Well done Minna. This is an excellent post and one that I agree with whole-heartedly. I've been saying that Europe needs time and that they have the measure of Trump. I couldn't have put Rutte's behaviour any better. It may be hard to accept but it is the clever play and Trump is too stupid to realise he is being played like a fiddle by both Europe and Russia.
If flattering the Toddler in chief without making major concessions brings good results, it's worth doing however bad it goes down with your domestic audience.
While I'm sure Putin and his mates have great ambitions of expansion into Ukraine and Europe there's the issue of whether they can do it. Russian military progress in the last two years has been very expensive and as far as I can tell pretty inconsequential (except for the unfortunate but smallish number of Ukrainians who had to leave). Putin gives no sign of wanting to stop, is spending far more than he earns (Russia's economy is his private piggy bank) and the sovereign wealth fund is getting steadily closer to exhaustion. When that happens things are going to get reallly interesting for the Russian war machine. Or boring. My guess is it will just seize up.
In sum, I think the Europeans should be very concerned about Putin and his ambitions but have cause to be a lot less worried than they needed to be 2-3 years ago.
Keep up the good work Minna. You're producing stuff well worth reading.
Yes, if FDR and Churchill could work with Stalin and flatter him, Rutte surely can humor Trump. And the Norwegians should make Trump an offer he can't refuse: if he sells Ukraine (via Europe) everything it wants, next year he gets the Nobel Peace Prize. Heck, the Swedes can throw in the Nobel Literature Prize for Art of the Deal and the Economics Prize for his tariffs (perhaps in 2027 and 2028 if he continues to support Ukraine AND Taiwan remains free). As much as Trump craves Putin's approval, there's absolutely no way such a narcissist will pass up a chance to become the first triple Nobel winner in history.
That's why I suggested staggering them all the way to October 2028 (by which time Ukraine should win, and if that happens because of Trump, his claim on the Peace Prize will not be entirely frivolous). The nominations close in February or so. The earliest Trump can be awarded any prize is October 2026. Over 15 months he can send A LOT of weapons.
“If flattering the Toddler in chief without making major concessions brings good results, it's worth doing however bad it goes down with your domestic audience.”
In regard to career diplomats, I agree.
In regard to political leaders, I however disagree: A political leader is not primarily someone whose work is to get good results, or prevent bad ones like economy-disrupting tariffs. A political leader is first and foremost a political leader of their nation; the political leader’s primarily responsibility is to provide clarity to their nation. Being a hypocritical Trump-flatterer in public prevents fulfilling that primary responsibility.
"It is the American people and institutions who have to stand up to Trump, not Europeans."
You can replace the word "Europeans" with "Republicans" and you have the GOP philosophy in the Trump era.
Frankly, the European position is similarly craven. Is Putin a problem for the Russian people to solve? You have to accept that the U.S. is in the throes of an authoritarian coup. Expect a decade for the U.S. to be a functional ally again. Trump is supporting the far right parties of Europe, everyone else (Including U.S. Democrats) are the enemy, full stop. Putin & Trump are in a partnership to suppress Europe. Trump is in a hybrid war with the EU, if not NATO (see Greenland.)
I do think your essay is balanced. You acknowledge that Europe avoided decisive action for 3 years. In particular, Trump’s desire to kick Ukraine to the curb has been clear since he pressured Congress to halt aid to Ukraine in 2023. I know Europe craves a gradual military buildup. But they are two years late for that plan, Ukraine is predictably in crisis in 2025.
Europe is moving, perhaps to the limit of public support. More hair should be on fire. At least stop the pointless talk of Trump or Lindsay Graham easing the burden. (I’m not directing this at you, I’m thinking of the endless stream of Euro commentators reading imaginary tea leaves.)
Thank you for sharing your perspective. Frankly, I do think that Putin and what he represents is for the Russians to figure out. A military defeat could help them in the process. American people voted for Trump and whatever is going on in the US is beyond Europe’s reach. I worry that waiting for the midterms may be too late.
Well, agree people can not fix other countries. But you used the phrase "stand up to." All countries can and should stand up to Trump.
Let me give an example: Great Britain and Canada can stand-up to Trump by pursuing close relationships with the EU. It will take some risk and courage - Trump has already threatened to punish trade deals with EU. But it is in the long term interests of all parties, including the American people, that Trump's international power and influence is reduced. Canada has shown courage (and I would add wisdom.) Great Britain not so much.
We didn't vote for Trump. Evidence is mounting that he stole the election. Many were prevented from voting.
Sadly, there are a bunch of people who did vote for him, but the majority of Americans oppose Trump. Don't make the mistake of imagining that the US has free or fair elections -- international observers refuse to observe US elections due to the high rate of irregularities.
Putin has been far more successful co-opting the Democratic process from within in Europe (and obviously with Trump) rather than the military assault mode.
