Europe's thin red line in Ukraine

Europe is facing an existential crisis.

For now, Ukraine is ground zero in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war against the West. If Russia is allowed to achieve a victory — either on the battlefield or at the negotiating table — then Europe’s thin red line in Eastern Europe will become even thinner.

To shield itself from the Russian menace in the East, Europe, since the end of World War II, has always looked west to the U.S. Either conventionally as part of NATO or under the aegis of Washington’s nuclear umbrella.

Those options are in danger of disappearing — or at least of being significantly reduced. President Trump is signaling to Europe that he no longer views defending the continent as his paramount strategic priority.

There are signs Europe is waking up to this new reality. On Sunday, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk pointed out what he called "a paradox" before leaving for an emergency summit in London. He noted that “500 million Europeans [are asking] 300 million Americans to protect them from 140 million Russians.” Tusk argued that Europe “must take greater responsibility for the continent’s security.

That is President Trump’s position, in a nutshell. And it is why his administration is calling for NATO member-states to increase defense spending to 5 percent of GDP.

Last Friday’s dust-up in the Oval Office between Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has the potential to undermine European security in the short term and jeopardize it in the long term.

On Tuesday, the Trump administration acknowledged that it had egregiously suspended military aid to Ukraine as a result. On Wednesday, Trump officials admitted this included pausing intelligence sharing as well. It is utter madness that these levels of national security decisions are largely being made as a result of a disagreement over a suit, or over whether or not Ukraine has said thanks enough times to a petulant Vance’s liking.

But here we are. And so too is Europe.

This makes the €800 billion “ReArm Europe” plan, proposed on Sunday by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, all the more urgent if Europe is to help stop Russia from crossing the thin red line in Ukraine and breaching the underbelly of Eastern Europe.

The threat looms now — not four years from now. Europe must enable Ukraine to win now so it does not have to face a Russian aggressor in the near future.

Von der Leyen’s proposal is essentially spread out over four years. The large majority, €650 billion, would come from European Union member states increasing their defense spending to 3 percent of GDP. The other €150 billion would come in the form of EU loan guarantees.

That is a good collective start for defending against future Russian threats. However, it is not nearly fast enough to backstop Ukraine today, given Trump’s arbitrary suspension of arms and intelligence sharing.

The fight for Europe’s immediate security is now, and it is being contested in Kursk, Russia and along a 600-mile front in Eastern Ukraine.

Europeans, fairly or not, need to understand that they are facing a future Russia that is now operating as a full wartime economy. Presently, the International Institute for Strategic Studies’s Military Balance Report estimates that Russia is spending $146 billion, or 6.7 percent of GDP. That may seem small in comparison to Europe’s $457 billion, but in terms of purchasing power, Russia is actually outpacing Europe on defense spending. When purchasing parity is applied, the Military Balance Report estimates that the Kremlin is spending the equivalent of $462 billion.

That buys a lot of weapons, ammunition, and soldiers from the likes of North Korea, Iran and Chechnya.

Europe is falling behind. And inexplicably, Europe continues indirectly helping to fund Putin’s war against Ukraine. Europe and the United Kingdom have, since the war’s beginning, spent far more in the aggregate purchasing Russian oil and liquified gas than they have put toward Ukraine’s military and economic needs.

Since 2022, the EU has provided €118 billion in assistance to Ukraine. The UK has sent roughly €8 billion. According to the Russia Fossil Tracker website, Europe combined over that same period has purchased €206 billion of Russian energy — 50 percent on oil, 48 percent on liquified gas and 2 percent on coal.

At that rate, Europe is arguably funding half of Russia’s current defense budget. Brussels is not only harming Ukraine but foolishly helping to fund a Russian military that one day might be used to attack Europe.

Europe’s days of having it both ways are over. Its underfunding of its military commitments are coming back to haunt — and if Ukraine loses or is allowed to fall back under the Russian sphere of influence, Europe’s future security will be inexcusably undermined.

Just talking the talk is no longer enough. Europe must immediately begin walking the walk. Especially given Trump’s pivot away from London, Brussels and Kyiv.

Europe’s time to lead is now. However, there is no clear sense of who among the European leaders will step up to the plate.

French President Emmanuel Macron vied for that role late Wednesday. In televised speech to the nation, he proposed using France’s nuclear arsenal as a deterrent to protect Europe from Russia. Asserting that Russia cannot be trusted to adhere to a ceasefire, he also insisted that Moscow and Washington not be allowed to decide the future of the European continent.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and von der Leyen are two other possible candidates. If the former, then perhaps King Charles II can play a key role behind the scenes, given Trump’s high regard for him.

Hopefully Trump will come around. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz signaled on Wednesday that he might after discussions between Washington and Kyiv. But Europe cannot wait. It must act.

London and Brussels must recognize one more thing. Tusk’s paradox almost got it right, but not quite. Currently, Europe is asking 39 million Ukrainians to defend the European continent from Putin’s war on the West.

The 340 million Americans need to understand this too. For now, it is Europe’s thin red line in Ukraine, but if Ukraine falls, Europe will become our thin red line, and potentially we will find ourselves in harm’s way.

Mark Toth writes on national security and foreign policy. Col. (Ret.) Jonathan E. Sweet served 30 years as an Army intelligence officer.

Topics

Ukraine Is Europe’s War Now

Ukraine wants a peace deal — it just doesn’t want to end up destroyed by peace’s terms.
The New York Times - 3d
Trump and Europe Clashed Over Ukraine

Also, the virtuoso Roberta Flack died at 88. Here’s the latest at the end of Monday.
The New York Times - Feb. 24
Now is the time for Europe really to step up on Ukraine

The future of the post-1945 security order hangs in the balance
Financial Times - Feb. 24
Europe and US clash over Ukraine in G7 and UN

EU and Trump administration differ over blaming Russia in rival draft resolutions
Financial Times - Feb. 24
Europe Is Left With Hard Choices as Trump Sours on Ukraine

European leaders have been working to support Ukraine and beef up their own defenses. But the blowup between President Trump and Ukraine’s president on Friday made those goals more urgent.
The New York Times - 4d
Can Europe secure peace in Ukraine without the US?

With relations between Washington and Kyiv in tatters, we examine what can realistically be achieved for Zelenskyy. Russia-Ukraine war – latest news updates Britain and France are trying, with ...
The Guardian - 3d
Europe’s rescue mission on Ukraine: keep Trump engaged

Continent’s biggest powers gathered at London summit to salvage something from crumbling postwar order
Financial Times - 3d
Monday Briefing: Europe Pledges to Support Ukraine

Plus, remote taste testing.
The New York Times - 3d