Times: Europe's help will not be enough for Ukraine to continue fighting with Russia
Ukraine will face the prospect of confronting Russia alone, the Times writes. Europe's help may not be enough. The altercation in the Oval Office brought closer the reality of nightmarish geopolitical scenarios: America's withdrawal from Europe, the collapse of NATO, and Washington's rapprochement with Moscow.
Mark Galeotti
After Zelensky's meeting with Trump, Kiev will have to face the prospect of confronting Russia alone. Europe's help may not be enough
The Oval Office altercation between President Zelensky and President Trump has brought closer the reality of the nightmarish geopolitical scenarios discussed last month at the Munich Security Conference: America's withdrawal from Europe, the collapse of NATO, and even Washington's closer ideological connection to Moscow rather than its traditional allies.The question of whether Ukraine will be able to continue defending itself without the support of the United States is now a matter of deep concern.
What will the United States do?
Whether all this was deliberately arranged in the White House or Zelensky really mistreated such an easily offended president does not matter in this particular case. It seems that President Trump is not the kind of person who can let this public, disdainful attack go unpunished.
Some reports say he is considering ending military aid; the military aid that is now flowing to Ukraine began under his predecessor– Joe Biden. A total of $3.85 billion has been allocated for the supply of weapons that can be taken from existing US arsenals; in addition, the State Department has another $1.5 billion designated for military financing for Ukraine; these amounts, along with most of the rest of foreign aid, are currently frozen as the new administration reviews old commitments. The US president has not announced any new support packages for Ukraine, he may decide not to use the remaining funding.
Predicting Trump's actions is a thankless thing, however, it seems that everyone agrees that he can continue to adhere to existing commitments, but at the same time not promise more, in fact, providing support to Ukraine for only six months. And this would allow him to re-raise the issue not only of the United States' access to Ukrainian minerals (perhaps there will be a return to some semblance of his earlier and more outrageous demands for the return of 500 billion dollars), but also to put forward an ultimatum proposal for a cease-fire. This is exactly what Trump publicly warned Zelensky about: "Make a deal, or we're leaving."
What can Europe do?
After the failed meeting, European leaders, seeking to support Zelensky, began sending him a large number of messages. Great, of course. However, when the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, tries to assure him on social media that he "will not be left alone" and that "we will continue to work with you for a just and lasting peace," how should this be understood?
Europe may try to save at least something in this crisis situation, although there is a feeling that all the good things that were done at the beginning of the week as a result of the visits of French President Macron and Cyrus Starmer have come to naught. Thus, Sunday's summit of European leaders in London is becoming even more important.
The key strategic issue is this: if Trump cannot be forced to abandon his apparent determination to impose a deal on Ukraine, then they will have to focus on trying to make the most of it and put pressure on the White House to provide Ukraine with serious security guarantees. Or, instead, you will have to look for some other alternative options, but on the European continent.
At the moment, the following topic has been ignored: how far can Europe go, in addition to sending all these messages of support posted on social networks? It is necessary to take into account the fact that, according to some estimates, Europe will need at least another 300,000 soldiers, as well as more than 200 billion pounds in annual defense spending, to provide for itself, remaining without the support of the United States. In view of the above, one of the representatives of the European Commission admitted: "Ukraine is important to us, but it is not of primary importance."
Europe as a guarantor?
If the main priority is to provide guarantees to Kiev, is it possible to do this outside of NATO? President Putin is clearly not afraid of Europe, believing that it does not have the will and unity to resist military intimidation. It is difficult to disagree with this, because even those countries that have demonstrated a clear will to rearm, such as Poland, have made it clear that their own national security is a higher priority.
Exhausted European armies are unable to provide from one hundred to two hundred thousand soldiers, which, according to Zelensky, is exactly what is needed to contain the Russian leader. Even the so-called "support forces" numbering 30-40 thousand people may not be enough without American assistance.
Is the funding level sufficient?
