EU still debating financial aid for Ukraine, but money alone won't resolve security issues — UK expert Grant

We recognize the gravity of the situation, especially in Europe. It is impossible to predict what might influence President Donald Trump’s decisions, but we are already witnessing significant repercussions and a profound shift in the security architecture, particularly within the European Union.  

Now the burden falls on key nations such as the UK, France and Germany to safeguard NATO’s eastern flank and Europe, including Ukraine, from Russian aggression if the self-proclaimed world's greatest negotiator fails to deliver tangible results.

There are a lot of questions in there. I think the first thing I will say is that the situation is extremely strange at the moment, so strange that anything I say today might be completely wrong by tomorrow. We simply do not know how things will unfold in the coming weeks and months. But I will start by addressing your last point, which is about negotiations with Russia.  I just do not see any possibility of negotiations with Russia because Russia has nothing to gain from negotiating. In fact, it seems to believe that it is doing quite well at the moment. If you consider the situation, they have managed to get Donald Trump to treat them as equals.  

They have also managed to reinsert themselves into global affairs because of Donald Trump. He has not forced them to make any compromises, while he has pressured Ukraine to do so, which is completely bizarre.  

However, in some ways, Donald Trump’s actions might actually be beneficial for Ukraine. They could serve as a wake-up call, making people realize that we cannot continue relying on others to do the work for us. Ukraine must take the war seriously in every aspect and make things work.

The other European countries are beginning to understand that this is serious, but they have not made any major changes yet.  

They are still talking about money as the solution, but they are not really making significant changes to their own defense systems, except perhaps Sweden and Finland, who understand that they need to adjust their approach.  

Great Britain, Germany, and France know they have to take action to support Ukraine and strengthen NATO’s eastern flank if NATO is to survive. However, with the way Trump is going, he may try to pull out of NATO or at least weaken its role.  

I think he will face difficulties because Congress will likely oppose him. Although many people in Congress support Trump, they also support NATO and understand that it is the organization holding everything together at the moment.  

We will have to wait and see what happens in the coming weeks. But Ukraine is not going to collapse. It will keep going because it is strong and capable.

You have raised some crucial points, and I would like to clarify a few of them. In this situation, much depends on the decisions made in the United States. We cannot read Donald Trump’s mind, nor can we predict the thinking of the new Pentagon chief. Their actions so far are concerning.  

At the same time, we hear claims that Russia might be ready to attack Europe in a few years. I strongly disagree with this. Russia is already preparing for a larger war if necessary. The Eastern Baltic states, including Finland, possibly Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and others, could be at risk.  

The Second World War began with the so-called Danzig Ultimatum when Hitler sought to gain control of an extraterritorial corridor to Gdansk. If the United States allows its relationship with the European Union to break down, Europe may have no choice but to respond militarily to provocations. How prepared are European countries for such a scenario and what is their political vision for addressing a potential new military threat?

Russia is not as strong as people think. Overall, they may have been holding some good troops back from the front line for another purpose, but there are weaknesses in Russia’s position.  

First, Kaliningrad. There are almost no combat troops stationed there because they have been redeployed to fight around Donetsk. If Russia were to launch an attack elsewhere, German, American, and Lithuanian troops could theoretically march into Kaliningrad tomorrow, which would completely disrupt any plans Russia has.  

Second, NATO’s air power in the northern region is enormous. Many people do not realize how many aircraft Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, and Poland have. That air power alone is enough to devastate any Russian attacking forces.  

People tend to underestimate the power of air superiority. If you look back at the first Gulf War, there was "shock and awe" in the first few days, during which coalition forces bombed everything they could. As a result, Iraqi forces were left incapable of fighting. A similar scenario could unfold if NATO were to use its air power effectively.  

I do not believe Russia has the capability to counter NATO’s air forces. In this respect, NATO is more prepared than many realize, because people naturally focus on ground troops rather than what happens in the air. They overlook the missiles and bombs that can be launched from aircraft, which exist in far greater numbers than most people understand.  

Politically, I am not worried about what Russia can do at the moment. I believe Putin understands that a larger war against NATO would be a serious mistake for him.

How seriously will the United Kingdom take on this responsibility? This is not just a European issue but a global one, especially when we see American officials publicly insulting Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. This is not just about Trudeau as an individual but about Canada as a nation.  

Canada and Australia, along with many other countries, still recognize King Charles III as their head of state. This raises the question of whether it is time to update and rethink the role of the British Commonwealth. Perhaps now is the moment to reconsider its military engagement and, more specifically, to strengthen the contribution and coordination of Commonwealth nations in matters of security and defense.

In the first place, I don't think you need to worry about the Commonwealth. It is an extremely strong organization with a common language and a common king.  

