This past week, I had the opportunity to attend two events where Ukraine was a major topic: the first was the Annual Conference for UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE), whose latest report delves into the current state of UK-EU relations. Among the various panels, one discussion that particularly stuck with me was on 'The Future of Europe'. This panel dissected the shifting geopolitical landscape and the myriad factors poised to fundamentally alter the nature of the European Union and its external relationships.
I was also invited to attend an event organised by UK Friends of Ukraine to support their #UkraineMustWin campaign that has been launched during the UK’s general election. It was heartening to witness a diverse array of speakers from the three major political parties unanimously express their unwavering support for Ukraine in its struggle against Russian imperialism.
My attendance, coupled with other recent developments, has underscored for me the pressing relevance of examining the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and its broader implications. The war in Ukraine is not just a regional skirmish but a significant conflict with profound ramifications for the future of Europe. It has already reshaped alliances, influenced political dynamics, and prompted urgent discussions about security, sovereignty, and the very ideals that underpin the European project.
Dreams into nightmares
The war in Ukraine has dramatically altered the geopolitical landscape, signaling a definitive end to the liberal post-Cold War order. Over recent years, we have observed a gradual retreat from globalisation and the once-prevailing belief that liberal free trade would naturally lead to political liberalism and democratisation. This paradigm shift has been starkly highlighted by the weaponisation of economic interdependence, most notably through Russia's manipulation of natural gas supplies to Central and Eastern Europe. As war rages on Europe's borders, the very model of post-war prosperity that promoted the expansion and integration of European nations into the European Union is being fundamentally reshaped.
Historically, the EU has been a project based on cooperation over competition, with economic integration serving as the cornerstone of peace and stability—designed to avert the horrors of another full-scale war in Europe. The promise of economic benefits and shared prosperity lured many countries into the fold. Part of this allure was the ability to outsource security guarantees to the United States, which acted as Europe’s "protector of last resort". However, the looming possibility of a second Trump administration following the upcoming election—made evermore likely following Joe Biden's appalling debate performance—has cast serious doubts on the reliability of the US as a long-term ally.
Trump's first term was marked by a clear disdain for abiding by NATO’s commitments and a transactional approach to international alliances. His recent dismissive comments about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's requests for aid—calling him the “greatest salesman ever”—further underscore the fears that a Trump 2.0 administration might totally abandon Ukraine to Russian aggression.
This scenario must force Europe to reconsider its security dependencies and recognise that the Americans might not be the reliable partner they once were.
This recognition necessitates a profound transformation within the EU. Originally conceived as a peace project based on economic cooperation, the EU must now incorporate a robust security dimension into its strategy. This involves developing a defence-based industrial strategy and moving away from prioritising liberal free trade arrangements. Such a shift requires a complete reprogramming of Brussels' entire DNA, a task that is significantly more challenging than it sounds.
The core principles that have driven European integration—free markets and reliance on US security guarantees—are increasingly untenable in today's volatile geopolitical climate. The US, having reached a bipartisan consensus that China poses the greatest geostrategic threat to its interests, is pivoting towards Asia. This strategic realignment comes at a time when Europe's security is most at risk, complicating the transatlantic relationship and leaving Europe to fend for itself.
Europe must now grapple with the reality that it can no longer depend on American military might to safeguard its interests. This realisation acts as a unifying force, paradoxically driven by the twin threats posed by Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. As Europe faces the prospect of an unreliable US ally and a revanchist Russia, the necessity for a self-sufficient and resilient European defence strategy becomes paramount.
Creating such a strategy involves more than just policy shifts; it requires a fundamental change in mindset across the continent. European nations must invest in their own defence capabilities and infrastructure, fostering greater cooperation and integration within the EU on security matters. This will likely involve significant financial investments, political will, and a willingness to redefine the traditional roles and responsibilities within the EU framework.
Moreover, this shift will impact the EU's approach to trade and economic policy. The focus will need to move from pure economic liberalism to a more balanced approach that considers strategic autonomy and security implications. This may lead to tighter controls on critical industries, increased investment in domestic production capacities, and a reevaluation of dependencies on external powers.
In essence, the war in Ukraine has forced Europe to confront its vulnerabilities and reassess its strategic priorities. The liberal post-Cold War order, characterised by globalisation and economic interdependence, is giving way to a new era where security and strategic autonomy take precedence. The EU must adapt to these new realities, transforming itself into a union capable of defending its interests and values independently.
