An interview with Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever, in which he said that after the war in Ukraine, Europe and Russia will normalise relations and resume energy trade, is being used to taint him again as a pro-Russian asset.
In the interview on March 14, De Wever argued that, once the war ends, Europe will have no choice but to re-engage with Russia on some level, particularly in the energy sector under current circumstances.
His remarks have reignited debate about his position on the war, as European unity on sanctions and support for Ukraine remains a sensitive topic.
De Wever’s political opponents, including those in his own government and foreign actors, have been quick to respond, attacking him for alleged defeatism or what they painted as his intention to cosy up with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Speaking to Belgian business newspaper L’Echo, De Wever had said: “Since we are not capable of threatening Vladimir Putin by sending weapons to Ukraine, and we cannot choke him economically without the support of the US, there is only one method left: Making a deal.
“Russia must never be rewarded for its invasion — that lesson is crucial— but in the long run, we must strive for a vigilant modus vivendi [way of living] that once again leaves room for other geopolitical challenges,” he said.
“We must stop the war, in the interest of Europe,” De Wever stated. “Without being naïve about Putin. We need to rearm and remilitarise the border.
“At the same time, we must normalise relations with Russia and regain access to cheap energy. That’s a matter of common sense.”
De Wever’s remarks sparked immediate backlash.
European officials slammed his call for normalisation, with critics from eastern Europe and within Belgium accusing him of being naïve or a “pro-Russian asset”.
Belgian coalition partners (Flemish socialists Vooruit, Christian democrats CD&V and Francophone centrists Les Engagés) called his comments “strange,” “naïve,” and “a sign of weakness”.
Belgian foreign minister Maxime Prévot publicly rebuked De Wever.
Some, though, say these rebuttals were inspired by tensions within the Belgian Government.
Pro-Ukrainian online activists condemned De Wever as a trailblazer for Russian state interests, willing to take Russian money.
European ministers who reacted in public were negative about normalising relations with Russia, although they seemed to be speaking about now, not after a peace deal.
European Energy Commissioner Dan Jørgensen stressed that Europe should not import “one molecule” of Russian fossil fuels, while Ebba Bush, Swedens’ energy minister, said: “We should not feed the Russian war machine.”
Lithuanian foreign minister Kestutis Budrys said: “There is nothing more expensive in this world than the cheap Russian oil.”
Budrys said Europe could also still take the Russian assets, an older issue still lingering after De Wever successfully talked the European Union out of taking frozen Russian assets from Brussels-based clearing house Euroclear.
European leaders have decided to loan €90 billion to Ukraine over the next two years using their own means instead of frozen Russian assets. https://t.co/j6Pb5ODwHO
— Brussels Signal (@brusselssignal) December 19, 2025
Replying to all the hyped-up controversy, De Wever stressed that he had said normalisation could only take place after an acceptable peace deal.
“I think that is common sense,” he said. “People are acting as though I want to curry favour with Russia, which is definitely not the case.”
When journalists said he had the backing of Hungary, De Wever said that did not matter and highlighted that he was not on the same line as Hungary Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
“I believe we need an acceptable peace treaty,” said De Wever. “I think it’s odd that, as Europeans, we are funding the war, that we aren’t even at the negotiating table, and that there is little prospect for the world as it stands today.
“‘All I’m saying is: Isn’t the intention, once peace is achieved, to eventually normalise relations? Isn’t that the purpose of every peace after a war? Isn’t that what we did after the Second World War?
“The Russians aren’t idiots, are they? If Russia makes peace with Europe, then the win for Russia is also that we would have normal commercial relations with each other,” he said.
“Surely it’s obvious that’s where we need to end up in the long run? But if people twist this into me wanting to throw myself at Putin’s feet today, that’s baseless. It’s also baseless given what I actually said in that interview.
“It would be better if an acceptable peace were achieved, acceptable to us Europeans, acceptable to Ukraine, that gives us a basis to return to normal relations in the world. That is surely self-evident,” De Wever concluded.
