Ukraine and the European struggle to sway Trump

Marking the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US sided with Russia on two UN General Assembly resolutions. It first voted against a European-drafted resolution condemning Russia’s aggression and advocating for Ukraine’s territorial integrity. It then passed its own resolution, which called for an end to the war without condemning Putin’s actions. Some, including Putin, praise this newly found US “neutrality” as the only viable way to end an already prolonged war. In Europe, the sentiment is wildly different as its leaders struggle to defend what’s left of the continent’s liberal order. With tightening budgets and political turmoil to contain at home, Europe needs Trump. It just doesn’t know how to engage with him. 

What’s happening in Europe?

Trump’s campaign promised to end the war and, unsurprisingly, has translated into less support for Ukraine than the Biden administration offered; recent events left European leaders shocked with the extent of US indifference towards the will and future of the continent – a perceived violation of the post-war world order. Among others, Trump called Zelenskyy a dictator while refusing to use the same term for Putin and began peace talks with Russia to which neither Ukraine nor its European allies were invited. With Europe pushed to the sidelines of determining its own future, its leaders find themselves in a difficult position.

For Keir Starmer, the proposal to increase defence spending and send troops to Ukraine not only falls short of the necessary amounts but is also a risky decision that might reduce his government’s capacity to deliver the high-expenditure policies for change he campaigned on. Meanwhile, Macron has been defending the extent of French aid to Ukraine amid accusations from Germany and the US that it hasn’t been “pulling its weight”. However, his ability to deliver on his recent promise to further increase this spending is potentially hindered by internal opposition, not least from a French far-right that only marginally lost the last elections. 

With the leading European providers of aid broadly facing economic and political turmoil, their ideological alignment is likely insufficient to keep Ukraine going. As much as it might sting, they need the US. During this week’s meetings with Trump, Macron and Starmer agreed to present a common front in favour of Ukraine and defend the need for security guarantees rather than sign a blank cheque for the sake of momentary peace. But in the face of a ‘care less’ (if not flat-out hostile) US, is unconditional support the best strategy for European leaders?

“Hug America tightly.”

In recent history, the strategy of European leaders and Britain in particular was to “hug America tightly”, as ex-Prime-Minister-turned-leadership-coach Tony Blair advised Starmer to do before the US elections regardless of the result. For now, both Starmer and Macron have been trying to balance this mantra with delivering the tough message that Trump is wrong to concede too much to Russia. 

Yesterday, Macron’s commitment to carry more of the war’s financial burden seemed to land well with Trump, despite later fact-checking him during a joint press conference. During his White House visit on Thursday, Starmer is expected to continue opposing Trump’s claims that Ukraine is “negotiating with no cards” while avoiding a confrontation through praises of Trump changing the conversation “for the better”. He is also likely to appeal to the US-UK “special” relationship, with some even suggesting that a Churchill-esque framing might land well in the White House given Trump’s admiration for the historical leader. 

Ultimately, it remains to be seen if historical relationships and a thin veil of flattery are enough to sweeten fundamental disagreements—or even to give Europe a seat at the negotiating table to determine its future.