Russian soldiers who took part in the full-scale invasion of Ukraine should be barred for life from the passport-free Schengen area, Estonia’s Prime Minister Kristen Michal has told Euronews, as he seeks to turn the proposal into EU-wide policy.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The Estonian government argues that the Kremlin’s expanded mobilisation — aimed at sustaining its assault on Ukraine and replenishing battlefield losses — raises the likelihood that, even after hostilities end, former combatants could pose a risk for the EU.
“What will those people do? Most of them are criminals, but they have to be treated as heroes inside Russia,” Michal said in the interview on Europe Today from the sidelines of an EU meeting in Cyprus.
“They will be formed (as) Wagner II, Wagner III, private armies, and they will be operating in Europe, Asia, Africa, all over the continents,” he added.
“Once again, I would ask everybody: do you want these guys near your home? No, you don’t. So that’s why you have to ban them for life from Schengen.”
Estonia began promoting the Schengen ban earlier this year and gradually amassed endorsements from other member states until the European Council included the project in its formal conclusions at the March summit.
Leaders tasked the European Commission to provide an “assessment on possible ways to address this issue, without prejudice to member states’ competences in this domain”.
It is up to each EU country to decide who is granted an entry visa and under which conditions. The Commission lays out common rules to ensure consistency because once the visa is issued, the recipient has the right to move freely across the Schengen area.
Given the sheer amount of former and active Russian soldiers, the responsibility needs to be shared by all member states, Michal said.
“Estonia has already banned about 1,300 Russian fighters,” Michal said.
“We can do more, we can do 10 times that, but we cannot do a million (soldiers) on our own. We need everybody’s help.”
High Representative Kaja Kallas, who is overseeing the efforts, said the proposal for a Schengen ban would be ready by the time leaders meet for their June summit.
Article 42.7 vs Article 5
Michal spoke with Euronews ahead of an informal gathering of EU leaders in Cyprus, the country currently holding the bloc’s rotating presidency.
The host, Cyprus President Nikos Christodoulides, used the occasion to kick-start a political reflection on Article 42.7 of the EU treaties, which obliges mutual assistance in case of an armed aggression against a member state. The assistance can take different forms, from military and economic to diplomatic and medical.
The article has been used only once, by France in 2015, and lacks a practical rulebook.
Cyprus is one of the few EU countries that does not belong to NATO and therefore cannot benefit from the alliance’s Article 5 of collective defence, its main deterrent.
Michal believes both clauses, the EU’s Article 42.7 and NATO’s Article 5, can “exist together” without any contradiction or tension.
“The question is about the need,” he said. “Usually, it’s pretty much overlapping what we’re doing because you need certain assistance, you need your allies to act with you.”
The debate on mutual assistance comes as US President Donald Trump revives his threat to withdraw his country from NATO in retaliation for the alliance’s refusal to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran keeps under tight control.
Asked whether Trump’s headline-grabbing threats diminished the deterrence value of Article 5, Michal said they did not, citing the alliance’s interventions last year to protect the airspace of Estonia and Poland against Russian incursions.
“At that moment, Trump’s message was quite clear that America is standing to protect the Baltics and Poland,” Michal said.
“Yes, I can understand that there are a lot of political messages, but the military side is working absolutely well.”
