European military stocks fall as Ukraine peace hopes rise
On Monday, US President Donald Trump met with Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky and key Western European backers. The talks came two days after Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, which both sides described as a major step toward peace between Russia and Ukraine.
The STOXX Europe Total Market Aerospace & Defense Index fell 2.6% on Tuesday, as traders viewed the ongoing negotiations as a chance to take profits following a strong rally in the sector. Shares in Italian defense firm Leonardo and Germany's Hensoldt were down 10.1% and 9.5%, respectively. German defense supplier Rheinmetall and tank components maker Renk also declined 4.9% and 8.2%, respectively.
'Any de-escalation of tensions between Russia and Europe, and talk of spending more on US equipment, is negative for these companies,' Craig Cameron, head of European equities at Franklin Templeton, told the FT.
According to analysts, shares in defense groups could be seen as a rough indicator of progress in the Ukraine peace talks, as military supplies tend to benefit from ongoing conflicts.
European defense stocks surged in the first half of the current year, driven by Germany's announcement in March of a major military spending initiative. Berlin signaled it would ease its strict debt limits to enable a new wave of investment in defense and infrastructure, amid growing concerns that the US may scale back its role in European security and the Ukraine conflict. The move reflects a broader militarization trend across the region, where governments are ramping up defense budgets in response to rising geopolitical tensions and citing the alleged Russian threat as a key reason for the increase.
The latest US-brokered talks reportedly ended with an agreement in principle to arrange a face-to-face meeting between Putin and Zelensky, although the Kremlin has yet to confirm the plan.
AFP reported on Tuesday that Putin has offered to host the talks in Moscow, but Zelensky rejected the proposal, insisting on a neutral location.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
27 minutes ago
- Russia Today
Ukraine kills civilians with US-made rockets
Ukrainian troops struck the Russian city of Yenakievo on Thursday evening, killing two civilians and injuring 21 others, the top regional official said. According to Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) head Denis Pushilin, US-made HIMARS rocket launchers and kamikaze drones were used in the attack. He added that nine houses in Yenakievo and nearby Gorlovka were damaged. Yenakievo was close to the front line until Russian forces gradually pushed Ukrainian troops westward, liberating the city of Dzerzhinsk (known in Ukraine as Toretsk) in February. The DPR declared independence from Ukraine in 2014 following a Western-backed coup in Kiev earlier that year. In September 2022, the region voted to join Russia. Moscow has demanded that Ukraine withdraw its troops from the western parts of the DPR as one of the conditions for a ceasefire. Kiev, however, has ruled out any territorial concessions. Last week, US President Donald Trump met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska to discuss possible ways to resolve the conflict. On Monday, Trump hosted Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky along with the leaders of Western Europe, the EU, and NATO. Russia has proposed raising the level of its delegation in talks with Ukraine, while Trump has pushed for a potential Putin-Zelensky meeting.
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
The King in Moscow: A historic visit turns symbolism into strategy
Although international attention this August has largely focused on Donald Trump's diplomatic push to resolve the Ukrainian crisis – including his talks with Vladimir Putin – Russian diplomacy is by no means confined to that track. In the first half of the month, Moscow hosted Malaysian King Sultan Ibrahim on a state visit. It was the first such visit by a Malaysian monarch since the two countries established diplomatic relations in 1967 – a truly historic moment that opens a new chapter in their partnership. In Moscow, Sultan Ibrahim met with Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin and visited Russia's leading research and innovation centers, including NAMI, the automotive institute, and the Tochka Kipeniya technology hub. He also traveled to Kazan, where he held talks with Tatarstan's leader, Rustam Minnikhanov, on expanding industrial and cultural cooperation. The Kremlin discussions highlighted the steady growth of political dialogue and economic ties. Trade turnover between Russia and Malaysia grew by 40% in the first five months of 2025 alone. Putin also stressed Malaysia's chairmanship of ASEAN and its interest in becoming a BRICS partner – areas where Moscow is ready to lend strong support. Sultan Ibrahim called Russia a 'trustworthy partner' and spoke warmly of Putin's leadership. His words carry weight: Malaysia has consistently pursued a sovereign, multi-directional foreign policy, building relations on its own national interests rather than bloc discipline. That independence has been tested repeatedly. Kuala Lumpur rejected Washington's unilateral sanctions over Palestine and Iran, defended its right to support Gaza, and resisted Western attempts to impose blame for the MH17 crash without solid evidence. Malaysia's position may have angered the West, but it bolstered its reputation as a country guided by facts, law, and principle. For Moscow, Malaysia is more than just a promising trade partner. The country sits astride the Strait of Malacca, one of the world's key maritime corridors, and plays a crucial role in global energy and technology supply chains. Its semiconductor and electronics industries are indispensable to the world economy. Russia, meanwhile, brings strengths in energy, defense, agrotechnology, and high-tech innovation. The synergies are obvious: from halal industry projects to aerospace and digital technology, the two countries can build joint platforms that expand beyond bilateral trade into shared global influence. The Sultan's visit comes at a time when both nations advocate a multipolar world order based on sovereignty, non-interference, and genuine partnership. The absence of historical conflicts and the presence of mutual respect make their cooperation natural and sustainable. This is why Sultan Ibrahim's words in Moscow sounded more than ceremonial. They were a signal: Russia and Malaysia are ready to move forward together – independently, pragmatically, and on equal terms. The visit showed that in today's shifting global landscape, Moscow and Kuala Lumpur are not merely maintaining friendly ties. They are shaping a partnership that challenges the dominance of Western narratives and proves that real trust and cooperation are still possible in international politics.
