European leaders will find ways to fill the potential void across Ukraine and continental security, as Trump's White House talks about dialing American support and military numbers in Europe Competing against.
As the war in Ukraine celebrates its third anniversary and marks a fascinating looming threat from Russia, European officials flocked to Kiev on Monday at a show of solidarity.
At the same time, European foreign ministers will meet in Brussels, where they are expected to discuss how much they should send to Kiev in their next support package.
The plan began with a single digit number, but could total over 20 billion euros, according to two people familiar with the discussions that spoke about the terms of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. It has sex.
The minister is also expected to approve a new sanctions package against Russia that may not please the White House as Trump approaches President Vladimir V. Putin.
More broadly, European leaders also consider the prospect of placing Ukrainian troops on the ground as a kind of peacekeeping or “security,” officials say.
Additionally, they discuss ways to increase military spending more generally in the blueprint for the future of European defense, which is expected to be proposed by the European Commission in mid-March.
And given the confusion and uncertainty over America's commitment to Europe, Antonio Costa, president of the Council of Europe, on Sunday night, on March 6, to discuss Ukraine and Europe's defenses. It has been announced that a special meeting of European leaders will be convened.
The gust of activity comes at a head-spurting moment for Europe. Until now, the US has been a major supporter of Ukraine's resistance to Russian aggression, diplomatically, financially and militarily in the leadership role that has been playing an alliance since World War II three years ago. I attracted to it.
But Trump is threatening to defeat it, or at least do so.
He shocked European leaders last week when he appeared to blame Ukrainian leaders for Russian invasion. He called Ukrainian President Volodimia Zelensky a “no-election dictator.” He declared that the outcome of the war was far more important than America and Europe.
It is not yet clear whether the US will cut military spending in Europe. But as recently proposed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegses, leaders are increasingly worried.
It could make Europe, particularly small members of the NATO Alliance vulnerable to offensive Russia.
Following the Russian invasion, President Joseph R. Biden Jr. increased the number of American troops in Europe by 20,000.
The outcome of Europe is that the future of defense appears to be more independent, but more challenging.
“In this battle for survival, Ukraine's fate is not the only one in crisis,” says Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, and is a European Union executive. It was posted to Arm and posted on social media along with her own video. Other leaders arrive in Ukraine. “That is the fate of Europe.”
Europeans have increased their spending on defense for several years, especially since the Russian invasion. But they remain far from a level that can be managed without the US, both in their spending and military capabilities.
The US spends around $119 billion on wars in Ukraine, and according to the frequently used tracker, $67 billion is spent on military spending. Europe spent $65 billion on military aid, slightly less, but $21 billion more on humanitarian and financial aid than the US.
For now, European leaders are doing their best to keep the US on the table, both in collaboration with Ukraine, on other military issues that are important. Leaders emphasize their willingness to meet Trump's demands that Europe bear primary responsibility for its own defense.
“We stopped whining, started acting, started putting together the act,” NATO secretary general Mark Latte said in a speech last week. He said, “What I think is an important initiative from President Trump: it's to lead Ukraine to lasting peace.”
If the US pulls back support on a large scale, it will be costly and difficult to replace, both military personnel and sophisticated military equipment. Even if Europe orders such hardware now, it would take up to 10 years to receive it.
A recent study by think tank Bruegel argued that to go alone without the US, Europe would require a military of perhaps 300,000 people, military spending of 3.5% of economic output, and a rapid stockpile of ammunition.
“To prevent the rapid Russian breakthrough of Balticus, for example, a reliable European deterrent would require a minimum of 1,400 tanks, 2,000 infantry combat vehicles and 700 pieces of artillery,” the study argued. . “This is more combat power than is present in the French, German, Italian and British army combined.”
Latte is one of those who emphasized that moving forward without the United States is not practical in the short term given how important it is to modern defense capabilities.
However, some European leaders, particularly French President Emmanuel Macron, have called for great push for Europe to take care of its own defenses within the NATO alliance. Now, European leaders like Friedrich Merz, who are expected to become Germany's next prime minister after Sunday's election, are questioning whether the NATO alliance is also reliable.
Macron said he plans to visit Washington on Monday and plans to encourage Trump to “get weaker” Putin. British Prime Minister Kiel will also visit the White House later in the week.
Last year, Macron came to the idea of placing Ukrainian European troops on the ground after a settlement to end the battle. But Starmer said it only works if the US acts as a “backstop.”
Trump says there will be no US troops on the ground in Ukraine, but he has so far not ruled out the possibility of an American air cover. “Backstop” commits to the US to come to the military aid of European peacekeepers if attacked by Russia or someone else, and rarely shows that Trump supports it .
Furthermore, Putin made it clear that he would not accept the presence of European troops on Ukraine's ground in the settlement.
For now, part of Europe's priorities is to make sure you're sitting at the table as a peace agreement is being built.
“This is how we look at this table of negotiations. Ukraine is part of Europe, Europe, the US and Russia,” Zelensky said at the forum on Sunday.
The continent is facing a major problem as Europe is thinking about the future in a more indifferent America.
Expanding Europe's military capabilities will cost a lot of money and may require joint funding. European Union leaders can do many things, from issuing common debt to allowing more wiggle rooms within the EU deficit rules when space is needed to fund military spending. We are investigating sex. Such issues are both in the Council of Europe's March 6 meeting and the much-anticipated March “whitepaper” of the European Union, which will make recommendations on necessary investments, particularly in the European military industry. may play a prominent role in. . And they could dominate the debate among European leaders in the coming days and weeks.
But for now, the leaders are working on the reality of America's sudden turn and what it means to them and Ukraine.
Kaha Karas, the top EU diplomat, said Trump's statement was “very interesting” while attending a diplomatic meeting on Monday morning.
When she heard that Trump called Zelensky a dictator, she said, “I was sure he made a mistake and mixed them together,” and said to the Ukrainian leader for the Russian leader. He said he confused me.
When asked if Trump was active in the Russian disinformation bubble, Karas, traveling to Washington on Tuesday, replied, “It's clear that the Russian story is very strongly expressed.”
Belgian Foreign Minister Maxim Pribott used even stronger language when he entered a gathering in Brussels on Monday.
“That's completely unacceptable,” he said, “To put both countries on the same footing – there are invaders, there are victims.”
