Welcome back, this newsletter comes to you from Copenhagen, or rather Copenhagen's airport, waiting for a connecting flight back to Brussels landing (if everything goes well) at 11pm. This week, as you may have noticed from our TV output, we were at The Rīga Conference in Latvia. I love the field, and I love a conference, but sleeping in a foreign bed means bad sleep. So bear with me.

Coming to Riga is always a good idea, it's a temperature check on the security situation in Europe beyond the Brussels bubble and the Baltics have some of the best minds on defence on the continent. The timing of the conference, where I moderated a panel on populism (this deserves a separate newsletter), was extra juicy because much speculation has surrounded Baltic security for weeks following a rare, unannounced trip by the CIA boss to Moscow last month.

Several US outlets reported John Ratcliffe warned Moscow against testing NATO's resolve, and escalating tensions with US allies in the Baltic region, namely Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia. If you strip away the jargon, what it means is that Washington felt it had sufficient indications to set a clear red line. The Baltics are NATO members sitting at the heart of the eastern flank — and they pay, which is how Trump measures whether he'll defend you or not.

The CIA trip was preceded by a letter, seen by Euronews, addressed to the European Commission President by several frontline-country Commissioners pointing to a deteriorating security scenario. The letter, signed by the Latvian, Polish, Finnish and Lithuanian Commissioners, alongside Estonian-born top diplomat Kaja Kallas, asked Brussels for better coordination with NATO.

So, is Russia planning an attack on the Baltics? First, don't panic. Second, the question is a serious one and third, the answer is not simple. 

As soon as you land here, there is a hyper-awareness about anything Moscow says and does. It is clearly seen as an existential threat for a group of countries that recall a story of occupation that began with the Second World War, and only regained independence in 1991. The Baltics are also hyper aware that Russia sees them as the weakest link in the eastern flank due to their size. On paper, they would seem the easier target. And yes, the question of Russia making a move against any of the three comes up in casual conversations in ways that would totally be seen as hysterical in Madrid or Rome. But here it's fully justified.

During a cigarette break (I am quitting this year), I struck up a conversation with a stylish blonde who told me she loooves Malaga after I mentioned I happen to be Spanish and visiting Latvia for work. She then explained how 'many in Latvia want to buy a house in Spain'. When silly me brought up the weather as enticing, she responded: 'yes, and the geopolitical situation'... The geopolitical situation, of course, is Russia and concerns about the war spilling over. 'Those who can buy abroad are buying houses, not everyone can. The Lithuanians buy more, they have more money,' she added. Quite the advert for prime real estate in Marbella. 

A good Latvian friend told me she thinks frequently about what would happen if Russia made a move and what that could look like (a conventional invasion is seen as unlikely, but there are many ways to destabilise a nation: political meddling, false-flag pretext, intensifying hybrid attacks), and she was amused by my surprise at the Spanish real estate story. 'It's not just Spain, I think other places in Europe'. But she also felt the resolve of a proud nation that can only bet on its own courage, its European allies and the power that NATO still holds here.

Kyrylo Budanov, Ukraine's former chief spy and now head of Zelenskyy's office, was also in Riga. He sat on a panel in which he was asked whether he believed Russia would attack the Baltics, with one member of the audience telling him that kind of language is freaking people out. Budanov, who surely knows what Russia is thinking, politely avoided the question. A European official told me it was good to show restraint because, beyond the impact it has in the population, it also hurts the business environment, with investment money at risk. There is also a pressure cooker effect, as Latvia heads to the polls next month. 

On the sidelines of the conference, I caught up with Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis, a former Latvian prime minister himself. Dombrovskis is always good to talk to because he knows what’s really cooking across the key dossiers in Brussels, which brings me to the money talks underway between the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and Ukraine.

Two things here: the European Union is largely financing the war effort, and no war comes cheap. President Zelenskyy now argues Ukraine may have to cash out the payments from a multi-billion-euro loan faster, citing a $27 billion budget hole for this year. The figure is much higher than Europeans had anticipated — and comes just nine months after they agreed to a €90 billion cash injection through 2027, in the form of a loan no one expects Ukraine to repay.

Dombrovskis met with Ukraine's new prime minister, Sergii Koretskyi, and the IMF boss, Kristalina Georgieva, in Brussels this week. The three will have to find a landing zone. As it stands, much needs to be sorted out, and it could take weeks to make an assessment. Some EU officials I spoke with this week say they do not understand how Ukraine is budgeting, and while the option of speeding up payments is seriously being considered, they need to see whether the numbers check out.  Last week, Ukraine's finance minister told me the IMF was on the same page. But, as I understand it, that is not quite the case yet.

The truth is, the cost of funding the war is getting more expensive, while peace talks have made little progress. European officials are clear-eyed about how colossal the sums at play may seem, but Ukrainians are paying with blood. 

Still, as crude as it sounds, it is difficult to ignore that the money question is becoming harder to square, and there are not many partners left for the EU to turn to for extra cash. The cost of Trump walking away from any financial support is really being felt now. This week, he even suggested Europe should repay the US for assistance provided under the Biden administration. It's funny how Trump has not uttered a word about the damage caused by Russia.

“We need to pin down the budget needs — and we will find a solution,” Dombrovskis told me. And the clock is ticking before winter arrives. I have long argued that the future of Ukraine and the EU is now entwined, so a solution must and should be found — with clear goals and in full transparency.

Thank you for reading Off the Record. As always, if you have any comments, email me at maria.tadeo@euronews.com.

— Maria Tadeo