War and peace: Labour can now ditch its rhetoric

Robert Abela did the right thing to support the conclusions agreed by all EU leaders in Brussels last Thursday on European defence. 

Whether we like it or not, Europe is at a crossroads – on the one hand Russia pursuing its war on Ukraine and on the other, an erratic US administration that has decided to abandon its European allies and cosy up to Russia. 

Europe has no option but to stand on its own two feet and boost its defensive capabilities. 

The Prime Minister also did well to put his name to the conclusions on Ukraine, which were approved by all member states bar Hungary. 

It is in Malta’s interest to have a strong EU capable of defending its own land, sea, air and cyberspace borders. It is also in Malta’s interest to ensure that a ‘comprehensive, just and lasting peace’ is achieved in Ukraine as opposed to simply ‘peace’. Talk of peace without embracing the concept of justice plays into the hands of the bully. 

It was good that Abela tagged along with Malta’s European allies rather than going rogue by playing the Trumpian card he had been waving all week. 

On the previous Sunday, in an interview with one of his own ministry officials, Abela refused to show any form of sympathy with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy following the humiliating dressing down he received at the hands of US President Donald Trump in Washington. Instead, Abela played down the incident, opting to call it an “episode” and in his analysis of the Ukrainian war implied that Ukraine will have to compromise and cede territory. 

Subsequently, in his doorstep comments just before the Brussels summit, Abela once again emphasised that Malta was against increased European military spending and even said the Constitution prevented the country from investing in lethal weapons. The latter statement is wrong, unless we believe that the weapons – limited as they may be – the Armed Forces of Malta possess are water pistols. 

Evidently, Abela’s comments in the days leading up to the summit were an attempt to peddle back on a statement he gave last month that Malta needs to ramp up defence spending and neutrality should not serve as a stumbling block in this regard – this leader agrees with this stance. He had received flak from certain quarters in the Labour Party for these statements. 

But Abela’s comments could also be interpreted as a petty attempt to spite European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, who has been a vociferous European voice advocating for more spending on defence and support for Ukraine. The Prime Minister wanted to portray himself as a ‘man of peace’, as opposed to Metsola, the ‘god of war’.

The Prime Minister and the Labour Party can now ditch this rhetoric after Abela put his name to Thursday’s Council conclusions in their entirety. 

This leader believes there never was anything wrong with the calls for increased European defence spending and cooperation after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Russia poses an existential threat that cannot be ignored. The situation is worse now when Europe can no longer rely on the US. 

It would be a mistake for Malta to believe that the risks it faces are negligible because it is a small, neutral country. 

Neutrality did not prevent Libya from forcing Malta at gunpoint to give up oil exploration on the Medina Bank in 1980. 

Today, all it takes is one rogue oil tanker passing through the Sicily-Malta channel to drop anchor and damage the internet and data cables connecting Malta to the rest of the world; or the interconnector supplying electricity from Sicily, to create mayhem. This is not a farfetched scenario. It has happened over the past months in the Baltic Sea. 

Within this context, it would be foolish for Malta to automatically exclude itself from EU-wide efforts to bolster the bloc’s defence capabilities. 

Malta needs to carry out a review of its defence needs and the army’s capabilities to fulfil its primary military task of defending the islands, its people and key infrastructure. Based on this review, the necessary investment should be carried out with the help of EU funds. But crucially, the review could also suggest what type of defence cooperation Malta may seek with other EU countries in areas where it makes more sense to be part of something bigger. 

This is not warmongering but a responsible way of strengthening Malta’s security in an increasingly uncertain world.