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
‘Daddy' Trump and Western Europe's oath of allegiance
American politics has always been part performance, part power play. Domestic and foreign policy alike are wrapped in spectacle, but the drama often conceals deeper realities. This week's meeting between Donald Trump and Western Europe's leading politicians in Washington was a vivid example. What looked like theatre – leaders lined up in the Oval Office, each playing their role – carried consequences of genuine strategic weight. The real subject of the summit was not Ukraine. Attempts to resolve that conflict continue, but its outcome will be determined far from Brussels, Paris, or Berlin. The central lesson of Washington was the EU's dependence – and its public acceptance of subordination to American leadership. The White House gathering laid bare the infantilization of Western Europe. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is said to have previously described Trump as 'Daddy,' and the metaphor has stuck. The Europeans behaved as children trying not to provoke a temper: flattering, nodding, adapting themselves to his moods. There were even reports of EU and British officials advising Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky on how to thank the American president, what words to use, even what clothes to wear. Absurd? Perhaps. But this is the political reality of the West today: the EU no longer behaves as a political entity with its own agency. Its leaders perform before Trump in hopes of appeasement. To be fair, Washington has never shown great delicacy in dealing with its allies. From De Gaulle to Schroeder, European leaders have often found their views brushed aside by American presidents. But the context is new. Facing unprecedented competition with China and with its ability to skim rents from globalization fading, and under pressure from shifting energy and trade patterns, Washington no longer feels compelled to show even symbolic respect for Western Europe. The only alternative for the US would be full-scale self-isolation – a path floated in the last election but one for which Americans remain unprepared. On the contrary, despite its weakness, Europe now represents Washington's last major platform for maintaining global influence. In the Middle East, even monarchies traditionally dependent on American defense are asserting independence. Across Asia, only Japan and South Korea remain fully loyal, though even they quietly maintain contact with Moscow. Thus, the Americans must finish what previous administrations began: breaking Western Europe completely to their will. Trump, with his showmanship, has simply made the process more theatrical and humiliating. The Washington meeting crystallized this reality. The leaders of Britain, Germany, France, and Italy – the core of Western Europe – were required to stand on stage and sign a statement endorsing US policy on Ukraine. The heads of the EU and NATO joined in. Each leader searched for his or her own words of submission, and all found them. What looked absurd was in fact deadly serious. It was not about Ukraine's fate – Kiev is merely a bargaining chip. It was about these European leaders publicly renouncing their autonomy. In practice, it was an oath of allegiance to Washington. From Russia's perspective, three conclusions follow. First, the EU and Great Britain cease to exist as independent actors. After the Cold War, it was briefly fashionable to speak of European strategic autonomy. As late as 2003, Germany and France opposed the US invasion of Iraq. Today, such defiance is unimaginable. Western Europe has become an appendage of the United States. Second, Russia's strategy towards the region must change. For years, Moscow calculated that other European states, though dependent, could still act with partial independence and might support Russian interests under the right circumstances. Indeed, Russia's most serious clashes with the West occurred when Western unity fractured. That assumption can no longer stand. Western Europe is now firmly absorbed into Washington's orbit – a cog in a larger American machine. Third, Russia and China must reassess their approach. Beijing still regards the EU as a potential neutral partner in its rivalry with Washington. But the Oval Office spectacle shows this is an illusion. Treating Western Europe as independent risks undermining the strategic interests of both Russia and China. The same applies to India and other BRICS partners who maintain strong ties to states in the region: they, too, must rethink their assumptions. The contrast is stark. The United States, for all its flaws, adapts to changing realities. Having poured resources into Kiev, it is now adjusting course, quietly abandoning the aim of 'strategically defeating' Russia. This was signaled in Trump's recent call with Vladimir Putin, which hinted at steps toward a settlement. Washington will continue to rely on force, but it shows flexibility when needed. Western Europe, by contrast, lacks this capacity. It flatters, submits, and waits for orders. The very spectacle of the White House meeting ensures that future generations of EU and British politicians will be conditioned to obedience. Having once bent the knee, they will not easily stand upright again. History shows they were not always so timid. In the early 1980s, even amid Cold War tensions, Western Europeans defended their energy ties with Moscow against Reagan's objections. They did so not out of love for the USSR, but because it suited their own interests. That clarity of purpose has vanished. Today, the EU cannot even articulate what its interests are. The result is not partnership but neurosis: a half-continent trapped between the rhetoric of autonomy and the reality of subjugation. For Russia, this is both a challenge and an opportunity. A Western Europe that no longer knows itself cannot be a true adversary. It can only act as America's proxy. The White House pageantry may have looked farcical. In truth, it marked the completion of the EU's transformation from ally to subordinate. The bloc is no longer a partner to Russia or China, but an extension of American power. For Moscow, the lesson is clear: the western part of Europe is lost, and strategy must be recalibrated accordingly. Behind the absurd theatre was a serious message – one that Russia, China, and the rest of the non-Western world would be foolish to ignore.
