logo
Europe must prepare to defend itself as US support for Nato wanes

Europe must prepare to defend itself as US support for Nato wanes

Independent24-02-2025

Encouragingly, and with the full spirit of the entente cordiale speeding them on, the French president and the British prime minister will be delivering much the same message to Donald Trump when he makes time for them at the White House this week.
For all the complexities of the situation, Emmanuel Macron – and, on Thursday, Sir Keir Starmer – will say something very simple and straightforward to the president: Ukraine must have a seat at the negotiating table. The argument, which should be irrefutable, is that there can be no lasting peace in Ukraine without Ukraine.
If the two men are fortunate, the president of the United States will listen to them, offer something in the way of a promise to consult Volodymyr Zelensky – and not lose his temper. If Mr Macron and Sir Keir find their coordinated diplomatic efforts making further, unexpected progress, then they might even get what Sir Keir calls a 'backstop' American security guarantee for Ukraine's new de facto border with Russia, with some restitution of Ukrainian lands.
Somewhere in this mix will fall a minerals deal on American exploitation of Ukraine's natural resources (at least the ones outside Russia's control) – after the deputy Ukrainian prime minister tweeted (and then briefly untweeted) the dramatic news that her country was about to sign a gigantic minerals deal with the Trump administration.
There will also be a form of words on Ukraine's status in relation to Nato and the European Union.
It is obviously worth a try – and however miserable such a denouement would be, it would be preferable to the kind of punishing Carthaginian settlement that President Putin and President Trump appear to be plotting.
However, the signs from the White House are not promising. President Trump has not yet chosen to belittle the British and French leaders with insulting nicknames and open contempt. In fact, he seems to like Sir Keir, at least. But he's not impressed, either, remarking that the pair 'haven't done anything' to end the war in Ukraine. As for President Zelensky having a seat at the table, Mr Trump opines that he has 'no cards' and 'I don't think he's very important to be in meetings'.
Now, though, a new leader has suddenly emerged with a rather more clear-sighted perspective. The likely next chancellor of Germany has recognised what has become all too depressingly apparent in the last week: America has switched sides.
Chancellor-designate Friedrich Merz is perfectly candid about the catastrophe that is befalling the free world. He has 'absolutely no illusions' about Mr Trump, who 'pretty much no longer cares about the fate of Europe …' Instead, he urges 'independence' from the US.
It's such a break with the geopolitics of the past 80 years that many, understandably enough, are unable or unwilling to come to terms with the changed reality. Yet Merz is entirely right. Even if Nato continues in existence, there can be no real certainty that the Americans would automatically and unconditionally honour their obligations under Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty. That famously declares that 'an attack on one is an attack on all' and was last activated by allies to assist the United States after the 9/11 attacks.
Would that be reciprocated now? Would President Trump threaten his friend Vladimir Putin with nuclear weapons just because Russian troops have made an incursion into Estonia? Would America fight to save Latvia? Bulgaria? Germany? How much would the bill from Washington be?
Things are, after all, transactional these days. The era is over when, as John F Kennedy put it, the United States 'shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty'. These days, it's the victims of aggression who are told to bear such burdens.
Lest anyone were under any such illusions, in his Valentine's Day speech, vice-president JD Vance brutally told Europe that the US does not share its values any longer. The US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, also told European allies that America's priorities lie elsewhere. It is not that Europe has drifted from America, but simply that America now favours Russia and echoes its propaganda. Mr Trump is a Russian ally, if not an asset.
Mr Merz is right to call for a Europe more able to defend itself and to take control of its defences. There is an emerging consensus to that effect. The continent has no choice; the geopolitical decision was made for it when Americans decided to put Mr Trump back in the White House.
Europe is vastly wealthier than Russia, it has the funds and the industrial resources to defend itself – if it wants to. In the short run, it could seize frozen Russian assets of about £300bn to prevent a Ukrainian collapse and to fund its reconstruction.
The French and British possess nuclear weapons. Ukraine could become a member of a new European defence and collective security pact – and a considerable asset. Combined, even the denuded armies, air forces and navies of the European powers would be formidable.
In the longer run, a coordinated defence structure to succeed Nato, with the necessary resources, will mean painful decisions about Europe's welfare states and levels of personal consumption – guns, not butter. It is an unfamiliar situation, not seen since the end of the Cold War.
Europe itself is going to have to pay a price and bear some burdens if it wishes to stay free. Has it the resolve to unite and succeed?

