Talking Europe

As part of FRANCE 24’s and Talking Europe’s coverage of the fourth anniversary of the war in Ukraine, we host veteran diplomat Vsevolod Chentsov, Ukraine’s ambassador to the European Union. He highlights the critical assistance the EU is providing for the country’s military, budgetary, and energy needs, saying that the solidarity shown by Ukraine’s European allies "cannot be underestimated".

On the fourth anniversary of full-scale war, Chentsov says that Ukrainians "again feel this feeling of strong support and solidarity with Ukraine. The unity of Europe is there. The role of European institutions and member states cannot be underestimated."

Faced with a particularly harsh winter and Russian missile attacks, Chentsov points to the EU’s crucial help in the energy sector. "The EU has managed to mobilise more than €3 billion for energy support since February 2022; emergency purchases, generators, transformers and so on." Chentsov highlights that Ukraine now faces "a very difficult combination of very low temperatures and depleted stocks of missiles to hit Russian ballistic missiles and drones".

On the landmark EU loan for Ukraine that was agreed at the end of last year, Chentsov says, "the 90-billion-euro loan launched new instruments to cover our needs in 2026 and 2027. Around 60 billion from this loan will be allocated to support Ukrainian defence, both for the Ukrainian defence industry and the European defence industry. What is very important is that Ukraine will be able to use the instrument in quite a flexible way, which means that we will be able to defend Ukraine."

Referring to Ukraine’s funding shortfall even after taking the EU loan into account, Chentsov remarks; "the EU is covering a significant part of our needs, but definitely other partners are supposed to chip in, and we are working hard with the rest of our G7 partners. There were quite successful meetings recently in Brussels."

We ask if the Ukrainian authorities feel abandoned by the Trump administration, given the latter’s drastic reduction in financial aid to Ukraine over the past year. "I hope that transatlantic unity will remain," Chentsov responds. "These days, our colleagues in the EU institutions and member states are talking to the US administration, for instance, about how to coordinate additional sanctions pressure on the Russian shadow fleet. And we are talking about a total ban on maritime transportation. So there is coordination between the EU and the US. And we definitely try to encourage our US partners put the pressure on Russia."

On Ukraine’s EU membership process, Chentsov says that "it’s important to find a way out” of the impasse caused by the Hungarian government blocking the formal opening of the first cluster in the EU accession negotiations. He adds, "We managed to find a way to move forward with the European Commission and the EU Council Secretariat and to do basically all the technical work, not only on the first cluster, but also on other clusters, in order to be ready to double down as soon as we will be able to overcome this political blockage. We are moving fast and we try not to lose any momentum."

Programme prepared by Oihana Almandoz, Perrine Desplats and Isabelle Romero

Europe's regions are in danger of being squeezed as the EU considers sweeping changes to the way its 27 member states spend their money, warns the European official tasked with reducing inequalities among the bloc's hundreds of towns and regions.

Kata Tütto, a Hungarian socialist, and president of the European Committee of the Regions, tells Talking Europe's Douglas Herbert that the EU's next long-term budget, which runs from 2028 to 2034, risks quietly shrinking the money that underpins local investment under the EU's region-focused Cohesion Policy.

At the centre of the controversy is a proposed "mega-fund" worth roughly €865 billion, which would pool money for farmers and poorer regions in a single pot.

That may sound vast. But spread across seven years and 260 regions, the reality is far less impressive, Tütto says. Under the current proposals, funding for regions would fall to roughly half of today's level. It's a shift that could hollow out the EU's cohesion policy, the main tool designed to reduce economic gaps between Europe's cities and regions.

The timing, Tüttő argues, could hardly be worse. Every region – rich or poor – is undergoing a demographic, climate and technological transition. In a world of constant crisis and mounting threats, she warns, governments are tempted to sacrifice long-term investment for short-term fixes, centralising decisions and draining attention and money away from the local level.

While Tüttő accepts that defence and security now dominate the political agenda, she challenges the definition of what security means. It is not only about tanks, borders or drones, she says, but also about safe drinking water, affordable housing, clean energy and resilient infrastructure – the everyday needs that allow societies to function when shocks hit.

