Did putin once favour joining eu
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Vladimir Putin publicly said in 2025 that “Russia has never opposed Ukraine’s potential membership of the European Union,” comments reported by Reuters and picked up across media amid peace-talks diplomacy [1]. Analysts and outlets warned that the statement contrasts with Moscow’s long-standing, firm opposition to Ukrainian NATO membership and may be tactical rather than a genuine policy shift [2] [1].
1. A surprising line in 2025 — what Putin actually said
In September 2025, Putin told Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico at talks in China that “as for Ukraine’s membership of the EU, we have never objected to this,” a remark Reuters recorded and that other outlets repeated [1]. That public phrasing explicitly distinguished EU accession — which Moscow said it did not oppose — from NATO accession, which Putin and the Kremlin continue to regard as unacceptable [1].
2. Why commentators treated the comment as strategic, not sincere
Observers immediately flagged motives: media and analysts suggested the comment was designed to appear conciliatory and to buy time in negotiations, because EU membership is a lengthy, often decades-long process, unlike NATO membership which offers faster, stronger security guarantees [2]. DW and Responsible Statecraft both framed the nod to EU membership as possibly disingenuous, intended to play to international audiences — notably the US under President Trump — while keeping NATO out of Ukraine [2] [3].
3. The long history: Putin, Russia and the idea of joining European institutions
The notion of Russia integrating with European institutions has a long, ambivalent pedigree. Academic accounts note earlier Kremlin rhetoric favouring close economic and cooperative ties — even proposals like “associate membership” at moments — but mainstream assessments conclude Russia under Putin has not pursued full EU accession and in practice rejected the EU’s political model [4]. Wikipedia’s survey of Russia–EU relations records Putin’s past statements that full EU membership would not be in either party’s interest even as he promoted selective integration [5].
4. Why EU accession looks different from NATO accession to Moscow
Sources underline Moscow’s principal red line: military alignment. Putin and Russian officials repeatedly treat NATO enlargement as a direct security threat that could justify forceful response, whereas economic and political links with the EU do not trigger the same immediate military concern [1] [2]. Analysts point out that inviting Ukraine into the EU could anchor Kyiv economically to Europe while leaving it militarily neutral, a compromise Moscow might tolerate — at least rhetorically [3].
5. Skepticism from Western and Ukrainian leaders
Western and Ukrainian leaders and diplomats have been cautious. Reuters reported that Kyiv insists it is the sovereign right of Ukraine to choose its alliances and that NATO declares Russia cannot veto membership — framing Putin’s EU comment as insufficient to address underlying security demands or territorial claims [1]. DW reported that many in Europe read the remark as tactical, warning it could be a ruse to prevent NATO accession while extracting concessions or territory [2].
6. How the comment fits current peace negotiations
Recent reporting tied Moscow’s openness to EU accession to broader peace talks and potential trade-offs: U.S. and European outlets covered scenarios in which Russia might accept EU membership for Ukraine as part of a settlement that also enshrines restrictions on NATO or cedes territory, though any concrete deal would require high-level agreements and remains contentious [6] [7] [8]. Analysts argue such a concession would leave Ukraine economically anchored to Europe but potentially politically constrained by security guarantees excluded from NATO [3].
7. Limits of the record and why uncertainty persists
Available sources document Putin’s public 2025 statement and contemporaneous analysis, but they do not prove a durable change in Kremlin strategy; commentators explicitly call the line strategic and note Moscow’s long-standing NATO objections [1] [2] [3]. Scholarly history shows Russia’s past flirtations with “association” or closer ties but also stresses that full accession was never a realistic Kremlin goal [4] [5]. In short, reporting records the statement; interpretation diverges and motive remains contested across the cited sources [1] [2].
If you want, I can now pull out a timeline of Putin’s public statements on EU and NATO accessions using only these sources.