War in Europe has fostered a more grown-up relationship between London and Brussels

Close cooperation over sanctions is a reminder of how much stronger we are working with the EU

Could there be a tiny silver lining to the massive dark cloud of the Ukraine crisis, if the close cooperation between the UK and EU on sanctions against Russia ushers in a more grown-up relationship between London and Brussels? Some Tory backbenchers dare to hope so.

Of course, it would be better if the UK were still at the EU table. Having covered EU summits for 30 years before the UK walked out, I’m sure our status as a leading Nato member would have given us real clout in the EU’s current debates, whatever the tensions with its members on other issues.

Pro-Europeans rue the UK’s absence and even think Brexit was one factor that emboldened Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine. “Brexit has weakened Britain, undermined our friends and allies, and played its part in breaking such a hard-earned peace in Europe,” said Richard Corbett, the last leader of Labour’s MEPs. Michael Heseltine, president of the European Movement, said: “I am ashamed that the country that in my lifetime saved European democracy has now absented itself as others determine Europe’s response.”

If this crisis has proved one thing, it is the strength of multilateral organisations. Nato, which Emmanuel Macron diagnosed as having “brain death”, is suddenly alive and kicking. So is the EU, and it would be even stronger with the UK in it. One day, the “UK” seat at the table will be taken by “UKR” and Ukraine, which knows you don’t have to sacrifice sovereignty to be a member.

Perhaps all is not lost. The cooperation on sanctions offers a ray of hope for a better UK-EU working relationship. The EU’s remarkably quick, united and tough response has erased the Brexiteers’ caricature of a bloc plagued by sclerotic decision-making and a “lowest common denominator” approach, especially on foreign policy, in which the convoy moved at the pace of its slowest member. The EU has surprised itself by outperforming its response to previous crises, such as on Greek debt, the annexation of Crimea, Covid and even Brexit.

UK ministers claim they “led the way” on arming the Ukrainians but the EU has, surprisingly, caught up. Germany’s decision to supply arms and boost defence spending is a watershed moment; the UK will now need to catch up by raising its defence budget to protect eastern Europe. One of the alleged benefits of Brexit was that the UK could be more agile in imposing sanctions. But the EU sanctioned members of the Duma and the RT television channel before the UK. The suspicion grows that some oligarchs will sell their UK assets while the government delays moving against them.

The bad news for pro-Europeans is that appearances can be deceptive. Revealingly, one EU diplomat told me: “There is good coordination on sanctions. But the UK goes to the US to agree a line before they then come to us.” Another said: “Washington is still driving the process. The UK is not in the [EU] picture and relies much more on Nato for the overview.”

I’m told there have been differences behind the scenes: for example, the US (and therefore the UK) wanted a United Nations resolution based on a total condemnation of Russia, while the EU’s instinct was for a slightly softer line.

Johnson’s top priority is to hug the US administration close and repair the damage done by the Afghanistan debacle – another own goal that encouraged Putin. His priority hasn’t changed in the past week. Nor have the populist instincts of his government, as witnessed by its slow, grudging response towards accepting Ukrainian refugees, on which the EU – despite its deep divisions on migration – did the right thing by opening its borders, and quickly.

Johnson had the nerve to claim: “The UK is way out in front in our willingness to help with refugees.” Yet it is the slowest member of the European convoy and the government’s true colours were revealed when the immigration minister Kevin Foster suggested Ukrainians should apply for seasonal work visas.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment sign up to our free weekly Voices newsletter by clicking here

This populism means Johnson wants to “keep Brexit alive” because he believes it is Keir Starmer’s weak point. It is why he indulges in Brussels-bashing and childish, counterproductive Macron-baiting (“Donnez-moi un break”) to grab easy headlines. It is why “Global Britain” senselessly avoids cooperating with the EU on foreign and defence policy and would rather talk to individual member states than the EU institutions that have proved their worth in this emergency.

Perhaps Johnson will come to realise that the UK and EU are stronger together in the face of their common enemy in Putin; the irony is that the US would prefer such a united Europe. Growing up and having a more grown-up EU relationship would help Johnson throw off his untrustworthy image in foreign capitals and be taken more seriously on the world stage. 

But can this leopard change his spots? Perhaps we will have to wait for the now delayed succession and Rishi Sunak, rightly keen to stop Johnson stumbling into a trade war with the UK’s biggest trading partner, or Liz Truss, sensibly taking a constructive approach to EU negotiations on the Northern Ireland protocol because she can see the global big picture. It may fall to one of them to end Johnson’s playground politics with the EU.