Tütto's message to Brussels is blunt: Europe cannot project strength abroad if it allows inequality and instability to grow at home.

Undermining Cohesion Policy, she warns, would weaken the very base that allows the European Union to act together economically, politically and strategically.

Programme prepared by Perrine Desplats, Oihana Almandoz, Paul Guianvarc'h and Isabelle Romero

Worries that too much time on social media may be hurting children's mental health, and creating addictions as harmful as alcohol or cigarettes, are sparking growing calls across Europe to block minors under the age of 15 or 16 from access to platforms.

After Australia became the first country to block under-16s from platforms in December, a host of EU countries are poised to possibly follow suit.

France, Spain, Portugal and Greece are now weighing similar measures, driven by growing concerns over algorithms and the grip of Big Tech on young minds.

Supporters of tougher rules argue that the risks are no longer theoretical. Studies increasingly link heavy social media use among teenagers to anxiety, depression, addictive behaviour and, in extreme cases, suicide.

Read more‘Addiction is profitable’: Meta, Google stand trial over social media effects on children

Governments insist they are stepping in where platforms have failed to protect children from systems designed to maximise screen time over well-being.

Marc Angel, a Luxembourgish MEP from the Socialists & Democrats group, and a member of the European Parliament's Intergroup on Children's Rights, is among the European lawmakers who backs a ban.

In our Talking Europe debate, Angel argues that the logic is simple: what is illegal offline should be illegal online.

He warns that today's dangers are no longer just in the street, but on the bedroom screens of smartphones and other devices. "When I was a kid, my parents told me not to let strangers into the house," he says. "Now the strangers are in the bedrooms of kids. And sometimes they aren't even real people."

But opponents of a blanket ban, such as Ana Vasconcelos, a Portuguese MEP with Renew Europe, consider it a blunt and ineffective tool. In a pointed retort to Angel, Vasconcelos argues that Europe risks over-correcting, prioritising symbolic action over workable solutions.

Vasconcelos warns that age-verification systems raise serious privacy issues, expose sensitive data to hacking, and are "very easy to circumvent." In her view, bans may create a false sense of safety while failing to address the real problem.

Instead, she argues for targeted measures: privacy-by-design on devices, phone-free spaces in schools, stronger media literacy, together with greater parental responsibility. For Vasconcelos, the challenge is not whether social media poses risks, but how to prepare young people to navigate a digital reality they cannot avoid.

Programme prepared by Perrine Desplats, Isabelle Romero, Oihana Almandoz and Paul Guianvarc'h

 

Find here the verbatim of the debate on the protection of minors online in the European Parliament

Shared economic and security interests still bind Europe and the United States, even as trust has eroded, insults have flown and rhetoric has hardened in the transatlantic relationship, Brando Benifei, the chair of the delegation for relations with the United States at the European Parliament, tells FRANCE 24 in Talking Europe.

Despite growing friction, Benifei, an MEP from Italy with the Socialists and Democrats parliamentary group, says ties between Brussels and Washington remain vital.

But a partnership, he adds, cannot survive without mutual respect.

While favouring diplomacy, Benifei insists there is a clear limit after which Europe must be ready to retaliate if it wants to be taken seriously. He points to the Greenland episode as proof that firmness and determination work: once EU governments signalled real consequences, dialogue with Washington on Arctic security became "calmer" and more "reasonable".

On trade, Benifei says Europe is deliberately reaching out to others. The recent EU-India trade agreement, he argues, shows the bloc is diversifying its trade routes and reducing dependence on any single partner. The message to Washington is simple: Europe has alternatives, and leverage.

As the EU leads global efforts on AI regulation, Benifei sees artificial intelligence as a tool to enforce trade rules and ensure that agreements are respected. But he cautions that Europe must strive to close the gap with the US and China by strengthening computing power, mobilising capital and deepening financial market integration.

