and military academies and institutions. In parallel, our civilian mission can strengthen Ukraine's resilience against Russian hybrid attacks. We can also do more for Ukraine's defence industry, but they really learn on the battlefield can be also turned into the strength of Europe.

We are already the biggest investor in Ukraine defence industry, and we can help Ukraine open production lines here in Europe and encourage greater European investment also in Ukraine. Denmark has a leading way here, really commend you on that.

Going forward, we will closely coordinate with the Coalition of the Willing. Ministers were clear that the security guarantees for Ukraine must be robust and credible. 2022 must not be allowed to repeat.

Then, European-owned defence. At the June European Council, leaders agreed to increase defence spending and invest better together. EU Member States identified nine priority areas, such as air and missile defence, drones, and ammunition. Today, Ministers discussed ways to close the most urgent capability gaps, and mostly, to do it jointly, to do it together. And to be more effective.

We are identifying lead nations for each area by October's European Council, alongside with the roadmap for defence with clear objectives and milestones.

Europe is spending record sums on defence - cash matters, but only if it delivers real capabilities, and only if we do it together.

Finally, on European Union, military missions and operations, over 5000 European personnel serve worldwide today. They maintain security and safety in the Balkans, protect shipping in the Red Sea, and also combat piracy in the Indian Ocean. These missions are vital to global security.

Today, Ministers discussed the ways to ensure these missions better support European Union geopolitical interests. Where we can have most effect, where we cannot. How we should make those operations really work together with the partner countries to address their needs, so that we are able to review the mandates, if necessary, and also to review the impact for the times to come.

Many important topics, and it was a really good discussion. Thank you, and I am ready to take your questions.

Link to the video: https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/media/video/I-275993

Q&A.

Q. We have just received information that Israelis are declaring Gaza a combat zone and suspending all the pauses humanitarian policies agreed so far. I would like you to give us a reaction, because it may impact the discussions tomorrow. And secondly, this is for both of you. When you say that the EPF can also be used for the PURL initiative, so priority purchases for US man-made arms for Ukraine. Do you hope that this is going to spin the story in a way that perhaps a certain Member State will finally deblock something that has been blocking for ages now? Thank you.

Thank you.

I must say that we had the meetings all day without the phones, so I actually received this information also just seconds ago before coming here. I am not ready to comment on this. It is certainly not making things any easier or better, but I will also look into this.

Now, when it comes to the PURL initiative, then it is true that in the EPF, we have €6.6 billion blocked, and we have offered to our Hungarian colleagues different ways out, opt out, like they have in NATO also. Different possibilities that are not part of the legal aid or anything of a sort. But it has not been, we have not been, effective so far. Now we have the PURL initiative, which means that buying weapons from America, if we could unblock this 6.6 billion, as also our different colleagues are very often also Hungarian colleagues, referring to President Trump's efforts - this is exactly what is it for. So, if we could unblock by this, and the 6.6 billion could be used in the PURL initiative, then it could definitely make a difference. And all the countries today were raising this issue of unblocking. You do not have to be part of it, but let others then do it.

Q. I have been looking at something called the Baltic defence line, a huge project being made in the Baltic countries, defending them against the possible Russian aggression. They are cash strapped. They are looking for extra funding. They are asking the EU for support and funding. Will they get that?

Well, there are several, several points here. First, what we discussed today is also the joint projects and where Member States can come in, because the Baltic countries also, border countries, were raising that they are sort of the gatekeepers of Russia. And that is why it is in everybody's interest to invest in that. Now we have also the European budget. The Commission has proposed this project, but this will be under discussions, first in the Council, but at the same time in the European Parliament. So yes, there should be more funding, as it is definitely a gatekeeping to keep Russia away, but eventually, it is upon the decision makers to decide how to allocate resources. This proposal is there.

Q. You spoke about potential EU trainers on the ground in Ukraine. Can you just clarify you made a change of mandate after a potential ceasefire, and can you tell us, do you think this is in any way realistic? You said there is broad support. What does that mean? I believe you would need unanimity for this. You just released a statement with only 26 countries just basically condemning those Russian attacks which damaged the EU mission. If you can't even get 27 countries on a basic statement like that, can you ever imagine getting agreement unanimously on something like a change of the mandate for EU trainers on the ground?

