No deal.

EU leaders ended an extraordinary summit Friday evening without reaching agreement on the bloc’s next long-term budget. German Chancellor Angela Merkel noted they had not even been given a serious second proposal to consider after it was clear European Council President Charles Michel’s initial €1.095 trillion package would not win approval.

Wide differences remain, particularly between the wealthy countries that are net contributors to the budget and others that are net recipients of EU funds, and it is unclear when leaders will resume their negotiations. Time is short, as the next budget cycle runs from 2021 to 2027 and substantial technical work will be required after a deal is reached to avoid disruptions to EU programs.

A group of four self-declared “frugal” net-paying countries, led by Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, refused to raise the budget above 1 percent of the EU’s combined gross national income, a politically symbolic threshold that critics denounced as a pointless impediment to the bloc’s big ambitions on issues ranging from climate change to digital transformation.

Negotiations on the budget are notoriously difficult and typically require more than one extraordinary summit. And this set of talks is especially difficult as the EU has lost the United Kingdom, a big budget contributor.

But Merkel’s remarks suggested that at least some leaders felt Michel, facing his first major test since taking over as Council president on December 1, could have been better prepared for the task.

“I don’t even want to go into the details, the differences were simply too big and it did not succeed and therefore we have to continue working on it,” Merkel said. “Look — there was not even a detailed second proposal that I could tell you about, what that would mean for Germany.”

Michel held a marathon series of meetings with individual EU leaders ahead of the summit in hopes of laying the groundwork for an accord. But he appeared to have brought leaders to Brussels with their differences still starkly apparent and insufficient proposals for bridging the gaps.

Rutte’s alliance, the so-called frugal four of Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden, refused to budge on the overall size of the budget, calling for Michel to propose new cuts and demanding to retain their rebates. Southern and eastern countries were scrambling to try to soften planned cuts to so-called cohesion programs for regional development, and a group of EU members led by France was pushing for Michel to offer more money for agriculture.

The president’s team responded not with a robust new offer, but with a two-page “technical document,” put forward by the European Commission as a “non-paper,” that set out a range of concessions — including rebates and more money for regional development and agriculture — compared to Michel’s previous proposal.

But it failed to present a comprehensive plan, ignoring certain parts of the budget and making it impossible for leaders to assess the real impact on their voters.

“This proposal was not even presented in full detail because it was already clear that the rough data in this proposal were not sufficient to bridge the differences,” Merkel said.

Michel’s case

At a news conference Friday evening, as leaders raced to the airport, Michel insisted that he had tried his best.

“As my grandmother used to say to me: To succeed, you have to try,” he said.

He was joined by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen who said the discussions had been useful and yielded important progress.

But with no clear path to a compromise, and not even a date for resuming talks, they struggled to put a positive spin on what ultimately amounted to not quite 30 hours of unsuccessful discussions and deliberations.

“The last weeks and the last days, we have worked very hard in order to try to reach an agreement regarding the next European budget,” Michel said. “Unfortunately, today we have observed that it was not possible to reach an agreement. We have observed that we need more time.”

The budget talks have been made all the more difficult by the U.K.’s departure, which has left a hole in the EU’s pocketbook amounting to an estimated €75 billion over the seven years.

Pressed on whether the summit had been a failure, Michel insisted it was not. He said he was “absolutely convinced” that the meeting was both useful and necessary. “We needed to get to a political debate at the highest level,” he said.

“This was the first time that we had an opportunity to have such a detailed discussion,” von der Leyen said. “We really broke it down into each individual policy area in each individual member state. This was the first time we were able to go into the specifics in looking at the various interests. And I think that was very helpful.”

But the conflicting positions among the 27 appeared only to have hardened.

French President Emmanuel Macron has called for a bigger budget to meet the EU’s growing ambitions, but he also had refused to say how much more France itself was willing to pay and pushed to reverse proposed cuts to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which is especially important to French farmers.

“We have not sacrificed the CAP,” said Macron, who on Saturday will attend the annual Salon International de l’Agriculture, a showpiece event for French farmers.

Leaving the summit, Macron complained about how EU countries had divided into “clubs” that ended up blocking a deal. “It is not a good method to try to divide things by groups,” he told reporters, adding: “We must re-mobilize everyone, rebuild some confidence.”

Inside track

Among EU budget insiders, the reaction was mixed. Some said there was notable progress while others said Michel did not come remotely close to a deal.

One of the widest gaps remains on overall size: With the frugals insisting on 1 percent of EU GNI, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán went as far as suggesting a budget close to 1.3 percent. Meanwhile many cohesion countries privately appeared content with Michel’s revised proposal of around 1.07 percent, acknowledging that realistically that is likely the highest level that could be reached.

“It was an OK first attempt and there was some movement but I think it was inevitable that we needed a second Council to decide,” said one national government official. Describing the Commission paper as “not ambitious enough” on size, the official said: “If it had been more to the 1.03-1.05 [percent] range, there could have been more room for a compromise.”

One senior diplomat from a cohesion country said the summit was never close to a deal and the Commission was not sufficiently involved in Michel’s preparations. “I don’t think there was a moment sides were close enough [that] the deal could be possible,” the senior diplomat said. “I think [the Commission] should have been involved in all bilaterals the week before. It can’t be frugals get it all.”

Another senior diplomat offered a similar view. “They were not close,” the diplomat said. “Michel and his team was weak — from the beginning.” The diplomat complained about preparation of the summit and a lack of strategy to strike deals and trade-offs.

A second national government official said there had been little movement to close the gaps. “The sides are still apart,” the official said, adding that Michel had not created enough opportunities for leaders to compromise and portray the deal as a victory to voters back home. “Nobody” could have sold this deal, the official said.

Another diplomat said Michel had failed to pressure any of the participants to give ground on their starting positions.

“On Michel, I am simply disappointed,” the diplomat said. “And the biggest disadvantage of the summit is that he didn’t manage to make them — us — feel forced to move an inch.” The diplomat added, “MFF [the Multiannual Financial Framework] is a file where, either everybody moves, or there is no party.”

Click Here: cheap nrl jerseys

Still, despite the grousing, some officials and diplomats said that the components of a potential deal were now visible. One diplomat noted that Germany, the biggest payer into the budget, would have been willing to “take a closer look” at the proposal put forward Friday afternoon.

Some diplomats also say that there was a case to be made that leaders simply needed a second summit to prove to their constituents that they are fighting hard and are not quick to grant concessions.

Having stood firm now, these officials and diplomats said, leaders could return for a second summit, perhaps as soon as next month, and make the necessary compromises.

But if a deal is not sealed soon, Berlin may end up having to play a mediating role alongside Michel after Germany takes over the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU from Croatia in the second half of the year.

“I think everybody understands we need some more time to move closer to each other and whether this will be during our presidency is difficult to say,” Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenković told POLITICO.

Jacopo Barigazzi, Maïa de la Baume, Florian Eder, Andrew Gray, Cristina Gonzalez, Aitor Hernández-Morales, Rym Momtaz, Ivo Oliveira, James Randerson, Eline Schaart, Hans von der Burchard, Zosia Wanat, Eddy Wax, Arthur Neslen, Paola Tamma, Hanne Cokelaere and Zia Weise contributed reporting.