Following the rather shameful treatment of Volodymyr Zelenskyy by the White House last Friday, French President Emmanuel Macron succinctly reminded everyone of the fundamental truths about the ongoing conflict, which stands as the first full-scale war between nation-states on European soil since 1945. Macron took to social media to point out, “There is an aggressor: Russia. There is a victim: Ukraine. We were right to help Ukraine and sanction Russia three years ago – and continuing to do so is the correct path.”
The fact that such a statement needed to be made highlights how deeply the Trump administration is redefining long-standing transatlantic relationships. In what seems to be a preference for resetting the U.S. relationship with Russia over observing international law and Western unity, Trump is chasing a peace agreement on Moscow’s terms dictated by Vladimir Putin. Concurrently, he’s eyeing Ukraine’s natural wealth while demanding loyalty and gratitude from Kyiv.
For Ukraine’s sake—having bravely resisted Putin’s unlawful invasion for three years—and in light of its own future security concerns, Europe needs to present a cohesive, strong, and forward-thinking response. The defense summit conducted by Sir Keir Starmer in London on Sunday was a valuable kickoff, although many uncertainties linger.
The Oval Office’s rude handling of Zelenskyy turned the conference into a platform for emotional solidarity, showcased by the hearty embrace Sir Keir extended to the Ukrainian president in Downing Street. However, Europe’s plans for engaging a volatile and ideologically unfriendly White House are still evolving.
Amid fresh pledges to bolster military aid for Ukraine, Sir Keir indicated the formation of a “coalition of the willing,” designed to deter Russian breaches of any forthcoming peace accord. By offering their own ceasefire proposals, significantly boosting defense budgets, and committing actual troops to enforce a peace arrangement, European leaders aim to coax Trump into providing the essential U.S. security assurances needed for such a force.
For this delicate maneuver to succeed, currently unnamed NATO members must join Britain and France with major troop deployments, and bridges must be rebuilt between Kyiv and Washington. This reconciliation won’t be simple. Yet Zelenskyy’s Sunday statement about his readiness to pen a minerals deal with Trump underscores his acknowledgment of this unfortunate but necessary reality.
The idea of Ukraine being pressured into a ceasefire lacking concrete assurances, while Trump enables a territorial partition to compensate Putin’s violent aggression, is unacceptable. Through both diplomacy in Washington and extensive military support requiring more adaptable fiscal policies in Brussels and national governments, Europe must leverage the momentum from the London summit, empowering Ukraine to shape its own future.
In a broader sense, it’s increasingly clear that as Trump strives for a new understanding with Putin’s assertive regime, he pays little heed to its repercussions on European security and interests. As Sir Keir remarked at the summit’s conclusion, Europe finds itself “at a crossroads.” Achieving strategic independence and significantly enhancing sovereign capabilities will be crucial to navigating the challenging path forward.
Do you have thoughts on the issues discussed in this article? If you’d like to submit a response of up to 300 words for potential publication in our letters section, please click here.
