Director and Chief Executive,Chatam House
The Munich Security Conference begins today with European leaders in a state of shock, following the news that President Donald Trump has spoken directly to Russian President Vladimir Putin in a 90-minute phone call. Trump evidently did so without consulting Ukraine or NATO allies.
He announced the call after the fact, along with the news that direct negotiations to end the war in Ukraine would begin ‘immediately’. He proposed a summit in the near future in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
With his actions the president has unilaterally lifted Putin’s diplomatic isolation and provoked astounded reactions across Europe. When the initial shock subsides, the significance of the change in US policy that this represents will sink in. The conference has much to consider – but at least certain truths are now painfully clear.
Walking back
Trump’s credentials as a dealmaker are now unquestionably damaged. This week, before any negotiations have commenced, his administration has publicly vowed that Ukraine will not be part of NATO, implied that Russia could keep territory it has taken in its war, and firmly stated that no American troops will defend Ukraine.
Boris Pistorius, Germany’s defence minister, was the first to make the point that there is no art in any deal that makes the most important concessions before negotiations even begin. Among other defence ministers and intelligence chiefs gathering for the conference, ‘appeasement’ is the term being exchanged, in deliberate recognition of its historical resonance here in Munich.
Yet even that fails to capture the full significance of President Trump’s actions. Trump has made clear that friends and allies count for nothing. He has fundamentally undermined European confidence in US commitment to NATO and the principle of mutual defence – the underpinning of peace and security in Europe for over 75 years.
And he has jettisoned the notion that the US should try to set the principles by which the world is ordered. President Trump has made clear that the pursuit of what he sees as immediate US interest is more than a campaign slogan, it is his resolved policy.
As was the case following Trump’s Gaza proposals, US officials attempted to walk back or reframe certain elements of the president’s language: the US might still help contribute to a security guarantee for Ukraine, it was stated. Europe’s leaders will be far from convinced. The damage has been done. Even after the president leaves office it could take years, even decades to repair.
Europe’s response
EU countries and the UK now have immediate, difficult decisions to make: how to support Ukraine; how to defend the European continent; and what form US relations should now take.
On Ukraine, European countries have a few cards to play. They hold most of the frozen Russian assets which presumably will form part of a negotiation with Putin. They have also been a prime customer for Russian gas. Even if the pressure to buy this cheap energy again is rising (it is an audible issue in the German election campaign), it remains a bargaining point.
But any durable peace requires a convincing security guarantee for Ukraine. That is now imperilled. Besides ruling out NATO membership, the US has made clear that it does not intend to help defend a line of cessation of fighting between Ukraine and Russia, stating that any such defence will have to come from European countries.
In practice, that is likely to mean a military presence deployed by the UK, France and Poland. But any useful commitment would absorb almost all of the UK’s diminished armed forces. And it is hard to see how any purely European defence of Ukraine could be effective without support from US airpower and missile technology. (The Trump team has hinted this might be available).
SOURCE
CHATAM HOUSE NEWSLETTER