However, let’s be honest. It is concerning to hear Trump’s comments about Canada and the idea of annexing it. This has to be straight out of the FSB playbook.  

It seems like an attempt to dismantle all Western organizations, whether that is NATO, the European Union, the Commonwealth, or the World Bank. Putin wants to destroy them all because once they collapse, he can start picking up the pieces.  

At the moment, it looks as if Trump is acting as his enabler, seemingly trying to help Putin weaken these organizations. I believe Britain will stand up for itself and will support Canada and Australia if Trump makes any moves in that direction.  

Right now, we have to rely on the strength and decency of the American people. There are many wonderful people in the United States who are deeply unhappy not only with how they are being treated by Trump but also with how he is treating the rest of the world in their name.  

Many in Congress are now saying, "I did not elect you to do this, to create this mess. I did not elect you to destroy our relationships with our allies."  

We will have to trust that America can sort itself out when it comes to Trump. But as a word of warning, if they fail, then we all have some very serious challenges ahead.

I wanted to ask you about what is perhaps the most critical issue, a new concept for defending and supporting Ukraine if, God forbid, the worst happens, particularly in light of Donald Trump’s discussions with the Kremlin dictator. If U.S. support weakens, it will not just be a matter of funding. It will also impact ammunition production, which is crucial given that Ukraine’s mobilization reserve is not in the best shape.  

Putin’s key objective is to exert indirect and subtle pressure on Trump, prompting him to in turn pressure Ukraine. However, as both Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and his deputy Ryabkov have stated, as long as negotiations continue, so will the war. There will be no ceasefire and Russia is now focused on expanding its frontline as much as possible.

I would like to think that it will be quite difficult for Trump to stop many of the measures that have already been set in motion, such as ammunition support.  

There are private companies involved, and they are large corporations. If Trump disrupts them too severely, they may simply tell him that they will leave the country and relocate their headquarters elsewhere. He will face a certain level of business pressure if he tries to go too far.  

However, we cannot rely on that because he is unpredictable and unreliable. It is entirely possible that he takes a trip to Putin, returns, and stops all support for Ukraine. I do not think it will happen, but I would keep it in the back of my mind as a possibility.  

If that does happen, we probably have enough ammunition to last for a month or two, but after that, supplies would run low. Eventually, we would reach a point where artillery could only be used in truly extreme situations.  

The best word to describe Trump's stance in support of Putin and against Ukraine is unpredictable.

A few days ago, Putin stated in an interview that his goal is to create a situation where Europeans, and I am quoting him directly, will start running to the feet of their overseas master, referring to Donald Trump.  

That is his perspective. Our perspective is that Ukraine, together with the UK, Poland, France, Germany, the Baltic states and Romania, must develop a swift and well-coordinated response. It may be theoretical for now, but it needs to be planned down to the finest detail. Who will take command? Will headquarters be established? What will the chain of command look like? How will logistics be managed?  

I say this not only because I care deeply about Ukraine but because I recognize that Europe will inevitably have to respond if a provocation occurs against Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania. These are strong and sovereign nations but their strategic reserves are not deep enough to face such threats alone.

The answer to this is yes. There are real problems with the concept of European defense, ranging from intelligence acquisition and high-level communications to command and control, mobile headquarters, and corps- and divisional-level troops such as artillery and engineers. Everyone has reduced their military capabilities to the bare minimum.  

There is no surplus, no extra artillery, no extra ammunition, and no extra engineers. This means there will have to be a lot of creative and innovative thinking in the use of troops, perhaps even retraining some soldiers to shift from infantry to engineers or other roles.  

Whatever the solution, Europe needs to act quickly. We cannot wait until Trump suddenly says no, Putin suddenly says yes, and then realize it will take us a year or more to make the necessary changes. Some of these adjustments will take even longer. We need to start now, but my concern is that I do not see this happening.  

We are still at the discussion stage, still focused on giving Ukraine money and hoping that will be enough. But money alone is not enough. We need strong, capable military forces that can fight, because that is now the true currency of this new world.  

Without that, soft power, financial aid, and conferences – whether in Munich or anywhere else – are a complete waste of time. They do nothing to address the real needs of the situation.

Thank you, Colonel, for this challenging and not particularly optimistic conversation, but above all, for your honesty. Today we spoke with retired British Army Colonel and military expert Glen Grant.  

God Save the King. Glory to Ukraine.

Yeah, Heroyam Slava. But I will finish as always. We are still going to win this. And as I have always told you, there are probably still more bad days ahead.  

But we are going to win, and I see signs of reform happening now in the defense forces that were not there six to eight months ago. Next time, we can maybe talk about some of those changes in the Ukrainian defense forces and what can still be done to improve them.  

God save Narva. 

God save Narva. Yeah, I have been there. I like it. It is wonderful. See you soon anyway.  

Thank you. 

Thank you.