As Europe navigates this complex transformation, it is clear that the challenges ahead are immense. Yet, this moment also presents an opportunity for the EU to emerge stronger and more unified. By addressing its security dependencies and embracing a more strategic approach to its economic and political policies, Europe can ensure that it remains a key player on the global stage, capable of defending its own future in an increasingly uncertain world.
The changing face of Europe
The evolving security landscape in Europe demands strong leadership and a unified approach from the European Union. Historically, the EU has prided itself on treating all 27 member states as equals, however, in practice, some states are more equal than others.
The Franco-German axis often drives European policymaking. Whenever integration has progressed, it has typically been on the back of unilateral decisions by France and Germany, which then brought the rest of the union along. In more politically stable times, the strength of these two nations provided comfort and guidance, however, the continent is currently experiencing a significant political realignment that challenges this traditional dynamic.
Issues such as rising immigration and the transition to green energy have sparked backlash across Europe, particularly from parties on the far-left and far-right. The latest parliamentary elections saw significant losses for the Greens and moderate centrist groups, while far-right parties made unprecedented gains. In Germany, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) has secured a sizeable bloc of support, particularly among the youth, threatening the already fragile coalition government in Berlin. Meanwhile in France, President Emmanuel Macron's decision to call a snap election has paved the way for Marine Le Pen's far-right to potentially dominate parliamentary elections.
This political turbulence raises critical questions about the future leadership of the EU. Both France and Germany, traditionally the main pillars of the union, are becoming increasingly unpredictable and may soon be governed by parties that are sceptical of the European project. This instability makes it uncertain who will provide the necessary leadership for the rest of the EU member states.
The potential return of Donald Trump to the US presidency exacerbates these concerns. Trump's first term was marked by a clear disregard for international commitments, and his potential second term could further embolden national populism across Europe. Leaders like Marine Le Pen in France and Giorgia Meloni in Italy, currently somewhat restrained, could feel free to pursue more radical agendas, drawing inspiration from Trump's nationalist rhetoric.
We have already seen the effects of such populist sentiments in the UK, where Nigel Farage has made a seismic return to British politics to lead the insurgent Reform UK party. Farage recently stated in a BBC interview that he believes the EU and NATO “provoked” Russia into invading Ukraine and urged President Zelenskiy to seek a peace deal to avoid further loss of life. Such statements echo Russian propaganda and reflect a worrying trend among Europe's far-right parties.
In Germany, the AfD's stance during Zelenskiy's state visit, where they chose to vacate the Bundestag during his speech, further underscores the potential for far-right parties to undermine European solidarity. These actions suggest a willingness among Europe's extreme parties to align with Russian interests, complicating the EU's response to the conflict in Ukraine and broader geopolitical challenges.
Given this political volatility, the EU must find ways to ensure stable and cohesive leadership. The traditional reliance on the Franco-German axis may no longer be sufficient. Instead, the EU needs to develop a more distributed leadership model that can adapt to the changing political landscape. This could involve greater empowerment of other member states, fostering a more collaborative approach to decision-making, and reinforcing the importance of shared values and objectives.
Moreover, the EU must address the root causes of the political realignment that is empowering far-right and far-left parties. This involves tackling issues such as economic inequality, social integration, and the impacts of globalisation and green energy transitions. By addressing these challenges head-on, the EU can reduce the appeal of extremist parties and create a more stable political environment.
At the same time, the EU needs to strengthen its security and defence capabilities. The war in Ukraine has highlighted the limitations of relying on the US for security guarantees. Europe must develop its own robust defence strategy, which includes increased defence spending, enhanced military cooperation among member states, and the development of a European defence industry. This will require significant investment and a shift in policy priorities but is essential for ensuring the EU's long-term security and autonomy.
The current geopolitical landscape presents significant challenges for the EU. The traditional leadership of France and Germany is under threat from domestic political instability and the rise of far-right parties. The potential return of Trump to the US presidency adds further uncertainty. To navigate these challenges, the EU must develop a more flexible and collaborative leadership model, address the underlying issues driving political extremism, and enhance its own defence capabilities. By doing so, the EU can ensure it remains a strong and unified entity capable of addressing the security challenges of the 21st century.
A path to peace
The EU faces significant challenges, yet it also stands at a pivotal moment that could shape its future for decades to come.
This week, the European Commission has been invited to continue accession talks with Ukraine and Moldova, both of which applied to join the union in 2022 following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. These talks represent not only an opportunity for the EU to expand but also a chance to reinforce its commitment to democracy, stability, and security in the region.
