The document, drafted in France and which has sparked a strong reaction in Brussels, proposes several reform scenarios. One of them strengthens Kallas’s position and expands her influence over trade and economic policy. The other two, on the contrary, propose reducing her powers in favor of either the European Commission or the governments of EU member states.
Kallas herself was quick to point out that the EU’s power structure is defined by existing treaties and cannot be altered by the political wishes of individual states.
However, the discussion surrounding the French initiative quickly turned into a much broader debate about Kallas’s role and the effectiveness of the EU’s entire foreign policy system.
What Kallas is accused of
According to Euronews, criticism of the former Estonian prime minister has intensified significantly in recent months. She is accused of taking too hard a line toward Russia, making harsh statements about China, and seeking to advance large-scale initiatives without prior consultation with key European capitals.
According to European diplomats, many partners believe that Kallas still acts as a national leader rather than as a representative of the compromise position of the 27 EU member states.
Dissatisfaction is growing louder. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has repeatedly called for her resignation, and in diplomatic circles, there is increasing talk of the growing isolation of the head of European diplomacy.
Nevertheless, many interlocutors in Brussels are convinced that the problem runs much deeper than Kallas’s personality.
According to them, the very system of foreign policy decision-making in the EU is increasingly stalling under the weight of internal contradictions. The High Representative is responsible for the Union’s diplomacy but lacks sufficient tools to pursue a unified line. Any member state can block a decision, and the principle of unanimity often turns EU foreign policy into a field of constant compromises and mutual vetoes.
“If this system were being created today, it certainly wouldn’t be built this way,” European diplomats acknowledge.
The Struggle for Influence Within the System
The struggle for influence within Brussels’ institutions creates additional tension. Under the leadership of Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission is increasingly taking the lead on the foreign policy agenda—from the war in Ukraine to relations with China and energy security.
In this situation, many diplomats view the French document not so much as an attack on Kallas, but rather as the latest episode in the struggle between key centers of power within the European Union.
While some countries consider Kallas’s position too hardline, others—primarily Poland, the Baltic states, and Northern European countries—continue to support her approach toward Moscow.
As a result, the dispute surrounding the head of European diplomacy is increasingly turning into a debate about the future of the European Union itself: who should speak on behalf of Europe on the world stage, and is Brussels capable of developing a unified foreign policy amid growing disagreements among member states.