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump to send 9,000 migrants to terrorist detention center
Trump to send 9,000 migrants to terrorist detention center

Daily Mail​

time17 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Trump to send 9,000 migrants to terrorist detention center

Donald Trump is set to send thousands more illegal migrants to the infamous terrorist detention center at Guantanamo Bay starting this week in an acceleration of his mass deportation plan. In February, Trump deployed members of the Armed Forces to expand the capacity of a detention facility at the Cuba base. This week, at least 9,000 people are being identified for a potential transfer to the prison as early as Wednesday, Politico reported. Currently, around 500 migrants have been held at the jail known as 'Gitmo' for short stints in the past few months. These holds would also be temporary, as it would be a pit stop on the way to being deported to the country they came from. However, it would reportedly send a message to foreign countries that America is closed to migrants who aren't willing to go through the legal process. A document obtained by the outlet said that several hundred Europeans - including over a hundred Russians and Romanians - that has the State Department worried. 'The message is to shock and horrify people, to upset people, but we're allies,' an anonymous State Department official familiar with the plans said. The White House also faces legal challenges to the policy. The United States Navy announced that its combat ship USS St. Louis was moored at the Guantanamo Bay naval station and that the crew was supporting the expansion in February. Photographs showed members of the armed forces setting up army green tents and pounding large stakes into the ground to hold them up. The first phase of the expansion is expected to increase the center's capacity to 2,000, according to the Navy, with plans to expand it to fit 30,000 migrants. The detention facility is widely known as the location for detained terrorism suspects in recent years, but the Trump administration has decided to expand it's use for detaining migrants scheduled for deportation. Trump announced plans for his administration to detain as many as 30,000 high priority migrants with criminal records at the military base at Guantanamo Bay. Legal experts stress that detainees at Guantanamo Bay will still have legal rights afforded to them by the Constitution, as the Supreme Court defended terror suspects right to habeas corpus and a lawyer. 'The government's view at that time was that Guantanamo was sort of outside the parameters of the U.S. Constitution, and whoever was there had no rights, whatever. And the Supreme Court rejected that,' Eugene Fidell, Yale Law School military law expert noted. 'We don't want them coming back, so we're sending them to Guantanamo,' he said at the White House. Trump's border czar Tom Homan (pictured) told reporters the administration would expand the capacity of the facility as the military has planned to erect temporary tents. 'We're just going to expand upon that existing migrant center,' Homan said.

Chagossians want sovereignty deal to go ahead, says Mauritius legal adviser
Chagossians want sovereignty deal to go ahead, says Mauritius legal adviser

