As European Union leaders prepare for emergency talks to ramp up military spending after the Trump administration suspended aid to Ukraine, several Russia experts say Moscow is trying to capitalize on fragmenting Western cohesion.

Following last week’s televised Oval Office clash between U.S. and Ukrainian leaders, Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov on Monday accused Europe of seeking to prolong the war, adding that changes in U.S. “foreign policy configurations” largely coincide with Moscow’s vision.

The comments came before an EU financial summit planned for Thursday that aims to grapple with stabilizing continental security and helping Ukraine after decades of dependence on the U.S. defense umbrella.

In a recent interview with the military newspaper Krasnaya Zvezda, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called President Donald Trump a “pragmatist” whose motto is “common sense.” He also said, “All tragedies in the world” over the past 500 years “originated in Europe or occurred owing to European policies,” while “the Americans played no seditious, let alone ‘inflammatory,’ role.”

Calling Europe Enemy No. 1 is “becoming the main trend in the Kremlin’s policy,” said exiled independent Russian political analyst Dmitry Oreshkin. “Therefore, having changed his tune … [Lavrov] explained to the audience that the U.S. is, if not a friend, then a reliable partner, and that means Britain and France are always to blame for everything.”

Oreshkin also said the relatively positive U.S. depiction shows the Kremlin is hoping for an “aggravation of contradictions” between Europe and America.

But Novaya Gazeta columnist Andrei Kolesnikov said it was premature for Russian authorities to assume Trump is taking Russia’s side in the war.

Trump’s “interest, which he equates with the interests of the United States, is to end the conflict,” Kolesnikov told VOA. “But there are two sides to the conflict. And if during future negotiations ... [Trump] remains dissatisfied with the intransigence of the Russian side, no one will stand on ceremony. New [U.S.] sanctions and measures to reduce oil prices will follow with the same decisiveness and speed as [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelenskyy's ‘punishment.’”

Kolesnikov was referring to the contentious Feb. 28 Oval Office meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy, in which top U.S. officials accused him of being insufficiently grateful for U.S. military support.

The meeting concluded without the signing of an expected defense deal involving Ukrainian rare-earth minerals.

With long-held certainties about U.S. reliability as a security partner suddenly in doubt, EU and NATO leaders gathered Sunday in London to map out a path forward.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called for uniting “around a new plan for a just and enduring peace," while French President Emmanuel Macron said his country and Britain had agreed on an alternative peace plan envisaging a one-month partial ceasefire to end mutual attacks on energy infrastructure, followed by a second stage involving sending peacekeepers to Ukraine.

The White House on Monday announced temporary suspension of all U.S. military aid to Kyiv, although Trump during an address to Congress on Tuesday said Zelenskyy had signaled renewed interest in inking the U.S.-proposed defense deal.

According to U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe, Trump on Wednesday halted intelligence cooperation with Ukraine.

Against this unclear backdrop, Russian officials have refrained from criticizing the U.S. administration and Trump personally while shifting their line of attack from the United States toward Europe.

Thursday’s summit in Brussels comes as the EU is arguably at its weakest point, fragmented by the steady rise of a hard right that is often pro-Russian.

EU leaders are also expected to discuss whether to place more arms contracts with Ukraine’s defense industry, and to help integrate it into the European industrial network.

The Trump administration has demanded that Europeans spend as much as 5% of GDP on defense, well beyond the NATO benchmark of at least 2%. Seven European allies still fall short of even that target. The U.S. spends around 3.4%, according to NATO figures, and a Pentagon audit that could reduce that is pending.

Some information for this report came from The Associated Press.