Munich Security Conference: Transatlantic Tensions Surface

From February 14 to 16, the 61st Munich Security Conference convened, bringing together global leaders to address pressing security challenges, with the Ukraine conflict at the forefront. German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier inaugurated the event, emphasizing the urgency of a cohesive international response to the crisis.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance’s address became a focal point of controversy. Rather than focusing on Ukraine, the vice president delivered a sweeping critique of European nations, accusing them of failing to meet their defense commitments and warning of an internal crisis within the West. “The threat that I worry the most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external factor,” said Vance during his speech, “What I worry about is the threat from within.” 

His remarks—suggesting that issues like censorship and political radicalization posed a greater danger than Moscow—elicited swift condemnation from European officials. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was among the most forceful in his response, rejecting Vance’s assertions and denouncing his perceived alignment with Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.

Yet what was perhaps most striking about Vance’s address was what it omitted. Ukraine, ostensibly the centerpiece of the conference, was barely mentioned. Instead, the vice president shifted attention to domestic tensions in nations like Switzerland, Germany, and the United Kingdom, sidelining discussions of the war itself.

By contrast, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, also present at the conference, took the stage with a sense of urgency, determined to bring the focus back to his country’s survival. During his speech, Zelensky called for the creation of a European army, arguing that the continent could no longer afford to rely on external security guarantees. “The Armed Forces of Europe must be created,” he said, “It’s not just about budgets, it’s about people realizing they need to defend their own home.” Zelensky, framing the war not just as Ukraine’s struggle but as a test of European sovereignty, drew loud applause from the audience.

Furthermore, Zelensky issued a pointed rebuke to Washington, criticizing ongoing U.S.-Russia peace negotiations that excluded Ukraine from the table. He dismissed any settlement reached without Ukrainian participation as illegitimate, warning that lasting peace could not be dictated from afar.

In perhaps his most unexpected remark, Zelensky suggested he would be willing to step down if his resignation could secure either a peace deal with Russia or Ukraine’s long-sought NATO membership. “If [it guarantees] peace for Ukraine, if you really need me to resign, I am ready,” said Zelensky during a Kyiv press conference, “I can exchange it for NATO.”

Paris Summit: Striving for European Unity

In response to the developments in Munich and the announcement of U.S.-Russia talks excluding European participation, French President Emmanuel Macron convened an emergency summit in Paris on February 17. Leaders from the UK, Germany, Poland, and other EU nations gathered to formulate a unified strategy addressing the Ukraine crisis.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer highlighted the necessity of U.S.-backed security guarantees to deter further Russian aggression, stating, “A U.S. ‘backstop’ will be vital to deter Russia from launching another invasion.” Starmer also announced Britain’s own readiness to deploy peacekeeping troops to support any forthcoming peace agreement. “The UK is with [Ukraine], today and everyday,” said Starmer.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz proposed that defense expenditures exceeding 2% of GDP should be exempt from EU fiscal constraints, aiming to encourage increased military spending among member states. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, while rejecting the deployment of Polish troops to Ukraine, called for substantial hikes in European defense budgets and emphasized the need for Europe to become more self-reliant in defense.

U.S.-Russia Negotiations and Emerging Peace Proposals

Concurrently, the U.S. administration under President Donald Trump announced direct negotiations with Russian officials in Saudi Arabia, aiming to resolve the Ukraine conflict. Notably, these talks excluded Ukrainian representation, leading to dissatisfaction in Kyiv. President Zelensky emphasized that any peace agreement must involve Ukraine directly. “Decisions about Ukraine cannot be made without Ukraine,” he said after meeting with Turkish President Recep Erdogan.

As of February 25, several significant peace proposals have been put forward to address the ongoing Ukraine crisis:

• Ukrainian 10-Point Peace Plan: In November 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky introduced a comprehensive 10-point peace plan. This proposal emphasizes the restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, the withdrawal of Russian forces, and security guarantees to prevent future aggression. The plan also addresses nuclear safety, food security, energy infrastructure, the release of prisoners, and ecological damage. Ukraine has sought international support for this initiative, aiming to build a coalition to back its terms for peace.
• U.S. Economic Development Proposal: The United States, under President Donald Trump, has shifted its approach by pursuing economic development deals with both Russia and Ukraine. This strategy focuses on gaining access to valuable mineral deposits in Ukraine as compensation for U.S. military assistance. President Trump has suggested that such agreements could benefit American taxpayers and has indicated that Russian President Vladimir Putin does not seek further conflict.
• French Security Guarantee Initiative: French President Emmanuel Macron has emphasized the necessity of a substantial and credible peace agreement that ensures the security of Ukraine, Europe, and the United States. Macron has proposed that any peace deal should include security guarantees for Ukraine, potentially involving European peacekeeping troops. He has also called for cooperation with European nations in the negotiation process and has warned President Trump to exercise caution in his dealings with Russia.

Deepening Divisions: U.S. and European Allies at Odds Over Ukraine

Recent events have further underscored a growing rift between the United States and its European allies concerning their approaches to Ukrainian security.

On February 24, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, with 93 countries in favor. Notably, the United States joined Russia and 16 other nations in voting against the measure. This marked a significant departure from previous U.S. policies, which had consistently supported such condemnations. The U.S. administration argued that further denunciations of Russia would hinder peace efforts, leading to its opposition to the resolution. Despite the controversial U.S. vote, the resolution still passed, reflecting Europe’s willingness to diverge from U.S. policies regarding Ukraine. 

French President Macron’s visit to Washington the next day further illuminated the policy divide between the U.S. and Europe. During discussions with President Trump, Macron emphasized the necessity of strong security guarantees for Ukraine in any potential ceasefire agreement with Russia. He stressed that Russia is the aggressor in the conflict and that a robust response is essential. 

In contrast, President Trump advocated for a swift ceasefire and expressed reluctance to commit to specific security assurances for Ukraine. The two leaders did find common ground on the concept of deploying European peacekeepers contingent upon a peace deal, but their differing perspectives revealed the widening gap in transatlantic strategies toward resolving the Ukraine crisis.