Well, when we are 27 and 26 are on board, then it is a broad support. I can say that it is a broad support. But yes, the discussion that we had was about the change of mandate. It is a bit also chicken and egg issues. Like you say, it is true that we are talking about changing the mandate or training on Ukrainian soil if there's ceasefire. So some are saying that we should do it after, but we can also do it conditionally, so that, we agree already how we change the mandate, so that it would be conditional when the ceasefire or truce enters into force when it is actually needed. Now, what we have to keep in mind is that there is a Coalition of the Willing for the security guarantees. There is a discussion with the Americans about their backstop. Americans have been very clear. Europeans have to be leading here. So again, we need to show how we are taking responsibility for certain tracks and training is has been on Europe, and we are ready to do it on Ukraine and soil once there is a truce. And then, this is also one argument to our friends who are saying that that truce is important, peace is important, but it can only be just and lasting if there are credible security guarantees. And one of the elements of the credible security guarantees is the EU training the military mission as well as the civilian mission.

Q. You mentioned that the EU is the largest investor in Ukrainian defence. I would like to know among whom? If the attack is coming from the east, and then from the west the United States spoke about decreasing their support to Ukraine, giving the leading position, as you just mentioned, to the EU. My other question is that, do you look at this announcement from the United States of America to give the European the leading role here, especially when it comes to the Russian Ukrainian conflict positively or how do you perceive this?

First on the Ukraine defence industry. I was saying that Europe has been the main investor in Ukraine defence industry, and one of the ideas is to also bring this industry to Europe, which means creating jobs here in Europe as well. It is clear that we need all to invest more in defence. Ukraine has all the lessons learned from the actual combat; what is needed, what works, what does not. So it is also in the benefit of European Union to have it in in in Europe.

Now, to your other question. America has been very clear that in this war, Europe has to be the one who is doing the most. We are giving the most military support to Ukraine. We have already done that. But when we talk about security guarantees, then they have been very clear that they are discussing, and are able to provide the backstop, if Europeans take the majority or, like they say, the lion's share. That is the message to us, and that is what we are discussing, that we are able to fulfill. To have them on board, then we also need to show that we are doing much. Am I happy or not? I would say that I would be so happy if this war would be over.

Q. There have been three missile attacks against the Druzhba crude oil pipeline, which supports at least two European Member States. And in January, the European Commission pledged in writing that it would take actions against attacks like this, but recently, there is not too much what we can see. Why does the Commission not see it as a direct threat against European Union Member States and the critical infrastructure?

Of course, what we what we have to keep in mind is that one of the places where the Russians get most resources to wage this war is oil, gas, fossil fuels. So therefore, the Commission has proposed a roadmap to really get rid of the Russian fossil fuels, because it is a bit contradictory that we try to stop this war but at the same time, we are the main buyers, as European countries, of the fossil fuels that actually fuel this war. This is, in the end, the target, the goal of the European Union to get rid of the Russian fossil fuels. Of course, any attacks on European soil, we always condemn. Thank you.

Q. Copenhagen is going to offer safe haven to Ukrainian defence companies. I was wondering what kind of weapons were going are going to be produced here in Denmark. Also, if any other European countries have raised their hand and offered to also offer similar safe haven to Ukrainian defense companies.

On the other question, many countries have indicated that they are interested in investments to the defence industry, bringing the defence industry to their soil, because it means jobs, and it means also prosperity for that country, considering how much money there is coming to the defence sector. I am not giving you concrete names, but if you look through different statements, what different countries have made, they are welcoming the defence industry. Also making detail planning for having this industry, because they have very concrete conditions. Definitely welcoming such development.

Q. The discussion on these security guarantees, they all build on the idea of American backstop. But if you see the stability of what President Trump is promising, or saying, can you really build on that? In the future, should Europe not find another way to achieve some kind of security guarantee for Ukraine.

Actually, it is the other way around. You might say that it is also what comes first, because the Americans are saying they are providing the backstop, if we are taking the lion's share. So [as] Europeans, what we are discussing is to take that lion's share in order to also invite the Americans in. So, not putting the main burden on the Americans, but inviting them to be part of it - like we have those discussions ongoing. That is conditional that we do more ourselves; and this is only what we can discuss ourselves, what more we can do.

Link to the video: https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/en/media/video/I-276259