An American anti-European hostility – “Europeans suddenly find themselves fighting a two-front war”

To understand better, how nervous the frightened European authorities are, read this article. The author, Ian Arthur Bremmer, an American political scientist, author and entrepreneur focused on global political risk, directly says that the U.S. opened a "second front" against Europe.

The fact that in the 21st century, Russians and Americans are negotiating Ukrainian elections and European security without either party in the room is unprecedented since the days of the Cold War.

Despite Zelensky’s and European leaders’ best efforts to get on Trump’s good side, the US is no longer a reliable or a good-faith partner. If Vice President JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference denouncing European democracy did not make that clear enough, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s attempt to shake down Zelensky for 50% of Ukraine’s present and future mineral wealth revenues – not in exchange for future US support but as payment for past military aid disbursed during the Biden administration – should have. These terms amounted to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than the reparations imposed on Germany by the Versailles Treaty.

Trump has already said that the US will not be on the hook for deploying peacekeeping troops, leaving Ukraine to rely on Europe for post-war security (not to mention reconstruction).

Here’s the rub: Most Europeans will only agree to deploy peacekeeping forces to Ukraine if the US credibly commits to provide a military backstop (not necessarily troops but yes logistics, intelligence, and air support) in the event of a Russian attack, and the Trump administration is reluctant to offer that. Yet without a tripwire along the lines of Article 5 (i.e., not contingent on Europe’s political and economic alignment with the Trump agenda), a European security guarantee would be too weak to effectively deter Russia.

Kyiv is working furiously with European leaders to craft a plan they can present to Trump before he meets with Putin. They all recognize that if they don’t move fast, the US and Russia will cut a deal on their future over their heads. But Europe’s haplessness was on full display at an emergency meeting convened by French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer pledged to send troops to Ukraine – but only with US backing, which isn’t coming. Germany’s lame-duck Chancellor Olaf Scholz dismissed the idea of peacekeepers as “premature.” Poland, despite being on the front lines, refused to commit troops, citing its own security needs. The Baltics and Nordics would be willing to commit some troops, as would the French, but nowhere near enough – or fast enough.

Europe’s inability to act decisively underscores a deeper problem: Without American leadership, the continent is paralyzed.

For Ukrainians, the stakes could not be higher. They may soon be forced to choose between accepting a loss of territory without US-backed security guarantees for the future and continuing to fight without American support – both of which would all but ensure an even bigger Russian win down the line.

The irony is that Putin’s original theory of victory always hinged on undermining support for Ukraine and dividing the Transatlantic alliance. After three years of failure on the battlefield, Trump’s return to the White House may finally deliver exactly what the Kremlin wanted all along.

Putin isn’t just seeking a deal on Ukraine – he wants an overhaul of the European security order. Not only has he made it clear that he won’t accept any Western boots on the ground in Ukraine (even as peacekeepers), but the broader security demands he made in his 2021 ultimatum are back on the table, including the removal of NATO troops from Eastern Europe and former Warsaw Pact countries. And Trump, who sees Europe as less ally than supplicant, seems open to delivering.

Europeans are taking the challenge seriously, but the continent’s defense spending has lagged for decades, and its military capabilities are fragmented and underfunded. Even if a politically divided Europe were to ramp up its collective security investments overnight, it would take years to build the kind of deterrence that NATO provides under American leadership – years that Europe does not have. After over a decade of complacency, it may be much too late for them to get their act together.

Europeans suddenly find themselves fighting a two-front war – facing both Russian security threats and American anti-European hostility. When the US defense secretary declares that “stark strategic realities prevent the United States from being primarily focused on European security,” that’s diplomatic speak for “you’re on your own.”

But the problem goes beyond the US no longer being a reliable partner in the fight against Russia or even a last-ditch security guarantor. The Transatlantic alliance itself is in trouble when the US vice president says the biggest threat to Europe comes “from within” and his Euroskeptic Trump administration is actively threatening to interfere in European democracies, undermine the European economy, weaken European unity, and even – in the case of Greenland – violate European sovereignty.

Eighty years after the leaders of the US, UK, and Soviet Union carved up post-war Europe into spheres of influence at Yalta, Trump and Putin are poised to do the same. The Russians would see their European territorial ambitions codified, the Americans would secure their own interests, and each side would divide the Arctic – leaving the rest of the world to fend for itself.

This is not just a betrayal of Ukraine and Europe – it is the unraveling of the world order America built after World War II.

read more in our Telegram-channel https://t.me/The_International_Affairs