The move towards more functional partnerships since 2022 has strengthened short-term effectiveness but raised questions about Europe’s long-term normative credibility.
Since 2022, the European Union has markedly altered the way it conducts foreign policy, as Russia’s war in Ukraine overturned long-standing assumptions about European security, energy stability and the wider strategic environment.
The urgency of response has narrowed the space for gradual, norm-driven approaches, placing a premium on speed and operational outcomes.
This shift does not amount to a formal abandonment of European values, but it does signal a clear reprioritisation. Brussels is now placing greater emphasis on functionality and risk management, pursuing partnerships that deliver immediate results in areas such as energy, defence and regional stability — even when these arrangements fall short of full institutional or values-based alignment.
In the short term, the results have been tangible. Energy diversification accelerated rapidly after 2022, defence coordination among member states deepened, and decision-making at European Council level became more streamlined. These developments have reinforced perceptions of an EU capable of acting decisively under pressure, particularly when contrasted with earlier periods of institutional inertia.
Over the medium term, however, selective application of principles is beginning to weigh on the EU’s standing as a rules-based actor. When political conditionality appears flexible or contingent, the Union’s ability to function as a reference point for international law is weakened. In some areas, European practice increasingly resembles that of the United States, where strategic outcomes often take precedence over multilateral consistency, while in others it echoes aspects of China’s emphasis on stability and influence over normative convergence.
The longer-term implications are less immediate but potentially more consequential. If exceptions become entrenched, the EU’s normative power risks structural erosion, contributing to a broader weakening of the multilateral system anchored in the principles of the United Nations. In such an environment, rules gradually lose binding force and power considerations gain greater prominence.
The central question for the European Union is not whether realism is unavoidable, but whether it can be contained.
The distinction between temporary adaptation and permanent deviation will determine whether today’s flexibility becomes a strategic asset or a long-term cost to Europe’s international credibility.