Long-read: In conversation with the Czech Republic's Foreign Minister
Jan Lipavský discusses Donald Trump's 'wake-up call', missing the NATO spending target and whether Taiwan is Europe's issue.
I recently caught up with Jan Lipavský, the Czech Republic’s Minister for Foreign Affairs.
The Czech Republic, or Czechia, as the government has rebranded the country, has been one of Ukraine’s strongest supporters.
But with the war now into its third year, Ukraine and Europe find themselves in a precarious position, with US military support held up and its future in question.
The prospect of a Donald Trump re-election looms large and while he might not go through some of his more extreme threats, like encouraging Vladimir Putin to attack poor-spending NATO allies, if President again, his Administration would certainly be frostier towards Europe compared to that of Joe Biden’s.
I sat down to discuss this and much more with Jan Lipavský during the recent Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi.
He was one of many European ministers attending, in part to encourage India to see Europe’s way of thinking regarding the threat of Russian colonialism, which is where we began our conversation.
Below is a lightly edited transcript of our discussion.
Latika M Bourke (LMB): Minister, this is your first Raisina Dialogue?
Foreign Minister Jan Lipavský (JL): Yes.
LMB: What is your country’s interest in India and what is your message to [India’s Foreign Minister] Jaishanker … particularly when it comes to Ukraine?
JL: The Czech-India relationship is very complex and it dates back. In the last year, we have a growing trajectory in trade and business cooperation. This cannot be done without good bilateral relations and there are a lot of possibilities for me, for our minister for Industry and Trade, and the Prime Minister visited India recently.
We have a memorandum on cooperation in technology and scientific innovations so we definitely want to work with India.
And also, the other part of this very practical relationship is the part when I share our security concerns with India. And of course, we don't have to agree on everything but it's very important for me that I have the possibility to share my concerns about where the world affairs are heading.
LMB: What are your concerns?
JL: My concern is Russian imperialism. I'm very clear about that in different ways. I'm speaking about that because this is the root cause of the Putin attack on Ukraine. It is the root cause of Ukraine's war refugees being in Czechia.
It is the the root cause for the higher energy prices in Europe. It is the root cause for the coup d’etats in Africa or hunger. So it’s quite easy in that sense.
LMB: It sounds existential. Why is that not clear to India? India is neutral on Ukraine.
JL: I respect this sense, in a sense that it is in India’s interest to decide, and on the other side if we are having such a thriving relationship in business sphere, we have to understand that there are some implications, for example, for us if Russia is trying to be basically a colonial power.
So basically I am sharing my view and I hope that it could lead to some sympathy for example.
LMB: Would you like to see India do more in condemning this invasion?
JL: I think there are some ways, in a sense that we have a principles of international law, we have a charter of UN, we have the principles that the borders won't be changed by force, that we recognise states in the internationally recognised borders and this is something where I wish that we are able to agree and yes, of course, I would like to see that.
On the other hand this needs to be based on mutual respect.
LMB: India buys a lot of Russian oil. Is that something you would also like to see tapered down?
JL: I think it's very important that the G7 was able to agree on this price cap.
And this is creating a series problem for Russian exports and I have to say that this price cap is being respected. Of course, you have some, some differences … but overall, Russia is selling at the cheaper price, then the world market are.
So we are doing some dents into Russian economy, it's not ideal, but I think it's much better than if there was no price cap.
So, of course, even my country is, sadly, still importing a few percentage of Russian oil but we are working hard on removing this dependency. We were able to achieve it fully in terms of gas – natural gas – and now we are working on on full oil independence.
LMB: Is part of your country's turn to India because you see India as a potential hedge against China?
Is it your hope that India will grow to a point where it is able to rival what China offers the world in terms of supply and dependency and security?
JL: I don't think it would be a mistake to have India as a hedge against China. I think our strategy needs to be diversify and definitely India plays an important role in diversification.
It's not replacement, and also, I think we should have a much better relationship between Europe, Czechia and India then with China. India is the biggest democratic country in the world.
India is built upon different kinds of principles, so this should also promote this kind of relationship.
