The European Union (EU) finds itself at a critical juncture, grappling with the implications of US President Donald Trump’s approach to Ukraine and its broader ramifications for European security. Trump’s policies, characterized by a transactional stance and a pivot away from traditional US support for European allies, have sparked a mix of alarm, introspection and urgency across the continent. Since the start of the new Trump administration in January 2025, the emergence of a Russia-United States-Ukraine triangle has marginalized Europe’s position and, more broadly, diminished Brussels’ role in the Trump administration’s pursuit of peace in this European regional war. During the Ukraine-United States summit in Jeddah, the European issue was mentioned only at the end of the communiqué, and only at the request of the Ukrainian side, “The United States committed to discussing these specific proposals with representatives from Russia. The Ukrainian delegation reiterated that European partners shall be involved in the peace process.”
EU narratives surrounding these developments reveal a bloc wrestling with its dependence on US power, the need to bolster its own defenses and the uncertain future of its security architecture in a rapidly shifting geopolitical landscape. Trump’s approach to Ukraine has been a lightning rod for European concern. Since his return to office in January 2025, he has pursued a unilateral strategy, engaging directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine — a move that has sidelined both Kyiv and its European partners. His administration’s decision to suspend military aid to Ukraine — only to reinstate it later —along with a public clash with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February 2025, marks a sharp departure from the Biden-era commitment to supporting Ukraine against Russian military intervention. EU leaders have interpreted this as a potential abandonment of Ukraine, fuelling concerns that a weak peace deal could embolden Russia and destabilize Europe’s eastern flank.
Trump’s vision for peace in Ukraine considers both the Kremlin’s perspective on the future of international relations in a post-Western world and the military realities along the 2,000-kilometer frontline. This redefined approach to peace by the US administration has taken Europe by surprise, making its stance appear as a preference for prolonged military confrontation over a short-term ceasefire.
The EU narrative frames Trump’s actions as a betrayal of transatlantic solidarity. Kaja Kallas, the EU’s chief diplomat, has criticized the US moves as “appeasement,” arguing that excluding Europe and Ukraine from negotiations undermines collective security. This sentiment is echoed across European capitals, where leaders worry that Trump’s “America First” doctrine prioritizes U.S. interests — or even a rapprochement with Russia — over the stability of Europe. The blow-up between Trump and Zelenskyy, followed by a halt in US weapons shipments, has only deepened this distrust, prompting European citizens to question whether the United States remains a reliable ally. Despite the EU Commission’s official denial and its continued view of the United States as an ally, many members of Europe’s political elite are now openly questioning their alliance with the United States under the Trump administration. These European concerns about US commitments have led to a renewed focus on European autonomy. Discussions have intensified regarding the necessity for Europe to assume greater responsibility for its defense, reducing reliance on the United States. This sentiment has been echoed by key political figures, emphasizing the urgency for Europe to bolster its own security mechanisms. In response to these challenges, the EU is actively exploring avenues to enhance its defense capabilities. Proposals include increasing defense spending up to 800 billion euros, developing joint military projects and fostering greater integration of defense industries across member states. The objective is to establish a more autonomous and robust European defense posture, capable of addressing security threats independently. However, this endeavour faces obstacles such as the fragmentation of the European defense sector and varying threat perceptions among member states. Efforts are underway to streamline defense initiatives and promote collaboration to overcome these challenges.
Trump’s policies have acted as a wake-up call for the EU, exposing its longstanding reliance on US military power and the NATO framework. For decades, Europe has operated under the assumption that US hard power — epitomized by its nuclear umbrella and substantial defense contributions — would underpin the continent’s security. However, Trump’s threats to scale back US commitments, including his past musings about withdrawing from NATO, have forced a reckoning. European leaders now face an existential question: Can they depend on the United States to defend them against Russian military ambitions, or must they stand alone?
This narrative of dependency has spurred a flurry of activity. French President Emmanuel Macron, a long-time advocate for European strategic autonomy, has seized the moment to push for a stronger, more self-reliant Europe. His proposal to deploy European troops to Ukraine as a “reassurance force” post-ceasefire reflects a desire to signal resolve to Russia, Ukraine and the United States alike. Similarly, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged “boots on the ground” to secure any truce, positioning the UK as a key player in European security post-Brexit. Meanwhile, Germany’s incoming Chancellor Friedrich Merz has floated the idea of loosening fiscal rules to unlock billions for defense —– a significant shift for a country historically cautious about militarization.
Yet, these efforts are tempered by a sobering reality: Europe’s military capabilities remain fragmented and underfunded. The EU’s decision-making process, requiring unanimity on foreign policy, is a persistent obstacle, especially with Hungary’s Viktor Orbán — a Trump partner — threatening to veto initiatives that bolster Ukraine. The future of EU security therefore hinges on its ability to unify. The exclusion of Baltic states from key summits and the divisions between pro-Trump leaders (like Orbán) and liberal leaders highlight the difficulty of forging a coherent strategy. Some analysts warn that without US leadership, NATO could weaken, leaving Europe vulnerable to Russian aggression — or even prompting nuclear proliferation as countries like Germany and Poland reconsider their non-nuclear stance.
The narrative emerging from Brussels is one of urgency but also frustration: Europe must do more, but its institutional and political constraints hinder rapid action. The EU’s narratives on Trump’s approach to Ukraine, European security and the future of its defense reflect a continent at a crossroads. Confronted with shifting US commitments, Europe is striving to fortify its defense capabilities and assert greater strategic autonomy, aiming to ensure stability and security within the region. While leaders like Macron, Starmer and Merz push for a stronger, more autonomous EU, the path forward is uncertain, marked by internal divisions, resource constraints and an unpredictable US president. As the EU navigates this turbulent era, its ability to translate rhetoric into reality will determine whether it can safeguard Ukraine, deter Russia and secure its own future — or remain caught between the whims of Washington and the ambitions of Moscow. All this rhetoric about rearming Europe is more likely to deepen its isolation. The real risk for Europe is that its elites may appear to be locking themselves into a bellicose stance. Moreover, if Europeans are seen as systematically opposing the Trump administration, they risk accelerating the very outcome they fear most: US disengagement from NATO.