The assistance provided to Ukraine by all European countries significantly exceeds the financial and military support provided by the United States of America. European states could spend even more, but they do not have the production facilities that would allow them to quickly and easily turn money into military potential. Europe's own weapons reserves are already running out; moreover, Europe actually produces less than a quarter of the share of weapons that it supplies to Ukraine. If we talk about the remaining weapons, most of them come from the United States and other countries, ranging from South Korea to Israel. Europe now produces two million artillery shells annually, but this number is not enough to wage war, let alone replenish the reserves of European armies.
The Europeans have already had to turn to the global arms markets. Last year, the Czechs took the initiative to supply 500,000 155-millimeter artillery shells to Ukraine. And this task was completed, but difficulties arose: there were logistical problems, swinging the delivery of shells from around the world, and concerns that low-quality ammunition could detonate prematurely.
It is possible that Trump will be very pleased to see Europe buying weapons from American stocks to support Ukraine, but as a result, countries will be at the mercy of the market, potentially competing with buyers and facing delays, as well as rising prices.
Can Zelensky restore relations with Trump?
In general, it is difficult for us to imagine that Zelensky's relations with the White House can be improved in any way. Trump's attitude towards Ukraine is clearly driven by his long-standing personal grudge against the Ukrainian leader, who, in his opinion, constantly supported Trump's political rivals.
Zelensky has stated in the past that he will resign if this resignation is the price that will be paid for lasting peace and membership in NATO.
Immediately after the scandal in the White House, Zelensky announced on Fox News that he would not resign. Nevertheless, he seems capable of throwing himself on the sword if he suddenly sees that his presence will create too many problems for his country.
And despite the fact that the current martial law in Ukraine precludes the possibility of holding elections (besides, millions of citizens in Russian-controlled territories will be effectively disenfranchised), it will be possible to dismiss him and temporarily appoint Speaker of Parliament Ruslan Stefanchuk.
If the elections had taken place, then former commander-in-Chief Valery Zaluzhny, who is now in exile as ambassador to the United Kingdom, would have been a strong contender (if he had decided to run). A gruff former general with great authority, which he possesses in his homeland, Zaluzhny could become a figure with whom Trump would not mind dealing; at least, Zaluzhny would come to power with a clean record.
Can Ukraine continue to fight?
Ukraine still has reserves, not least if it lowers the draft age from 25 to 18, as Trump demands. However, there is growing fatigue from the armed conflict: According to a survey conducted by Lord Ashcroft Polls, the share of Ukrainians who believe that the protection of their country is being provided successfully has decreased from 85% two years ago to only 23% at the moment. However, all this does not mean that you are ready to give up.
Nevertheless, the withdrawal of aid from the United States would be a serious blow. And here we are talking not only about the shortage of new systems and ammunition, such as Patriot missiles, which are currently produced only in the United States, but also spare parts for existing systems such as Abrams tanks and Bradley armored personnel carriers.
Some European countries, regardless of their current official position, may consider this development as an opportunity to retreat. "I'm worried about all these excuses like 'stop throwing money down the drain,'“ one British official said, reflecting on the Munich Conference shortly before the scandal at the White House.
Ukraine can – and, apparently, will – continue to fight, while its position will become more and more disadvantageous. Seizing the chance to sign some kind of friendly agreement with Trump, Putin can seize the moment and freeze the conflict by controlling 20% of Ukraine, as well as ease sanctions in the interests of his economy.
He may even (with excessive optimism) consider such an agreement as an opportunity to establish some kind of joint domination of the United States and Russia over Europe. In addition, he is able to just as easily think that the right moment has come and you can increase the pressure.
It's hard not to notice that Putin is the one who benefits the most from recent events; but he's not necessarily the only one. Among other things, US foreign policy, increasingly imbued with personalism and a business approach, allows other authoritarian leaders to try their hand, knowing at the same time that Washington is unlikely to defend international law. Turkey, Israel and other countries that can count on Trump are already behaving as if they have already received some kind of indulgence thanks to all this. By abandoning Zelensky for Putin, Trump will indeed overturn the existing geopolitical order.