So yes, I see it as a kind of pivot. I see those risks in having very tied business relationship between Europe and China. Therefore we are speaking about derisking, so it makes sense to derisk through this kind of diversification and I'm glad that we have a very good concrete example of what we are able to achieve in the Czechia-India relationship.
LMB: Can Europe derisk if it doesn't sign trade deals? We've seen the Australia-EU trade deal full apart. We saw Mercosur fall apart. I doubt there’s much prospect of one with India if you can't get those two across the line. How important is it that some European leaders face down their farmers and allow you to sign deals that would truly allow you to de-risk particularly when it comes to critical minerals?
JL: We have to find consensus in the EU. We have to find agreement, that's it. So, my country is basically standing behind all of those trade agreements. 80 per cent of our GDP consists of exports – the biggest part of that is to the EU but the rest of that is to the rest of the world.
So we are an open economy and we … have to have those agreements and in every meeting when I speak with Australia, with Americans, I say, we support those agreements so you have us on your side so we support those agreements.
LMB: But it doesn't matter if you're on their side because these agreements are not prevailing, they're not winning through.
JL: It matters in a sense that there is a European debate on those agreements. We are the ones who are saying please, let's have it. And of course, then you have countries, which they have some interest in it and then they block it … but it's not our role to change position internally.
Yes, I would like to see those treaties being done.
LB: I get what you say about the consensus, but in this case, it's one country that has led to the blockage of these trade deals getting over and that's France.
Is it unfair to the rest of the bloc to have one country being able to hold up for one political sector in their country?
JL: But this is how the EU works? This is it. This is it. That is no other way than to have the full agreement of the qualified majority agreement to pass those things.
So, maybe in the future, we will see, let's say more engagement, European-led, on this matter and some strategic push to have those deals done and some of those are being negotiated for decades, I know it’s incredible, but this is the reality.
LMB: Were you disappointed when those agreements did not get over the line?
JL: I don't know what the expectation was many years ago. So for me this is the reality and on the other side, the EU works in a way that until you have agreement you negotiate. That’s it, that’s the point.
LMB: Let’s go to Ukraine and particularly US support. If we have a situation where the US withdraws support from Ukraine, does Putin win?
JL: We don't know what Putin’s objective is. In the sense to say that now we’ve won, that would be an objective.
LMB: Well hang on, didn’t we see it from [Dmitry] Medvedev? He wants Odesa and Kyiv, doesn’t he?
JL: Medvedev is saying so many outrageous things that we need to be, we need to be very careful when reading it and taking it seriously. But the root cause of the whole thing is Russian imperialism, as I already said.
Therefore the goal, ‘the win’ is to have a big Russian empire which is able to destroy the principles of international order, which is now prohibiting from Russia being an imperialistic power and to colonise its neighbours.
So that’s what I see as Putin's real goal and what we can see as a win. Of course, in the current stage of the war, Putin proclaimed that he want to destroy Ukraine as a state - he is not recognising Ukrainian statehood.
He recognised Ukraine as some kind of territory with people, some of those people are misguided and the rest of them could be incorporated into the Russian Federation direction.
This is his logic. The point is that if Ukraine falls he won't end.
He will continue with Moldova, he’s now speaking about the Baltics. Belarus … and we don't know when and where this might stop and if Ukraine falls, it will be much closer to Czechia borders.
And we were 40 years on the Russia orbit. We don't want to be on Russia orbit anymore and it was after the Second World War, it was 1968 when the Czechoslovakia leadership started doing policy changes, which were not fitting into Moscow’s views so they sent the army in.
So we want to stay away from that as much as possible and therefore, we need Ukraine to hold from the matter of principles, from the matter of European security.
And back to that question – so, if the USA stops its help to Ukraine I would see it as a wake-up call for Europe.
You know when you pep talk someone you tell him to get your … together. So Europe should do this, and we need to, and we must invest into our security because otherwise, we will be dealing with this for many years to come.
LMB: Can Europe fund Ukraine if the US is not there?
JL: It is already happening, basically, over half of the aid is coming from the EU, macro-financial aid and military aid. I think it's a 50/50 right now, roughly, very roughly.