Rhyl Journal

time19 minutes ago

  • Rhyl Journal

Chagossians want sovereignty deal to go ahead, says Mauritius legal adviser

Philippe Sands KC, who has represented Mauritius in its legal battle with the UK since 2010, told a House of Lords committee he wanted to 'knock on the head this idea that all of the Chagossians were not involved' in negotiations over the deal. His comments came a day after a panel of UN experts urged Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to abandon the agreement reached with Mauritius last month and negotiate a new one. The panel, appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, said it was 'gravely concerned about the lack of meaningful participation of Chagossians in the processes that have led to the agreement'. The experts also criticised the continuing bar on Chagossians returning to Diego Garcia, the largest of the islands, because of the ongoing presence of a joint UK-US military base. On Wednesday, Mr Sands told the Lords International Relations and Defence Committee: 'To be clear, it is not the case that Chagossians had no role in the negotiations. 'I can tell you that Chagossians in Mauritius and Seychelles were deeply involved in consulting with successive prime ministers of Mauritius and they attended the hearings at the International Court of Justice.' He added: 'I want to really knock on the head this idea that all of the Chagossians were not involved in the various processes. That is simply not true. 'It is true, however, that the Chagossian community is divided and I respect that division.' Earlier, he had told the committee that, while some UK-based Chagossians wanted the islands to remain British territory, 'most in Mauritius and Seychelles have made very clear…that they wish this deal to go ahead'. The Chagossians were expelled from the islands between 1965 and 1973 to make way for the Diego Garcia base and have not been allowed to Mr Sands told peers the 'quid pro quo' for the military base remaining on Diego Garcia was Chagossians would be allowed to settle on the outer islands of the archipelago. The deal follows a 2019 advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice saying the islands should be handed over to Mauritius. As well as establishing a £40 million fund for Chagossians, the UK has agreed to pay Mauritius at least £120 million a year for 99 years in order to lease back the Diego Garcia base – a total cost of at least £13 billion in cash terms. The deal also includes provisions preventing development on the rest of the archipelago without the UK's consent, which the Government has said will prevent countries such as China setting up their own facilities. The agreement has also been backed by the United States, the UN secretary general and the African Union, but heavily criticised by the Conservative Party as a 'surrender'. Mr Sands disagreed with that on Wednesday, saying the deal 'will enhance Britain's position in the world'. He said: 'I can tell you from personal experience, direct comments from countries, ambassadors, prime ministers, presidents around the world, this is seen as Britain back on the world (stage), acting honourably and decently, protecting its interests and safeguarding…the rule of law.'

Chagossians want sovereignty deal to go ahead, says Mauritius legal adviser
Chagossians want sovereignty deal to go ahead, says Mauritius legal adviser

South Wales Guardian

time21 minutes ago

  • South Wales Guardian

Chagossians want sovereignty deal to go ahead, says Mauritius legal adviser

Philippe Sands KC, who has represented Mauritius in its legal battle with the UK since 2010, told a House of Lords committee he wanted to 'knock on the head this idea that all of the Chagossians were not involved' in negotiations over the deal. His comments came a day after a panel of UN experts urged Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to abandon the agreement reached with Mauritius last month and negotiate a new one. The panel, appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, said it was 'gravely concerned about the lack of meaningful participation of Chagossians in the processes that have led to the agreement'. The experts also criticised the continuing bar on Chagossians returning to Diego Garcia, the largest of the islands, because of the ongoing presence of a joint UK-US military base. On Wednesday, Mr Sands told the Lords International Relations and Defence Committee: 'To be clear, it is not the case that Chagossians had no role in the negotiations. 'I can tell you that Chagossians in Mauritius and Seychelles were deeply involved in consulting with successive prime ministers of Mauritius and they attended the hearings at the International Court of Justice.' He added: 'I want to really knock on the head this idea that all of the Chagossians were not involved in the various processes. That is simply not true. 'It is true, however, that the Chagossian community is divided and I respect that division.' Earlier, he had told the committee that, while some UK-based Chagossians wanted the islands to remain British territory, 'most in Mauritius and Seychelles have made very clear…that they wish this deal to go ahead'. The Chagossians were expelled from the islands between 1965 and 1973 to make way for the Diego Garcia base and have not been allowed to Mr Sands told peers the 'quid pro quo' for the military base remaining on Diego Garcia was Chagossians would be allowed to settle on the outer islands of the archipelago. The deal follows a 2019 advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice saying the islands should be handed over to Mauritius. As well as establishing a £40 million fund for Chagossians, the UK has agreed to pay Mauritius at least £120 million a year for 99 years in order to lease back the Diego Garcia base – a total cost of at least £13 billion in cash terms. The deal also includes provisions preventing development on the rest of the archipelago without the UK's consent, which the Government has said will prevent countries such as China setting up their own facilities. The agreement has also been backed by the United States, the UN secretary general and the African Union, but heavily criticised by the Conservative Party as a 'surrender'. Mr Sands disagreed with that on Wednesday, saying the deal 'will enhance Britain's position in the world'. He said: 'I can tell you from personal experience, direct comments from countries, ambassadors, prime ministers, presidents around the world, this is seen as Britain back on the world (stage), acting honourably and decently, protecting its interests and safeguarding…the rule of law.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store