Ukraine emerges as Europe’s sole shield

The first time was on October 23, in Frankfurt. The excitement of the first year of the Russian invasion was gradually fading, and so was the attention of foreigners to the Ukrainian stand. Foreigners came to listen to Ukrainian authors and to buy translated editions, but this was nothing compared to the full houses of 2022. I was then asked where the Ukrainian Hemingways and remarks were. I replied that they were all sitting in the trenches near Avdiivka right now.

The general tone of the largest European book fair was sympathetic and at the same time distant. The war was perceived as a tragedy, the invasion as a violation of all possible rules. But at the same time, the Russian-Ukrainian war was read by Europeans as something local. As something that had nothing to do with their future. “You did not deserve this fate, we are helping you, but our help is charity.”

The second time I went abroad was on March 25. It was the Leipzig Book Fair. Again, there was a Ukrainian stand, again, translations and public discussions. But the atmosphere was different from the one that prevailed a year and a half ago. It was felt in the tone of the questions from the audience. If on March 23, our war was perceived only as “Ukrainian,” quite far from Europe and Europeans, on March 25, the frame of interest had already changed significantly. And the reason for this transformation was obvious - Donald Trump.

After the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, Europe got used to the fact that Washington now holds the security umbrella over it. The security surplus led to the downsizing of European armies. "Guns" gave way to "oil," and defense issues were replaced by economic issues. European capitals faced a full-scale war with bonsai armies that could at best fight guerrillas in third world countries.

“The U.S. factor allowed Europe not to think about security. Just as a person with rich parents does not think about money, and someone who is lucky with genetics does not think about health.”

When official Kyiv warned Europe that Nord Stream could pose a threat to its security, it was dismissed as a mere economic project. The US military presence allowed European capitals not to think about threats, because they believed that security was their default.

Donald Trump's victory changed everything.

NATO's strength was not that the North Atlantic Alliance won wars. NATO's strength was that no one dared to fight this military alliance. As long as it demonstrated a high level of internal solidarity, no one had a desire to test this solidarity in practice. Therefore, both small Latvia and much more capable Poland could feel safe.

Everything changed when NATO's chief security guarantor decided to step down. The Alliance lost the main thing that gave it strength and power: strategic unambiguity was replaced by strategic ambiguity. At the moment when the United States decided that from now on it would keep the security umbrella only over itself, Europe found itself in a difficult situation.

“At that moment, the Russian-Ukrainian war ceased to be just a Russian-Ukrainian war. It is now a war on the border of Europe. Which can go a step further at any time - without guarantees of intervention from Washington. And if before Donald Trump's inauguration, one could ask Ukraine what it was going to do without American help, now Kyiv can ask European capitals a counter question.”

Previously, military supplies to Ukraine could be perceived as charity. As help from the strong to the weak. As an act of mercy on the part of those who have nothing to do with the outcome of this war. But the moment the United States questions its willingness to defend its European supporters, everything changes.

From now on, assistance to Ukraine turns from charity into an investment. As Russia becomes a direct and clear threat to Europe, Russian losses on the Ukrainian front become a security factor for the continent. The more depleted Russia's military and technical stockpiles are, the higher its costs become, the less of a threat it is to the EU.

“In this situation, Ukraine becomes the only shield of the continent. As long as the Kremlin is throwing all its efforts at the Ukrainian direction, it has no reserves to open a second front. In fact, Kyiv is buying Europe time to rearm. As long as Ukraine is at war, its western neighbors have time to revive their armies.”

Moreover, the Ukrainian army has suddenly found itself the only bearer of modern military experience on the continent. Only it can shoot down hypersonic missiles and burn strategic bombers. Only it can sink missile cruisers and hold more than a thousand kilometers of front line. Ukraine managed to burn down the Soviet tank fist, which was being created to throw to the English Channel, and ensure that Russia's losses exceeded one million people.

In a situation where the world's strongest army is turning its back on Europe, the continent's strongest army is the only thing Europe has left. Donald Trump has managed to pull Europeans out of their cozy illusion of security. That is why the further away from Brussels Washington is, the closer to Brussels Kyiv may be. If Ukraine used to look to Europe for strength, now Europe may start looking to Ukraine for strength.

Fate has a rather strange sense of humor.

Source

About the author: Pavlo Kazarin, journalist, TV presenter, winner of the Taras Shevchenko National Prize.

The editors do not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.