The hugs of European leaders for Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a London summit this weekend could not have contrasted more sharply with the Ukrainian president’s dressing down in the White House on Friday. One upside of the Oval Office showdown is that it seems to have served as a galvanising moment — though there had been plenty already — in persuading Europe it must act. An outline strategy, if not yet a fleshed-out plan, has begun to take shape. But even greater speed and urgency is needed. However much they may hope to keep the US on board, European leaders and Canada must prepare for the real possibility that Donald Trump could cut off military support to Ukraine, leaving Kyiv and its non-US allies on their own.
The first step should be to accelerate European military support and funding as rapidly as possible, to strengthen Ukraine’s negotiating hand and ability to deter any future Russian aggression. More can still be done through joint European procurement to fill gaps in Ukraine’s armoury. European capitals should be ready, too, to dig even deeper into their own dwindling stockpiles; the front line of Europe’s security today runs through Ukraine.
In parallel, they should expand the model pioneered by Denmark of financing production by Ukraine’s arms industry, which has transformed its capabilities since 2022. That could enable a big boost in production of drones and missiles — helping to turn Ukraine into what the EU’s Ursula von der Leyen called an indigestible “steel porcupine”.
The second prong of the European approach being developed by the UK’s Sir Keir Starmer and France’s Emmanuel Macron is to elaborate plans for a multinational stabilisation force for postwar Ukraine, and cajole partners to sign up. Though many west European militaries are badly depleted and some are reluctant to commit troops, a coalition of the willing ought to be able to assemble a force of sufficient size.
Kyiv’s non-US allies are rightly working, too, on their own blueprint for a long-term peace deal that would better guarantee Ukraine’s, and Europe’s, security. European capitals have leverage with Moscow via hefty sanctions that Vladimir Putin wants to see lifted. The bulk of Russia’s $300bn frozen foreign exchange reserves are held in Europe, too. Though leaders have shied away from seizing the capital, the arguments are shifting in favour of doing so to help fund Ukraine’s defence.
Armed with solid commitments to bear much more of the defence burden of themselves and Kyiv, European leaders should engage in concerted efforts to persuade the Trump administration to join a joint peace effort — and to provide at least logistical support and a US “backstop” to security arrangements in Ukraine. They should make clear they fully share the US president’s desire to end the war, differing only in how to achieve this and make it lasting. Some in the Trump universe suggest the president is cunningly trying to peel Russia away from its partnership with China, in a reverse of Richard Nixon’s cold war manoeuvre. But the logic of this is undermined if it causes a rift with America’s erstwhile biggest economic and military ally — Europe — and leaves it bogged down in defending itself against a revanchist Kremlin.
Concerted European diplomacy with the Trump administration is still worth undertaking, even if there is no certainty that the US president will heed the entreaties. Ukrainians are already under no illusion that they may soon confront a choice between accepting a US-imposed deal that is a quasi-capitulation, or to fight on without America. Kyiv’s non-US allies would then face heavy moral and strategic pressure to step in and replace US military aid as far as they could. They can delay no longer in preparing for all such outcomes.