Benifei is sharply critical of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's approach to US President Donald Trump, calling it "very bad" and driven by domestic politics and ideology rather than Italy's national interests. His conclusion is blunt: only a united Europe can negotiate with the United States on an equal footing.

Programme prepared by Perrine Desplats, Oihana Almandoz, Paul Guianvarc'h and Isabelle Romero

Europe has experienced numerous crises since Donald Trump returned to the White House: on trade and tariffs; on Ukraine; and perhaps the most surreal one – on Greenland. The latter was unprecedented: NATO's leading member, the US, openly expressing its territorial designs on another NATO member, Denmark. With each emergency, the same calls have been heard for Europe to wake up and take its destiny into its own hands. But how should the EU and the European members of NATO actually make a strategic shift? We put the question to two MEPs. 

Read moreEurope braces for what's next after Trump eases Greenland tensions

Programme prepared by Perrine Desplats, Paul Guianvarc’h, Oihana Almandoz and Isabelle Romero

 

Find here the debate in the European Parliament on the "Territorial integrity and sovereignty of Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark and the need for a united EU response to US blackmail attempts"

 

As Europe faces unprecedented geopolitical headwinds, from the Ukraine war to Donald Trump’s designs on Greenland, we speak to the EU Commissioner in charge of the economy, productivity, and simplification: Valdis Dombrovskis. A former prime minister of Latvia, Dombrovskis is very much a Brussels insider, serving in various high-profile roles in the EU Commission since 2016, and as a member of the European Parliament in 2004-2009.

Asked if Europe has been too soft on Trump during the Greenland crisis, Dombrovskis answers: "The EU was very clear that threats to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of EU member states are not acceptable, and so are the tariff threats. And correspondingly, we were ready to react forcefully. I think that was one of the factors which eventually helped to change President Trump's mind. And the focus now is where it should be: on how to strengthen security in the Arctic region."

But, we ask, is it not naïve to go back to business as usual, especially when it comes to US-EU trade, and the bilateral trade agreement?

"We managed to get the situation (with the US) into a constructive trajectory," Dombrovskis responds. "Correspondingly, it would be important to indeed finalise the (trade) agreement also from our side, because it's important to provide some stability and predictability for economies and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic. It's worth noting that the EU-US trade and investment relationship is the largest in the world."

On the issue of defence, Dombrovskis explains how "buy European" rules will affect Ukraine's military capabilities.

"The European Commission has proposed a balanced solution. There is a clear priority for European manufacturers, and that includes Ukraine itself," Dombrovskis asserts. "But there is also a cascading mechanism, meaning that if there's certain military equipment which Ukraine urgently needs, but which is not readily available from the eligible (European) producers, Ukraine can purchase this equipment from other producers. Right now the situation in Ukraine is very dire. We see that Russia has substantially intensified its attacks against Ukrainian cities, against Ukrainian energy. And in a situation like this, to block weapons deliveries, for example air defence systems or other deliveries which are urgently needed, that would certainly not be justified."

We turn to the controversial issue of simplification, which environmental groups and trade unions have criticised, saying that the Green Deal and social protections are being rolled back in the process.

"Our simplification work is not deregulation," Dombrovskis counters. "We are not giving away our high social or environmental standards. We are sticking with the European Green Deal 2030 targets, and 2050 targets. So what it's about is how to reach our goals in a simpler and less burdensome manner. If you listen to businesses, the majority of them are saying that the excessive administrative burden is an obstacle for development, and for investing in Europe. A majority of small and medium-sized enterprises are saying it's their main obstacle. And that's why we are pursuing this simplification agenda, with the aim of reducing the overall administrative burden by 25 percent for all companies, and by 35 percent for small and medium enterprises."

Programme prepared by Oihana Almandoz, Perrine Desplats and Isabelle Romero

On January 1, Bulgaria officially joined the eurozone, becoming the 21st country to join the European single currency. Sofia's adoption of the euro brings hope of major economic benefits, but it also comes at a moment of deep political polarisation and mass anti-corruption protests, which culminated in the resignation of both the country's government and president.

