Intersection in the history of the West: European leaders stand for a dizzying task

Deputy, European leaders suddenly stood at a crossroads in the history of the West. Confused about hard and conflicting messages from Washington about NATO and Ukraine. Offended that they were not consulted about contact with enemy Vladimir Putin. And angry about a populist chastisement by the US, which they had not seen coming.

After the first frontal introduction to Team Trump, Europe was temporarily in shock. Only after a few days did moving again. On Sunday morning, EU Ministers of Foreign Affairs met at the Security Conference in Munich to take stock and compare notes. This Monday, a group of European government leaders, including Prime Minister shoved, will speak in Paris.

Europe must come up with a plan. And fast. “Knock yourself at the table,” NATO chief Mark Rutte advised the Europeans. In fact, it is astonishing that Europe stood empty -handed this weekend: Trump has announced for months what it intended.

Trump is in a hurry. In Munich, Trumps special envoy for Ukraine last weekend already from one European leader to the next to hear what they intend to contribute to a possible deterrent for Ukraine that should become part of a peace agreement. On Monday he speaks with the NATO ambassadors in Brussels. In addition, next week, a high American delegation is flying to Saudi Arabia to prepare a top meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin with a team from Moscow.

Fear of weak deal

Trump has taken it to put an end to the bloodshed in Ukraine. The Europeans fear a weak deal that gives Putin the chance to regroup and sooner or later to attack again. Is Trump cash with stiff Russian negotiators? He throws European interests in grabbing, looking for one Quick Fix In conversations with an authoritarian leader that he treats with a striking amount?

The concern about Ukraine is accompanied by a nagging uncertainty about a very fundamental issue: is Europe still sufficiently protected?

The US did not announce their departure from NATO and Secretary-General Rutte assured everyone that the Trump government is fully committed to the alliance. But how reliable is Donald Trump’s Washington?

In three tumultuous days in February, decades were lost in mutual trust. The president himself called Vladimir Putin, spoke to him for ninety minutes and announced the start of negotiations on Ukraine. Minister of Defense Pete Hegseeth said that Ukraine cannot return to the boundaries of before 2014 and that NATO membership will not be part of an agreement. Vice-president JD Vance launched at a conference where the Atlantic Band has been celebrated since the 1960s a populist attack on European democracy.

Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg confirmed on Saturday evening that there will really be no place for Europe at the main table where the future of Ukraine will soon be decided. Zensky and Putin have to negotiate peace, Kellogg said in Munich, with Trump in the role of mediator. The US will listen to Europe, he said. So in a transferable sense, Europe is sitting at the table, he paved.

The French Minister of Defense Sébastien Lecornu arrives for a group photo with NATO chef Mark Rutte and the American Minister of Defense Pete Hegseeth (foreground left), Thursday at the NATO headquarters in Brussels.

There were more arguments

Was this a frontal collision with a new populist team in Washington who has not yet been incorporated and started unscathed, or did a break here that can undermine the alliance? The core product of a defense alliance is unity. It is far to find at the moment.

Quarrels between Europe and the US are not uncommon. In 2003, for example, France and Germany refused to follow Washington in an attack against Iraq because they were not convinced that Saddam Hussein had mass destruction weapons. During an icy confrontation at the same security conference in Munich, the then German Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer (Groenen) took out to the American Minister of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. “Excuse me, I am not convinced”Fischer then told Rumsfeld. At that time, Germans of all ages were walking around the Snow around the conference hotel: for peace and against the US.

In three tumultuous days, decades were lost in mutual trust

Europe and the US have also argued about money for decades because Washington believes that Europe is not spending enough on Defense. Trump threatened to abandon Europe in his first term of office. Last year he caused the day before the Tumult Security Conference with the comment that as far as he is concerned, Putin could go his course against European countries that do not spend enough on their defense. Even then, Europeans were angry, but the angular threats were mainly seen as a negotiating tactics. And Trump had a point: there are still important NATO countries that do not meet the expenditure standard.

European Army

But now there is a more fundamental shift. It was President Zensky of Ukraine Who quickly drew conclusions and gave Europe a voice on Saturday. Zensky: “From now on it will be different and Europe must adapt to it. I believe in Europe and I am sure of you too. And I call you to act for your own good. ”

Zensky also had a solution: a military power to defend Europe. “This is no longer about increasing defense expenditure as a percentage of the gross domestic product. The point is that people realize that they have to defend their own house. ”

The US quickly rises on another division of labor within the Alliance: Europe defends itself, the US will help Europe defend itself. “These are days when it becomes clear to everyone that the safety of Europe is not self-evident,” said Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp after breakfast with his EU colleagues.

“NATO is not lost. The Americans have clearly assured us: NATO is relevant. The American Atomaraplu remains, but more effort from the European countries will be required. The US will remain involved in European safety, but in a different, reduced and less direct role. We can no longer afford to the presence of one hundred thousand American soldiers [die in Europa gestationeerd zijn] to trust. ”

The US races off a different division of work within NATO: Europe defends itself, the US will help Europe with that

The US, says Veldkamp, ​​will be a ‘way’Offshore Balancer. ‘ Offshore balancing is a strategic concept in which a superpower uses regional powers to control another superpower. In that point of view, the US is the arsenal of the democratic world, but do not deliver the manpower on the spot, Onshore.

The US has not yet said that they will reduce their presence. But in Europe it has already been suggested that Trump, for example, can remove the 82nd Airborne Division – twenty thousand soldiers – from Europe. The unit is considered the ‘fire brigade’ of the American armed forces and was moved to Europe by President Biden after the large -scale invasion of Russia in Ukraine.

The new relationships in NATO will soon become clearer in the coming months. A first test case becomes the deterrent force for Ukraine. After a possible agreement with Russia, Ukraine must receive the guarantee that Putin will not come in again. The best guarantee would be NATO membership. But the US does not want that. The Republican Senator Lindsey Graham suggested that the West can threaten that Mócht Putin violates an agreement, Ukraine immediately becomes a member of NATO.

In any case, Team Trump wants Europeans on the spot that detachment power. The Netherlands has already indicated that it is positive about this. It is also expected that France and Germany want to contribute. The United Kingdom, which has a serious armed forces, might be in charge of such a power.

But, Europeans know, it is not going without back cover from the United States. Veldkamp pointed out that Europe simply does not have crucial capacities, ranging from large transport aircraft to intelligence services. Prime Minister Schoof said that the Netherlands only wants to consider participation if the US provides back cover should the situation get out of hand. The first major European military operation among the new relationships therefore starts with a European request to the US.

New NATO standard

The second test case will be the discussion about the new NATO standard for defense spending. It is now 2 percent GDP, Trump demands 5 percent. 3.5 percent circulated as an option at the safety conference. Probably the countries must grow step by step. Rutte suggested annual steps of 0.2 or 0.3 percent. There must be an agreement at the NATO summit in June in The Hague. The budget rules will probably be stretched in the EU to finance defense expenditure with new debts.

In the meantime, the pressure on Putin should not decrease. Opening negotiations is something other than successful termination of negotiations. The EU wants to announce new sanctions in a week. The US is now increasing the pressure to also address the frozen Russian credits in Europe – so far only the interest is skimmed off for Ukraine. And it is, underlined Veldkamp, ​​important that all the promises that Western countries have made on Ukraine actually intensify.

The European leaders together at that historic intersection is waiting for a dizzying task. “Europe quickly needs an action plan for Ukraine and our safety,” wrote Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk on X, “otherwise global players will decide on our future. Not necessarily in our interest. That plan must now be made. There is no time to lose. “

To share





Mail the editors