Europe is facing a critical moment in its history, as it navigates the challenges posed by Donald Trump’s disregard for the transatlantic bond. It’s been three years since European leaders woke up to the shocking invasion of Ukraine by Vladimir Putin’s troops. At the time, US intelligence services had warned of an unusual buildup of Russian forces along Ukraine’s borders, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had implored NATO to grant Ukraine membership under the collective defense clause of the Washington Treaty, Article 5.
“I thought we had an enormous responsibility to help Ukraine resist aggression, and that everything possible had to be done in its favor,” said Josep Borrell, the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, in a recent interview with La Razón. “At that time, I wasn’t sure if we were capable, but fortunately, we were. The West finally realized, or at least slowed down, the negative evolution of Putin’s policies, both internally and in relation to his neighbors.” Borrell noted that the response to the initial aggression in 2014, which led to the annexation of Crimea, was “undoubtedly too soft.”
The invasion of Ukraine forced the European Union to take a significant geopolitical leap, breaking many taboos in the process. The EU implemented successive rounds of sanctions and, for the first time, used common European funds to support a country under attack. The bloc also had to find alternative gas suppliers, as Russia’s energy blackmail took hold. Germany, one of the most affected countries, had to rapidly reduce its dependence on Russian hydrocarbons, which has had a significant impact on the traditional European economic powerhouse. This experience has shown that the strategy of trying to appease Putin through economic ties was doomed to fail.
In addition, the EU’s response to the refugee crisis sparked by the war was notably different from its reaction to the Syrian refugee crisis in 2015. The EU dusted off a directive that allowed for the temporary reception of refugees without subjecting them to usual asylum processes. The EU also granted Ukraine candidate status in record time, which has emboldened Western Balkan countries that had been waiting for decades to join the bloc.
However, the initial momentum has been slowed down in recent years due to delays and doubts over the provision of weapons. The war has proven to be a challenge for which no one was fully prepared, with its combination of 20th-century artillery and 21st-century technology, such as drones. European countries have had to deplete their arsenals to support Ukraine, and there are divisions between those who advocate for greater forcefulness and those who fear that certain steps could lead to a direct conflict between NATO and Russia.
Germany has been one of the most cautious countries, despite eventually agreeing to supply Leopard tanks. The country has opposed providing long-range Taurus missiles and only allows Ukraine to use German weapons for defensive purposes, not to attack Russian territory. Ukraine has complained that it needs more anti-aircraft defenses, which are not arriving quickly enough.
The growing divisions between EU member states are also a concern. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has been blocking the approval of new sanctions packages and has sent armaments to Ukraine, while seeing the potential return of Donald Trump to the White House as an opportunity to end the war quickly.
This Monday, the EU’s College of Commissioners will travel to Ukraine to commemorate the third anniversary of the invasion, and the European leaders will give the green light to the 16th sanctions package, aimed at targeting Russia’s “ghost fleet” that helps the Kremlin evade sanctions. While the EU remains committed to supporting Kyiv, there is a growing concern that Russia and the US might agree on a humiliating peace for Ukraine behind the EU’s back. The EU is demanding a seat at the negotiating table, not just for Ukraine’s future but also to ensure the bloc’s relevance in the 21st century.
