The moment of truth for Europe

BERLIN – It is time for Europeans to take Ukraine seriously. With Russian President Vladimir Putin posing the greatest threat to European security since the end of the Cold War, everything is at stake. US President Donald Trump’s approach to this issue has rightly frightened European leaders, but rather than proactively defending their interests, they have spent most of their energy reacting to events and doing damage control.

At the beginning of the year, many Europeans hoped to keep the United States on their side by purchasing more American weapons and liquefied natural gas. They have even shown that they can work together in dealing with Trump, as they did after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s disastrous meeting in the Oval Office and again after Trump’s friendly meeting with Putin in Anchorage. But if you expand the focus, you’ll see that European diplomats are swimming against the tide. No matter how much energy they invest, the fate of the United States, Russia and even Ukraine is against them.

In the US, your luck will run out sooner or later, simply because Trump’s core interests conflict with yours. His advisors and closest followers of the MAGA movement have three general goals: to force a “peace” at any cost; normalize relations with Russia to benefit from resulting business opportunities; and bring American troops back to the Western Hemisphere. Some European leaders have denied this agenda, but after the release of the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy, they no longer have an excuse.

The civilizational suicide of the United States

Meanwhile, Putin’s sacrifice of Russian blood and resources shows that this is the case remains firmly committed to the war effort. Now that Russia has redesigned the state machinery and the entire economy for conquest, it produces many times more ammunition every year than Ukraine. It can overtake Ukraine in drone production and is introducing new technologies such as glide bombs that it is difficult to defend against. And on the diplomatic front, Putin’s strategy of “keeping the Europeans out, the Americans in, and the Ukrainians submissive” (quoting a Russian close to the regime who spoke to me anonymously) is paying off, judging by Trump’s increasing pressure on Zelensky to accept unfavorable terms.

Most importantly, the Ukrainian people, who have shown incredible courage since the first hour of the war, may now be reaching the limits of what they can tolerate. Military aid (in dollars) to Ukraine fell by 43% in July and August this yearand the Ukrainian military faces an acute troop shortage amid growing public opposition to conscription. Additionally, the country’s domestic politics are in chaos due to a corruption scandal that led to the downfall of Zelensky’s powerful chief of staff, Andriy Yermak.

Even if Europeans manage to avoid the worst-case scenario in the short term, they should think about how they can prevent catastrophe in the long term. Instead of just preparing for the next horror show from Steve Witkoff and Kirill Dmitriev (the US and Russian envoys, respectively), they should make their own plans and make it clear that they are the true party of peace.

Global health workers strengthen U.S. national security

The first step is to mobilize Russia’s frozen assetssufficient to provide financial support to Ukraine for at least the next two years. This is the main source of European influence over Russia and the US (and even Ukraine), but unpleasant discussions with Belgium (where the funds are technically located) on this issue have made Europe appear clumsy and weak.

Given the new loans to Ukraine, European leaders must not waste the momentum. Ukrainians cannot endure a war of attrition for many months, let alone years, longer. They have to ask themselves how they want the war to end. Realistically, what is the best possible outcome for next year?

For Europe, To take things seriously, you need to have a high-level conversation about what credible security guarantees might look like.. At least there must be an “auto-return” mechanism (Snapback) for sanctions, financing and arms supplies in the event that Russia attacks again. At the same time, Europe must be prepared to speak directly to the Russians, especially if Trump tires of the process and withdraws.

The Trump administration’s latest 28-point plan was understandably a shock, given how much it appeared aimed at exploiting Ukraine’s vulnerabilities. However, it broke down some of the key areas that any serious peace plan must address, including issues of territory, NATO membership, protection of minorities in Ukraine, security guarantees and possible limitations on Ukrainian armed forces.

The transatlantic break is complete

Clearly, Europeans must make it clear that the continued existence of a democratic, sovereign and secure Ukraine is non-negotiable. But other issues will also require difficult compromises. Although they will never recognize Russian occupation, they must accept Russia’s de facto control over part of Ukrainian territory. In the same way, Ukraine’s accession to NATO seems to be ruled out from the outset. In any case, European leaders should already be working privately with the Ukrainians to create a framework for a sustainable peace.

Given that an unfair outcome could simply be a prelude to another war, this remains an existential question for Ukraine. But it is also an existential question for Europe. If European leaders finally manage to come to an agreement, they will have much more credibility to counter American tariffs or China’s economic blackmail. But if they fail, they will signal to the whole world that they are still weak and faint-hearted, and the fight for Europe will begin.

Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, is the author of The Age of Unpeace: How Connectivity Causes Conflict (Bantam Press, 2021).