Our reporters Elitsa Gadeva and Charlotte Prudhomme were on the ground during the first weeks of the transition, as Bulgarians had one month to adapt to the new currency. From February 1, the country's only legal tender is the euro.

In this programme, we also speak to Ekaterina Zaharieva, the EU Commissioner for Startups, Research and Innovation, and a former deputy prime minister of Bulgaria.

"I think this will open a huge opportunity for the whole private sector," Zaharieva says about Bulgaria joining the euro. "And of course, startups are really flexible by their nature. They have employees from different countries. So this will definitely be a big improvement for the private sector."

On the broader strategic significance of the move, Zaharieva says: "As a minister in different governments who really worked hard for Bulgaria to join the eurozone, I really think it's a big moment for Bulgaria and for Europe. Because in this geopolitical instability, the European Union has become a beacon of stability, of predictability. And you see that the euro is getting stronger and stronger as a currency. So I think it's really positive news for Bulgarian businesses and for Bulgarian citizens."

Programme prepared by Oihana Almandoz, Perrine Desplats and Isabelle Romero

One of the most pressing issues in the EU is the housing crisis. Wages are not keeping up with the rising costs of accommodation, and paying the rent is a challenge for many – never mind trying to get on the property ladder. Meanwhile, homelessness has got worse. Our guest is the EU's first housing commissioner, although his brief also covers energy – a key issue as the bloc tries to become more independent. Dan Jorgensen is a Danish Social Democrat, and in Denmark he was minister for climate and energy, and minister for development cooperation and global climate policy, before taking up the Energy and Housing portfolio for the EU in 2024.

We start with the tensions over Greenland, and we ask Jorgensen if the EU has stood up for its interests forcefully enough.

"I do think that the European Union has been quite strong in sending the message across the Atlantic to President Trump that we all stand behind Greenland," Jorgensen replies. "The French president has also been very vocal, saying that the sovereignty of a nation needs to be respected, and we appreciate that a lot."

"There is no future of Greenland without the Greenlandic people," Jorgensen goes on, "and no future without decisions made by the Greenlandic government and the Danish government, since, of course, Greenland is still a part of the Danish kingdom."

Turning to his portfolio, Jorgensen underlines that Europe needs "a huge wake-up call" on the housing crisis. "If people don't have a home, if they cannot afford the most basic need, which is a roof over their head, then there is a real risk that they will turn against democracy, and to protests," Jorgensen asserts. "What is our job as decision makers if not to help people have a good life? And it is true, as you imply, that in the past the European Commission has not played a big role here. We will play now a much bigger role, and one of the things that we need to do is change the rules for when it is possible to use state aid. We want to make it easier for member states to use state aid where the market does not deliver. So this means that we can use state aid to provide more affordable housing so that nurses, teachers and police officers can also afford to live where they serve."

Jorgensen turns to the question of short-term rentals, which he says is "a huge challenge in many cities in France and across the European Union. Short-term rentals have in some places turned into money factories for the people that own the buildings, crowding out normal people from their homes because there's more money to be made on short-term rentals. We want to do something about that problem," Jorgensen says, adding: "You can put a maximum number of nights that you are allowed to rent out your home. You can differentiate between normal people, so to speak, and professional owners that only have these apartments to rent them out as short-term rentals."

Turning to energy, the EU has committed itself to stopping imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) by the end of 2027. Is that realistic, given that several European countries imported significant amounts of Russian LNG in 2025, notably France?

"I do think it is realistic," Jorgensen answers. "We have managed to bring down our consumption quite significantly already, from 45 percent four years ago to between 10 and 13 percent today, and now we need to take the final steps. We can no longer allow Putin to weaponise energy against us."

Will this gas independence happen, though, given that the leaders of Hungary and Slovakia oppose that overall EU direction?

"Well, the decision has been made," Jorgensen points out. "So it is no longer up to those two countries. This will now be made into legislation and law in all countries. That is the way our Union works. When a decision is made by qualified majority, then it happens in all member states. Also in the ones that do not support it. Now, I would have wished, of course, that we had unanimity behind these decisions. We don't, and that's regrettable, but it doesn't change the bottom line and the outcome. We will stop importing Russian gas in Europe," Jorgensen concludes.

