Who Really Defends Europe — Ukraine or the U.S.?

by J.D. Bindenagel and Stephan Richter

Forget any further displays of European concern about Venezuela. Now that the Trump administration has once again threatened to seize Greenland, it is high time for the Europeans to wake up.

Europe is defended by Ukraine

First and foremost, all Europeans must understand that, at least as long as the Trump administration is in office, their most effective defense will not be provided by the United States but by Ukraine. That is true in a far more comprehensive sense than has been considered until now.

Ukraine is far more than just a tripwire on Putin’s march to Berlin. In addition to the Polish army, it is the only bulwark, especially for the Germans, given their weak military.

The German left still in denial

Incomprehensibly, the junior partner in the German government, the SPD, has still not come to grips with the realities of the world.

For example, it has resolutely resisted the introduction of an effective draft mechanism, which is urgently needed to rebuild the country’s military backbone. It is still fancying to find ways to accommodate Putin’s Russia. One reason for that is the SPD’s unwillingness to do what is necessary for Germany’s defenses across all dimensions, including even civil defense.

Defend the welfare state, not the country

Even in light of Europe’s shaky security environment, Germany’s Social Democrats remain unwilling to move beyond their increasingly untenable obsession with further expanding the German social welfare state.

For proof, look no further than the thematic outline for the SPD’s current grand project, the development of a new party platform. Among the ten project dimensions, you will look in vain for any focus on defense policy, security policy, or even foreign policy in the classic sense.

How to counter Putin?

That is truly troubling, given Vladimir Putin’s clearly stated imperial interests on the European continent.

After all, the Russian President has made no secret of the fact that he considers any place where Russians live as Russian territory. That would include, for example, the heart of Berlin.

Despite the fact that Russia is an economic midget and, as proven by the grave daily attacks on the civilian population all over Ukraine, a failed state in any civilized sense, Europe is far weaker at present than it should be.

Worrying or hoping for 2029?

European officials, including the German defense minister, often make reference to the fact that Europe must be sufficiently armed by 2029 to defend itself against Russia as a military aggressor.

While some take that goal seriously, other European nations seem to take the real meaning of 2029 in a different direction. Their hope is that Europe may be able to hobble along with “only” hybrid attacks on its territory until that date, before a more partnership-oriented U.S. administration would take office in early 2029.

The military-industrial complex to the rescue

No question, Europe currently lives at Putin’s mercy to an unacceptable degree. And worries about the reliability of the American partnership in defending Europe are very justified under Trump.

Against this backdrop, it is vital to consider the peaceful(!) purposes of the much-maligned U.S. military-industrial complex. At this juncture, given the madness of the Trump administration, that industry’s material interests in continuing to sell arms and co-produce them with Europeans are probably the only Article 5-like guarantee from the U.S. side that the Europeans can rely on

A Trump Security Guarantee for Ukraine is an illusion

NATO member states still hope that Donald Trump will uphold the U.S. security guarantee to Ukraine.

But hope is not a strategy, as the history of the Budapest Memorandum and the Minsk Agreements shows that Putin will break every agreement.

Ukrainians and Europeans are thus barking up the wrong tree if they think “security guarantees” are even intended to deter further Russian aggression.

Donald Trump and Steve Witkoff are playing with “security guarantees” solely as an inducement to create some kind of political cover for the only thing they care about — doing commercial deals with Putin’s Russia.

The globally hyper-muscular Trump is a total wimp on Russia

The reality is that Trump has never shown the slightest willingness to confront Mr. Putin’s Russia directly, let alone militarily.

In Trump’s draft agreement, the conditions for a security guarantee for Ukraine would apply to a “significant, deliberate and sustained” armed attack by Russia, qualifiers that would allow Mr. Trump to decline to back up the guarantee if he deemed a new attack insignificant, accidental or temporary.

The consequences for Europe

Europe faces its security alone. The European future rests on its unity amid the diversity of its nations. Frankly, only the Ukrainians have halted Putin’s special military operation.

Ukraine has provided the deterrent needed to stop Russia until NATO members in Europe can build the military capacity for NATO’s deterrence.

What does this mean for Europe? European security depends on Ukraine, not the United States to deter Russian aggression.

Europeans will face increased hybrid attacks. If Europe wants to deter Russian forces from advancing into Europe, it must have the fortitude to sustain Ukrainian deterrence and increase arms deliveries, especially air defense and long-range missiles.

A matter of self-defense, really

To defend itself, Europe must do everything in its power to help Ukraine defend itself with arms and economic assistance.

Europe must also decide how to help Ukraine defend itself against Chechnya-like destruction, even if that means long-range missiles or Taurus.

It is well-known that failure to stop Putin will result in a wave of migration as refugees from Ukraine will sweep across Europe.

*J.D. Bindenagel is a former U.S. Ambassador and founding Henry Kissinger Professor at Bonn University. He is currently Senior Nonresident Fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the U.S. Stephan Richter is the Publisher and “Editor-in-Chief of The Globalist, and Director of the Global Ideas Center, a global network of authors and analysts.

**Published first on The Globalist