Context:

Volodymyr Zelensky argued that European security should depend on a larger, more militarily capable EU footprint, proposing the United Kingdom join the bloc again along with Ukraine, Türkiye and Norway to deter Russia. He warned that if NATO weakens, Europe must organize its own defence, highlighting that four countries on Europe’s edge could collectively outmatch Russia and control the seas, skies, and ground. The stance intersects with ongoing debates over Ukraine’s EU accession, UK Brexit history, and skepticism among some member states about expanding the Union or integrating additional security commitments. The remarks underscore a pivot toward deeper European security integration, while Brussels faces political and legal hurdles, including Ukraine’s candidacy status and resistance from Hungary and others. Looking ahead, the discussion anticipates continued tension between expansion ambitions, legal constraints, and balancing alliance commitments with national sovereignties.

Dive Deeper:

• Zelensky spoke on The Rest is Politics in a framing that the EU, not NATO, could shoulder continental defence if Washington reduces its commitment; he named the UK, Ukraine, Türkiye, and Norway as essential European powers, arguing their combined strength could surpass Russia’s military capacity.

• He claimed that the UK’s 2016 Brexit vote and its sovereignty concerns over a potential EU army reflect broader skepticism about security integration, and noted Turkey’s and Norway’s positions as potential obstacles or considerations in any expansion.

• The piece emphasizes that Ukraine’s EU bid is controversial and currently not compliant with EU accession rules, given wartime conditions, governance issues, and structural concerns raised in prior EU reviews.

• Hungary and Slovakia are cited as key veto-players whose opposition could block rapid expansion, with critics arguing Hungarian energy ties to Russia and scepticism about aligning with a harder stance against Moscow.

• Zelensky revisits the grievance over Ukraine losing nuclear arsenal in the 1990s in exchange for security assurances, framing NATO membership as a baseline expectation for a non-nuclear Ukraine and tying security guarantees to the broader debate on EU/NATO security architecture.

• The article also notes longstanding Brussels debates about turning Europe into a unified military power, a goal that has persisted for years without resolution, and frames Trump-era criticisms of NATO as rhetoric that actually sought to strengthen the alliance.

• Overall, the forward path is uncertain due to legal, political, and alliance dynamics, including the need to reconcile expansion with member-state vetoes, the wartime status of Ukraine, and the EU’s readiness to absorb a large, strategically significant new member.