View from London: Europe has had its bleakest week since the fall of the Iron Curtain – the implications have yet to sink in

The past week has been the bleakest in Europe since the fall of the Iron Curtain, ‘The Economist’ panics.

Ukraine is being sold out, Russia is being rehabilitated and, under Donald Trump, America can no longer be counted on to come to Europe’s aid in wartime. The implications for Europe’s security are grave, but they have yet to sink in to the continent’s leaders and people. The old world needs a crash course on how to wield hard power in a lawless era, or it will fall victim to the new world disorder.

Speaking in Munich last week, America’s vice-president, J.D. Vance, offered a taste of how the home of fine wines, classical architecture and welfare cheques faces humiliation, when he ridiculed Europe as decadent and undemocratic. Its leaders have been excluded from peace talks between the White House and the Kremlin, which began officially in Riyadh on February 18th. However, the unfolding crisis goes far beyond insults and diplomatic niceties.

Mr Trump appears ready to walk away from Ukraine which he falsely blames for the war. Calling its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a “dictator”, Mr Trump warned him that he had “better move fast or he is not going to have a country left”. America may try to impose an unstable ceasefire on Ukraine with only weak security guarantees that limit its right to re-arm.

That is bad enough, but Europe’s worst nightmare is bigger than Ukraine. Mr Trump intends to rehabilitate Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, ditching a long-standing policy to isolate him. Without any obvious geopolitical benefit to America, he is angling to restore diplomatic relations. He may soon be feted at a glitzy summit. Offering up concessions in Riyadh, Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, gushed about co-operation and “historic economic and investment opportunities”. (Trump Tower Red Square?)

Mr Trump’s shakedown of Europe and pandering to Russia have cast doubt on America’s commitment to defend nato come what may. One fear is that American forces could be cut, or pulled back to leave eastern Europe exposed. Mr Trump’s first and deepest instinct will be to ask what is in it for him. He is due to meet Britain’s prime minister and the French president next week. But don’t take that as a signal that this is just clever talk from a dealmaker: Mr Trump’s readiness to trade everything away is precisely the problem. nato’s deterrence rests on the certainty that if one member is attacked the rest will come to its aid. Doubt is corrosive; it leaves Europe dangerously exposed.

Let us spell out the reality Europe faces. It is an indebted, ageing continent that is barely growing and cannot defend itself or project hard power. Global rules on trade, borders, defence and technology are being ripped up. If Russia invades one of the Baltic states, or uses disinformation and sabotage to destabilise eastern Europe, what precisely will Europe do?

So far the answer is to curl up in a defensive crouch. After the maga onslaught, a group of European leaders hastily met in Paris on February 17th but managed only to advertise their differences. Three years after Russia’s invasion Europe has not raised military spending nearly enough. It is trapped in an obsolete worldview of multilateral treaties and shared values.

All this sounds outlandish. nato has been the world’s most successful alliance: its disappearance is hard to imagine. But the old things have passed away; all things have become new. Europe needs to face up to that before it is too late.

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