Ukraine and Moldova will be presented with a “negotiating framework” outlining the reforms and legislation they need to adopt before being deemed ready to join the EU. For Ukraine, adherence to the values listed in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union is paramount. These values include respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights, including the rights of minorities. However, Ukraine's ability to meet these requirements is under scrutiny, especially given the enormous strains the war has placed on its economy and society.
The conflict has caused hundreds of billions of dollars in damage to Ukraine’s economic output. Industrial regions and major corporations have been decimated, key ports blocked, and millions of professionals have fled the country. The mobilisation of manpower, initially through volunteers but increasingly through conscription, has also raised constitutional concerns. Sustaining the military effort requires a significant boost in recruitment, with military experts suggesting that the Ukrainian army needs to triple its intake of recruits to maintain current levels of defence. To address this, Kyiv has sought assistance from NATO partners for training recruits within Ukraine.
Despite these challenges, there is a strategic path forward. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced in Kyiv on May 14th that the United States plans to sign a ten-year bilateral security agreement with Ukraine. Alongside similar agreements with other partners, this move signals to Russia that Ukraine is backed by strong international support, even if NATO membership is not immediately forthcoming.
These agreements are crucial in deterring Russian aggression by demonstrating a Western commitment to Ukraine’s long-term security.
Deterring Russia effectively involves three critical elements: denial, punishment, and credibility. Denial means building up Ukraine’s armed forces and defence industry to degrade Russia’s military capacity and deter future invasions. Punishment requires Western militaries to develop contingency plans to impose significant costs on Russia if it breaches a ceasefire agreement. Credibility, the cornerstone of these deterrence strategies, depends on Western nations committing resources to these plans in legally binding forms. This is where the security agreements with the United States and other NATO allies become essential.
A durable peace for Ukraine hinges on a clear vision for its long-term security. The Kremlin must recognise that subjugating Kyiv is not achievable, now or in the future. Only when Russia understands this reality might it engage in meaningful negotiations and accept Ukraine’s sovereignty.
“I am grateful to everyone on our team who worked hard to make this historic step a reality. Millions of Ukrainians, and indeed generations of our people, are realizing their European dream. Ukraine is returning to Europe, where it has belonged for centuries, as a full-fledged member of the European community.”
Achieving this vision will likely take years, if not decades, and may require a combination of military efforts and diplomatic negotiations. However, history shows that regimes like Putin’s are not eternal, and internal pressures could eventually force a reevaluation of Russian ambitions.
In the interim, Ukraine needs unwavering support from its Western allies. Ukrainians must be confident in their partners' commitment, regardless of the war's trajectory, including the possibility of pursuing a ceasefire if it becomes strategically beneficial. Simultaneously, the Russian leadership must see that its leverage over Kyiv diminishes as Ukraine's capabilities grow, bolstered by a steadfast Western commitment to the country’s security.
This strategic approach—building Ukraine's defence and deterrence capacities while signaling the West’s enduring support—is the most viable path to creating a lasting peace in Europe.
Security guarantees are essential to protect Ukraine from future Russian aggression and, by extension, to ensure the long-term security of Europe. The failure to prevent Russian imperialism from advancing beyond Ukraine into Poland and the Baltic states would test NATO's collective security under Article 5. In the absence of a reliable bulwark in the US, it is crucial for the EU to prevent such a scenario to safeguard its stability and longevity.
Ukraine and Moldova's accession to the EU is more than just an expansion; it is a strategic imperative. It sends a clear message of resistance to aggression and a commitment to democratic values. While the road to accession will be challenging, involving significant reforms and the resolution of constitutional and economic issues, the potential benefits for European stability and security are immense. By integrating Ukraine and Moldova, the EU not only supports these nations in their struggle for sovereignty but also fortifies the European project against future threats.
Timothy Snyder argues that if we allow Ukraine to be defeated by Russia, the consequences will extend far beyond Ukraine's borders. A Russian victory would enable Moscow to harness Ukraine’s economic resources, military capabilities, and manpower, turning these assets against NATO. This scenario risks escalating into a broader conflict, potentially igniting another world war.
As we consider these parallels and the stakes involved, it becomes clear that supporting Ukraine is not merely a matter of regional stability but a critical component of global security. Ensuring Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence serves as a bulwark against further Russian expansionism and a safeguard for the principles of democracy and the rule of law that underpin the European project.
The lessons of 1938 remind us of the perils of appeasement and the necessity of collective resolve. By standing with Ukraine, Europe can prevent history from repeating itself and secure a peaceful and prosperous future for the continent.