So if we are serious about our security we need to be able to find resources for that because Russia, they definitely do not have a problem to find the resources for their war effort.
Yes you ask, they sell oil, they mobilise people, then they send them to the front to die so we need to be ready to protect Europe.
But on the US side, I’m not so pessimistic about the developments in the USA. I believe in the USA’s ability to understand its role in foreign affairs.
LMB: Which is what?
JL: For decades, it was a role of leader. And even Republicans and Donald Trump are speaking about China as the biggest risk competitor — different kinds of words are being used — and this is very much interconnected.
And if the USA will need help from Europe with the China matter then it’s very logical that Europe will need US help with Russia.
LMB: And so are you saying that if you’re left to fend for your own devices in Europe on Ukraine, can Europe have the capability to then help the United States in the Indo-Pacific if that theatre should open up at the same time?
JL: Europe has a lot of capacities which are now not being fully used.
And we seriously need to mobilise our political will. And this is something which I have dedicated quite a lot of my activity to right now.
LMB: Is Taiwan Europe's issue?
JL: It's a global issue. If something is a global issue, it's also a European issue.
And it was Antony Blinken who was quite clear that half of the maritime trade which goes in the region goes through the Taiwan Strait.
70 per cent of microchips are still being produced in Taiwan and today we have a microchip even in a washing machine, basically on everything, in every car.
So any kind of escalation in this part of the world has also a very serious impact in Europe.
LMB: So what could Europe be expected to do? In the event of any escalation?
JL: We are more thinking about how to prevent that. And also, this mutual understanding with the USA in this matter would be very, very useful.
So I'm trying to work on that as well, But it's a complex matter, I am speaking for Czechia, not for the EU.
LMB: Yes, I understand. Now I had a look at your defence spending levels. And Donald Trump seemed to encourage Vladimir Putin to attack any NATO country, which hadn't met it spending obligations when it came to defence. Would that, include your country, or have you met your two per cent as of this year? Are you one of the 18?
JL: We have not met yet.
LMB: Why not?
JL: But my government will be the first government in 25 years which will be able to reach the two per cent by the end of our term.
We have started from very low point so you have to increase gradually. You cannot do it … these are quite huge sums.
So, I was not happy with that statement, but Trump had a point that we need to invest in our defence.
LMB: Did he need to make it in the way he did?
JL: I don't think so.
LMB: Did you take it seriously?
JL: We are thinking seriously for many years, our government has decided to put those funds.
LMB: Sorry, did you take his encouragement of Putin to attack NATO countries seriously?
JL: He’s not now an elected politician. So It's a different kind of game if you are in power, rather than if you are, let's say an opposition figure or politician trying to get elected.
LMB: So it didn't concern you?
JL: I don't like this kind of language. So I was not happy about that.
LMB: Do you fear a Trump return and what it means for European security?
JL: Definitely I’m not in fear. I respect the decision of the US electorate, so for me, it's a Biden, Trump, maybe it will be a different name, you know, we are not still there.
So it’s not complicated to understand what it will mean for the US policy. I'm very closely observing what the different kind of circles are saying, how they are approaching the issues.
Definitely a possible future Trump leadership will put more responsibility on Europe. On the other side, the US were always very keen to have Europe close and to be part of the European security, so there is a kind of dual approach, even in the American politics.
LMB: Trump did threaten to pull out of NATO before and he didn't. Do you think his bark might be worse than his bite on this front?
JL: I don't have a crystal ball. I don't know how this would look like. What I see currently from the US is a strong participation participation and I would be very surprised to see any kind of serious turnaround.
LMB: And just finally, do you support Mark Rutte for NATO Secretary-General?
JL: This is something on which we do not comment on openly.
LMB: I think that means no, right?
JL: This means that we do not comment openly.
LMB: Minister thank you for your time.
The interview concluded with the minister presenting me with a ‘gift’ - the Czech Republic’s most recent national security strategy. It was gratefully received.
I am grateful to the minister and to the Czech Foreign Ministry team who were an absolute delight and breeze to work with, and for their time and assistance in granting me this interview opportunity.