This is exactly how Europe’s future looks like as it tries to save Ukraine at all costs, insisting on the principle of ’peace through strength’, while driving itself into a war psychosis.
Following a giant diplomatic scandal at the White House on 28 February, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy left Washington early. He failed not only to sign the so-called ’Minerals Agreement’ between the US and Ukraine, but was also left without any promise of further US military supplies and financial aid packages, while his reputation was seriously damaged.
However, Zelenskyy received a warm welcome in London on 2 March by some European leaders who, despite the new American approach, kept on repeating the old slogans such as ’as long as it is needed’ and ’as long as it takes’, suggesting an unwavering European support for Ukraine. Be strong, be brave, be fearless. EU leaders express their support for Zelenskyy after his clash with Trump – EU NEIGHBOURS east ’You will never be alone, dear President,’ European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen wrote on X in a joint post with other European leaders after the scandalous scene at the White House. After the incident, another EU top official, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas openly criticised Donald Trump claiming that ’Today, it became clear that the free world needs a new leader. It’s up to us, Europeans, to take this challenge.’ After the meeting in the UK, some countries have expressed their commitment to develop a ’coalition of the willing’ that will deploy peacekeepers to defend a peace agreement in Ukraine. Europe Is Left with Hard Choices as Trump Sours on Ukraine – The New York Times
Against this background, we are attempting to highlight the implications of Europe’s ’fixation on Ukraine’ in opposition to the US, by focusing on the key challenges.
Some political science experts believe the Trump-Zelenskyy confrontation signals major shift in global politics. They suggest that the discussion in the Oval Office was not just a spat between two leaders but it signaled a major realignment of the United States away from Europe.
In this regard, the fact that the planned meeting in Washington D.C. between Kaja Kallas and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was cancelled due to ’scheduling issues’ is just the beginning, a starting point, however, it did expose the diplomatic difficulties Brussels faces in the new Trump era.
The recent transatlantic rift, in particular over the protective tariffs on EU products announced by US President Donald Trump in a speech to a joint session of Congress on 4 March, and the issue of further support for Ukraine – an issue of peace and war, in simplistic terms – has created a new situation when sustainability of traditional shared values and core principles is being questioned.
Transatlantic solidarity, a centuries-old principle and shared value, seems to be lost somewhere in the details of the daily disputes over trade, defence and, the issue of Ukraine. However, it also should be added that, Europe’s unwavering support for Ukraine is still an open question, given the lack of unity in EU regarding this issue.
All things considered, the Old Continent faces unpredictable consequences as it has decided to boost its defence capabilities not to defend itself but for the sake of Ukraine. Furthermore, there is another related and crucial problem: the issue of EU sovereignty.
Presumably, none of the attendees of the meeting of the ’coalition of the willing’ in London or the top officials at the European Commission would be ready to answer the question: how sovereign is a European Union that has not decided on its own to provide security guarantees to Ukraine, but has been forced into a state of necessity by the US refusal to do so?
In the current situation, there is one thing that simply cannot be left out of consideration namely that everything that is happening in the EU at the moment in terms of defence, including the €800bn ’ReArm Europe’ plan announced by Ursula von der Leyen on 4 March, is just a hasty and ill-considered response to a US move, coupled with the fact that any measures on Ukraine are marked by a lack of consensus on the part of the Member States. Press statement by the President on the defence package
The strategic differences between the new American approach and that of Europe have emerged at the Munich Security Conference held from 14 to 16 February when Ursula Von der Leyen, insisting on the ’peace through strength’ principle, issued a warning to Washington, saying that ’A failed Ukraine would weaken Europe, but would also weaken the United States’. (…) Ukraine needs peace through strength, Europe wants peace through strength, and (…) and as President Trump has made clear: the United States is strongly committed to peace through strength,’ she said. A failed Ukraine will weaken Europe and US, von der Leyen warns – Euractiv
Simply ignoring that some Member States disagree with the view ’peace through strength’, she continued in the same vein after the United States halted military support for Ukraine. ’We have to put Ukraine in a position of strength so that it has the means to fortify and protect itself – from economic survival to military resistance. It’s basically about turning Ukraine into a steel porcupine that is indigestible for potential invaders.’, von der Leyen said after the London summit.
Presenting the ’ReArm Europe’ plan in Brussels, von der Leyen said: ’This is a moment for Europe, and we are ready to step up.’ The proposals could mobilise close to €800bn of defence expenditures for a safe and resilient Europe, she added. In addition, she clearly linked this package to the issue of Ukraine saying, ’with this equipment, Member States can massively step up their support to Ukraine.’ Press statement by the President on the defence package
It should be noted that some politicians in EU are convinced that, with the ’Rearm Europe’ package, the European Commission is completely overstepping its authority and ’von der Leyen has neither the competence in terms of prerogatives nor even the mandate to grant herself defence’, as French National Party President Jordan Bardella said. France’s National Rally says EU’s €800bn defence ‘rearm’ plan is a power grab – Brussels Signal
In addition to conseqences of a continued and even strengthened European support for Ukraine in the sphere of politics and defence, there is one more issue that must be considered. The likelihood of a new wave of Ukrainian refugees after the change in the American approach should also be taken into account, especially because EU Member States are not ready to receive more refugees from any part of the world. Trump threats prompt EU to plan for fresh Ukraine refugee wave – POLITICO
’Ukraine is Europe’, Kallas emphasised and this may mean that, according to a central decision by Brussels, EU Member States may not have a choice to accept or reject Ukrainian refugees. If Ukraine is EU, admitting Ukrainians will not be a sovereign choice by Member States but a kind of collective moral obligation – something that Brussels will expect from them.
In case of a sovereign EU, boosting European defence should not be linked to the issue of support for Ukraine and the decision-making of a sovereign EU, especially in defence, should not be shaped by the lack of action by other states.
Even if the oversized and bleeding body of Ukraine, bound to the EU’s feet, does not bring the EU very quickly into the deep end, with a series of wrong steps taken by the European Commission, Brussels itself is still in a position to pull the whole of Europe underwater, to the amusement of both Washington and Moscow.
