Disgrace in Washington, Decisions in London

Angry and ashamed. That’s how I felt after watching the spectacle of President Trump and Vice-President Vance ganging up on President Zelensky, two against one, live on TV last Friday (28 February 2025). Trump, moreover, who called his predecessor “stupid”. Unworthy of a head of state

*****

Disgrace in Washington, Decisions in London

Angry and ashamed. That’s how I felt after watching the spectacle of President Trump and Vice-President Vance ganging up on President Zelensky, two against one, live on TV last Friday (28 February 2025). Trump, moreover, who called his predecessor “stupid”. Unworthy of a head of state and a disgrace for the United States of America. Immediately afterwards, Zelensky was summoned to leave the White House, and the planned signing of a minerals deal was cancelled. Just as well, for laying claim to Ukraine’s resources without offering a real security guarantee in return is not a deal, but blackmail.

What now? Will Trump make even more concessions in his negotiation with President Putin, at Ukraine’s expense? (As he already excluded NATO membership before the talks had even started). Was the whole performance nothing but a set-up to give Trump an excuse to end military support to Ukraine, while the war is raging, so that Putin can conquer even more territory before an eventual agreement? Most importantly: what will we, Europe, now do? Fortunately, yesterday’s summit of European leaders in London proved decisive.

Europe Assumes the Risk

For sure, as upset as one may be, one should never allow one’s emotions to dominate. Emotions may motivate one to act, but should never determine the substance of strategy. Strategy also does not seek to predict the future. Strategy starts from one’s own interests, and then makes prudent assumptions in order to make the right choices. What struck me most during the shameful White House spectacle was how much time Trump took to present Putin, once again, as a fellow victim of a so-called Democrat conspiracy. Hence my simple, but very consequential prudent assumption: as long as Putin is president, Trump will side with Russia; not with Europe, and certainly not with Ukraine.

So Europe may well be on its own in supporting Ukraine against Russia. Some may be tempted to abandon it therefore, but that would be a grave mistake. “Those who are afraid, risk the same beating nonetheless”, was a favourite saying of my grandfather, a World War Two veteran. We have reached a point at which all options imply substantial risk.

We have made our fundamental choice in 2022, when the EU invited Ukraine to join, and we must stick to that. At the London Summit, European leaders proved to Trump that they can create faits accomplis as well, which will shape the eventual settlement of the war. First of all, there will be a surge in military support for Ukraine, so that it doesn’t lose even more territory. Secondly, after a settlement, Europe will continue to arm Ukraine – there will be no talk of the “demilitarisation” that Putin demands. And thirdly, a coalition of European states will guarantee Ukraine’s security and deploy European forces behind the Ukrainian lines to make that credible, whether Putin likes it or not.

France and the UK (not coincidentally the two European nuclear powers) have already started to build that coalition. British Prime Minister Starmer stated unambiguously that there will be British boots on the ground and planes in the air. A security guarantee is not a peace operation. This is about deterrence: if Russia violates the ceasefire and attacks Ukraine a third time, it will be at war with us.

So yes, this implies a risk of war with Russia. But so does abandoning Ukraine. If we do not stop Russia now, it will undoubtedly try to fully incorporate Georgia and Moldova in an exclusive sphere of influence. And if we continue to give the impression that we are easily intimidated, we may become a target ourselves. That’s why we need to pursue EU membership for Ukraine. The risk of war is there in any case. I would rather face it with several hundred thousand battle-hardened Ukrainian soldiers as part of our deterrence than without them.

Will the US Assume Responsibility?

Of course, European leaders still aim to involve the US. Again, this is about strategy, not about emotions and personal feelings. Though putting all the onus on Ukraine, as NATO Secretary-General Rutte seemed to do when he stated that it is up to Zelensky to find a way to restore his relationship with Trump, whom we really have to give credit, is surely going too far. Flattery may bring temporary respite from Trump’s whims, but ultimately, he seems to respond only to force – very much like Putin.

Together with EU membership for Ukraine and EU sanctions against Russia, the firm decisions made in London are facts that Trump cannot negotiate away. That will hopefully convince his administration that concertation with Europe and, of course, Ukraine itself, is indispensable for the peace deal that Trump rightfully seeks.

It is logical that Europeans provide the boots on the ground for a security guarantee; Ukraine will be joining the EU, not the US. But by stating that if that guarantee would be invoked and Europe find itself at war with Russia, Article 5 would not apply, the US has directly undermined the guarantee that it has itself demanded. The reality is that in this scenario NATO will be involved, for all members of the European coalition will be NATO Allies: either the US joins the fight, or NATO dies there and then. That the US cannot afford, for it still has an essential interest in the security of Europe, its indispensable economic partner. But Trump must state that very explicitly if he wants his own strategy to work. Yet the seed of distrust has been sown, and it is very damaging to the credibility of our deterrence: who now dares to say where Trump’s red lines are when it comes to pleasing Putin?

In order to maintain the effectiveness of deterrence, therefore, Europe must urgently reinforce the European pillar of NATO. All the conventional capabilities for which until now we counted on the US, we have to acquire ourselves, by coordinating our additional defence efforts. The aim: for the combined forces of all European Allies to constitute a complete, autonomous force package.

Meanwhile, the credibility of the US itself has suffered worldwide, not just in Europe. “The free world needs a new leader”, EU High Representative Kaja Kallas declared. This does enormous damage to the American power position in the world. Other allies of the US, in Asia in particular, may well also begin to doubt whether they can truly trust America. Actors that are hostile to the West no longer have to take into account that when push comes to shove Europe and the US will always be on the same side. China hopefully realises that it has a great interest in restraining Russia and putting pressure on it to respect any ceasefire. For Europe is Beijing’s indispensable economic partner too, hence a European-Russian war would be a catastrophe for China as well.

This Is Europe

Now is not the time to gripe and moan about past mistakes of the West vis-à-vis Russia. We have certainly made mistakes, but Russia, and only Russia, chose to go to war. That is why we are where we are. At one of those moments in world history when everyone realises momentous decisions have to be made. A European leadership is emerging. Moreover, Canada and Turkey were also present in London. The crisis of American leadership thus also has some positive side-effects, not least the rapprochement between Britain and continental Europe. It is heartening to see how when the stability of the European continent itself is threatened, Britain reverts to its traditional strategic role and steps up to forge the coalition that can preserve the balance of power. As a Belgian, it reminds me that my country’s truest ally, at independence and from the very start in two world wars, has not been the US, but the United Kingdom.

Prof. Dr Sven Biscop (Egmont Institute & Ghent University) has always been an Anglophile. Today, he is proud of saying so again.

(Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons)