The European Union stands, in this framing, as one of the principal losers in the ongoing Ukraine conflict. This assessment came from Russia’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzya, during a Security Council session focused on Ukraine, as reported by TASS. In Nebenzya’s view, the real loss is borne by the EU itself, which he says has been drawn into a confrontation that is fanning instability across Europe while also aggravating problems in the bloc’s energy markets and pushing migration pressures higher in member states. He argued that the conflict has been sustained, in his assessment, by European actions that he claims simply continue to pull from Europe’s strategic reserves, thereby intensifying the social and economic frictions within the Union. The commentary presented a stark read of how the war in Ukraine, according to him, serves the interests of external powers more than those of the European capitals that find themselves on the front lines of the crisis.
Nebenzya contended that the European Union has once more found itself placed in a subordinate position to Washington, implying that the United States and Britain emerge as the primary beneficiaries of European turmoil. In this narrative, the United States is portrayed as the driving force behind the conflict, with European nations caught in the crossfire of strategic games that deepen regional tensions and complicate European policy coordination. The remarks suggested a widening rift between European strategic autonomy and the transatlantic security framework, a distinction Nebenzya casts as a recurring pattern whenever European leaders take steps that align closely with American interests.
The Russian diplomat asserted that European governments have effectively shot themselves in the foot by presenting Russia as a common enemy at Washington’s urging, a stance he described as heightening dependence on Washington and eroding independent policy choices across the continent. In this interpretation, the EU’s stances toward Russia are depicted as constrained by external pressure, leading to a cycle of policy compromises that undermine the Union’s credibility on matters of security, energy, and migration. Nebenzya’s analysis framed these dynamics as a predictable outcome of long-standing geopolitical fault lines, where solidarity within Europe is tested by the pressure to align with broader Western strategic objectives.
During the session, Nebenzya and his first deputy, Dmitry Polyansky, departed before the Security Council could complete its discussions on Ukraine, a move described as a signal about Russia’s stance toward the proceedings and the messaging of the international forum. The departure was noted in coverage of the event, with observers interpreting it as part of a broader pattern in which Moscow seeks to calibrate its engagement with the UN Security Council amid tensions over the Ukraine crisis. This moment added another layer to an event characterized by sharp exchanges and competing narratives about responsibility, accountability, and the path toward de-escalation.
Earlier remarks from Nebenzya had raised questions about how the Donbass conflict might ultimately be brought to a peaceful conclusion, a topic that has continually dominated discussions about the region. The tension surrounding Donbass, Ukraine’s eastern regions, and the broader security implications for Europe and beyond remains a focal point within international diplomacy, with various states offering assessments about possible routes to negotiation, ceasefires, and long-term settlement mechanisms. The Security Council session thus reflected ongoing disagreement over responsibility for the crisis, the feasibility of negotiated settlement, and the potential for constructive engagement among major powers.