Programme prepared by Oihana Almandoz, Perrine Desplats and Isabelle Romero

EU member states have backed a hardening of migration policy, endorsing the controversial idea of "return hubs" beyond EU borders to process asylum seekers whose applications have been rejected. This as a key EU Migration and Asylum Pact is set to come into effect in June. We ask why this more hardline approach is taking shape, and what our guests think of the "hubs" concept.

Programme prepared by Isabelle Romero, Perrine Desplats and Oihana Almandoz

 

Find here information on the EU's migration policy

 

For US President Donald Trump, mocking a country or a leader is not just a reality TV-style soundbite, it is an early warning sign of military action. Trump scorned Nicolas Maduro for "playing tough" before snatching the Venezuelan leader. Now he contemptuously talks of Denmark "adding two more dogsleds" to defend Greenland. European countries do appear to be taking this latest threat seriously, but can they actually stop Trump from taking over Greenland? And how do they navigate this crisis when they must also stay focused on Ukraine? We put these questions to Rasmus Jarlov, chair of the defence committee in the Danish parliament.

We cut to the chase: Is Denmark expecting a US invasion of Greenland?

"We still don't consider that the most likely scenario, because it would be so disastrous and so crazy and so damaging also for the Americans," Jarlov answers. "But we can't afford to rule it out when the American government continuously refuses to take it off the table. Of course we have to be prepared for that scenario also."

Read moreTaking over Greenland, a long-standing US obsession

Jarlov says Denmark is grateful for the solidarity that EU and NATO friends are showing by joining military exercises being carried out by the Danish defence forces in and around Greenland.

"It means everything to us because we are a small country of 6 million people, and we cannot stand up to the Americans ourselves," Jarlov says. "So it is important that others step up in a situation like this, when we are under so much pressure. We must show that we mean it, and that we cannot allow anyone to take our territory. We are so grateful for the support we're receiving from France, from Germany, from other reliable allies."

Watch moreWhat will Europe actually do to defend Greenland?

So what about the worst-case development – an American invasion?

"That would be a horrible scenario for everybody," Jarlov says. "There would be absolutely no winners because the Americans already have access to Greenland. Annexing Greenland is not going to give them anything that they don't already have. Where they have full military access, they can have as many bases as they want. They used to have about 30 bases and they only have one today. They've completely downscaled their presence, but if they want to upscale it again, the door is wide open. If they want to do mining in Greenland, the door is also wide open. And so annexing Greenland wouldn't gain anything that they don't already have. And it would cause a lot of problems because our relationship would be over. Our alliance would be finished. And we would also have a complete meltdown of NATO."

And the winner in that scenario would be Russian President Vladimir Putin, presumably?

"This [situation] is a very unwelcome and unnecessary distraction from our efforts in Ukraine," Jarlov explains. "Denmark is the top contributor to Ukraine per person. There's no other population in the world where each person has given as much money as Denmark to Ukraine, and that's by a large margin. And we want to help Ukraine with everything we can. We don't want to have to defend ourselves on the western flank as well. And now we have a distraction where we actually have to move troops up to Greenland. So far, in small numbers. But this is a big win for Putin. If he can split the Western alliance, if the Americans can insist on any part of our territory, and he can split, maybe even destroy NATO, then he is the big winner. It would be fantastic for him."

Read morePutin says not surprised by Trump's Greenland bid due to longstanding US mineral interests

We ask Jarlov if the crisis has tempered the desire for independence among Greenlanders. "It's up to the Greenlanders to draw that conclusion, of course," he asserts. "But it's becoming very clear what the alternative to being a part of Denmark is, and that is to be swallowed by the United States. So that means that Greenlanders right now are not talking about independence because they first of all want to avoid being taken by the Americans."

Programme prepared by Paul Guianvarc'h, Oihana Almandoz and Perrine Desplats