OPINION: Europe Faces Existential Risks: Do Its Leaders Get it?

Volodymyr Zelensky’s recent high noon show down in the Oval Office appears to have been a light bulb moment for Ukraine but also for Europe.

For Ukraine I think the penny finally dropped that the US is no longer its ally in its war for survival against Russia. Indeed, after the showdown in the Oval Office, and events since (arms and intelligence support from the US suspended), I think there are even well-grounded fears that the Trump administration might actually be on the other side. On the side of Russia, the aggressor.

For Ukraine, if Vance’s performance at the Munich Security Conference was not “a read my lips” moment, the taking down of Zelensky, again by Vance, should have left no doubt that Europe is on its own against the Russian threat. And rather like the Budapest Memorandum - which supposedly gave security assurances to Ukraine - was in the event not worth the paper it was written on, well so NATO’s Article V mutual defense clause seems to be similarly nigh on worthless.

Crises typically concentrate minds in Europe - the EU only tends to function effectively when it has a bullet (this time literally) close to its head. And I think the biggest existential security crisis that Europe has faced, perhaps since the Berlin airlift, or before, finally forced Europe into action, and this week we have seen activity across a number of fronts, including the U.K. leading efforts to come up with a European/Ukrainian peace plan to end the war in Ukraine - to help alleviate the risk of a bad peace imposed by Russia and the USA.

Other Topics of Interest

28 Years in the Shadows: Former CIA Officer Drops Bombshells on Russia’s Secrets

Former CIA insider John Sipher, a 28-year veteran and Russia expert with deep ties to Moscow, drops explosive revelations about the collapse of Russian intelligence.

We have also seen Europe finally pull its finger out and announce huge new financing program for arms production, to the tune of many hundreds of billions of euros. The obvious question is why Europe has done nothing for the past three years, over the duration of the war in Ukraine, when surely the threat from Russia was already crystallized and existential?

Misreading Russia - even appeasement by some - in the run up to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 was bad enough, but Europe sitting on its hands and doing nothing to assure its own security for the past three years is surely criminal.

But we are where we are, Europe is finally stepping into gear.

The problem for Europe though is that while the financing pillars of Europe’s rearmament are now in place, it will take time to build factories and build out actual defense capability in the field. This is time that Europe does not have - the threat from Russia is now, not in five years down the line, albeit in five years’ time the threat from Russia might be even more extreme.

Europe has two hopes here:

First, that the Trump administration will continue to sell arms to Europe, and Ukraine. Clearly Europe is going to be spending multiples more on defense, say going from €400bn a year at present to say €750 billion over a five-year horizon then to €1 trillion, likely. In the short term the only source of off-the-shelf kit is the US. Would Trump say no to a new huge European arms procurement program? Say Europe commits to spending 100 billion plus a year for the next decade buying US kit. Think of the jobs, jobs, jobs for Trump to sell to his MAGA constituency. Perhaps not.

Second, that Ukraine hold out as long as possible against Russia. Ukraine currently has the second largest military in Europe (800,000 plus under arms), and it has proven able to hold back Russia, against overwhelming odds. It has, meanwhile, developed a largescale arms industry - now producing around 40% of its own kit. And it is innovating fast. Ukraine could not only hold the line against Russia, to allow Europe to rearm over the medium term, but could also help supply kit to the European rearmament project. The longer Ukraine holds out against Russia, the better for Europe.

All this sounds like a plan. The problem is that it might not stand the test of time.

First, the US has clearly signaled now that its main priority is countering the threat from China. Would the US be prepared to divert military production from its focus on China to help the Europeans in their defense?

Connected still is there is much to suggest from the US pivot to ally with Russia now against China reflects a fundamental aversion, hatred even, of Europe and the EU in particular by the Trump administration.

The EU seems to fall the wrong side of the Trump and Putin administrations in the culture wars. Trump, Vance et al seems to want to destroy Europe, as they despise its core values of democracy, respect for human rights, and their socially liberal (woke) agenda. Why would the US help defend Europe, when it appears to be allying with Russia, against Europe.

Second, Trump’s policy on the war in Ukraine seems now to be to gift Ukraine to Putin. Perhaps Ukraine is the quid pro quo for Putin’s support for the US against China, but perhaps also turning the other way as the US annexes Greenland and Canada.

The Trump team seems intent on imposing a bad, Russian, peace on Ukraine. Likely this means no NATO for Ukraine, no security guarantees, Russia keeps all the territory it currently occupies and perhaps the rest of Donbas, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, demilitarization of Ukraine - which means limits on Ukraine’s ability to defend itself.

Add in also de-Nazification which for the Kremlin means regime change in Kyiv. It means a new government in Kyiv which is amenable to Russian interests. Likely this latter condition will mean early presidential elections, which means the early lifting of martial law, and end to mobilization and very likely this will mean the collapse of Ukraine’s front lines. Ukrainians will see the lack of security assurances, and the end of mobilization as a green light to exit the country.

The peace likely imposed by Russia and the U.S. will likely bring an end to Ukrainian sovereignty, and its economic, social and political collapse. Russia will take all, it will occupy Ukraine not thru war but by means of the peace imposed by Trump.

For Europe the above represents an existential threat. Russia will capture Ukraine’s huge military industrial complex and double its own military capability. The threat to Europe will be immense, multiples greater than at present.

Meanwhile, tens of millions of Ukrainians will likely vote with their feet and move West. This will just increase anti migrant sentiment in Europe, straining the economic, social and political fabric of Europe. Boosting the rise of the far right in Europe. But this is exactly what Trump, Putin and Vance wants. They want more social and political disharmony in Europe as that will see the illiberal (anti woke) capture of Europe, they hope eventually lining up Europe, with the U.S. and Russia against China.

The outlook is grim for Europe - which raises the question why Europe has not got the obvious for so long, sitting on its hands on issues like seizing immobilized Russian assets for Ukraine.

European inaction might well be the cause of its own downfall.

Reprinted from the author’s tashecon blog! See the original here.

Disclaimer - All opinions in this column reflect the views of the author(s), not Kyiv Post.