Further, as Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Iran demonstrate terror inspiring air campaigns are more likely to harden the resolve of the opponent than foment regime change.
Austerity, such as will likely occur from increased Canadian and European defense spending might be Putin's at least secondary goal here.
Generating sufficient economic growth in aging European populations to offset the drag of increased defense spending (which will, as you note, have to happen given the changes in the US) will be paramount.
Many thanks for this great analysis. If Europe is squeezed between Putin and Trump for now, things are slowly moving, as you say, and not to Putin's advantage, as too many analysts have somewhat hastily concluded. As Europe ramps up its own defence capabilities, its support for Ukraine, in short, its own agency, Putin will see that Trump is rapidly losing interest in Europe in general and Ukraine in particular, will not be able to help him subjugate Ukraine, and that he may have made a serious miscalculation by not taking the off-ramp that Trump seemed to be offering him a few months ago. How this will affect his strategy and that of his allies, China, Iran and North Korea remains to be seen. As long as they were sure that they were "taking a pot shot at America", in the words of Fiona Hill (in a recent interview with "Foreign Affairs") by helping Putin in Ukraine, they may not be so keen on being on the wrong side of a stronger Europe within NATO (including of course Canada, the UK, Norway and Turkey). Especially China. It's worth noting that Putin called in North Korean troops to help help Russia defend its territory in Kursk Oblast but those troops didn't cross the border into Ukraine. Was this Putin's choice alone, simply the result of catastrophic casualties or perhaps an indication that China was unwilling to see its vassal state accused of contributing to a war of aggression in Europe ?
Good anaysis, Minna. I especially liked your last comment on Rutte vis a vis Lavrov. Rutte has his moments...albeit few and far between. By this time, everyone knows what they have to do and all that remains is the hard part...to DO IT. As for the U.S. and Trump, the battle for the soul of the country is just beginning and, honestly, where it will end is unpredictable. Trump and his minions are creating a fascist state, complete with its own "gestapo" and with the complicity of its Republican legislators. If successful, what that will mean for relations with Europe will depend on which "camp" in his regime ends with the most influence. Will it be the "pro Putin" camp or the old Republican "pro Europe" faction? The less that has to do with the survival of Ukraine, the better...but it will factor in. Let's hope that this veritable "earthquake" in geopolitics transitions into a new power structure without further conflicts.
I'm going to warn that fascist Trump's grip on power is extremely weak. He is destroying American central-government institutions. But there are other centers of power in the US.
It is going to become vital for Europeans to understand SUBNATIONAL institutions like the states of the US. Just like Europeans needed to understand the states of the USSR before 1991 happened (most did not understand them)
I am happy to read the European Dispatch every Tuesday. As you say Europe just needs time which of course Ukraine doesn’t have. Still, good news to read that Germany has signed a $2.5 billion contract to supply IRIS-T missile systems and related warheads to Ukraine.
Very insightful. I haven't seen the European position towards the US described like this before, but of course you are correct. Trump is really our problem to solve, not Europe's.
Thank you. Trump hates being humiliated. How many weapons that Ukraine would find useful are actually still here in the US? We need reliable information.
Time for Europe to step up. Putin helped put Trump in office. Trump may never agree to giving Ukraine the help it needs. If Europe and Ukraine ever do anything that makes Russia look badly overmatched, Trump might want to take credit for that, but otherwise Uncle Vladimir will keep him in his place. There are two Americas today. Trump’s America has Allegator Alley camps.
I've been musing along those lines. If Ukraine turns the tide, Trump will likely get behind them. It's interesting to think about, but probably the smart money assumes that Trump is good for nothing.
I read reports 2 weeks ago that Trump remains convinced that Russia will win. It sounds credible and explains his behavior.
“The US, regardless of who its president is, remains our treaty ally, after all.”
Alas, not quite. The US under Trump have not only shown themselves to be very uncommitted to their “article 5” treaty commitment, they have also stated clearly and repeatedly that they want to take Canada and Greenland for themselves, in the latter case explicitly refusing to rule out the use of military force. In view of all that, the above-quoted statement sounds to me awfully like a delusion.
And yet, the US has not legally exited NATO. As long as they don’t do that, they remain technically a treaty ally. Article 5 has always been a question of interpretation and even if the US actually did do something against Canada or Greenland, it wouldn’t be the first time that NATO allies were on the brink of war (see Turkey and Greece).
I totally agree that the North Atlantic Treaty is a quite different kind of treaty from the Budapest Memorandum. The Budapest Memorandum was always intended (not only by Russia, but also by the US) to be a bunch of empty promises under a nice-sounding headline; NATO by contrast was intended to be a true defence alliance.
I’m not sure though that that distinction really matters that much now.
For example, the free trade agreements that the US has negotiated and agreed and ratified with e.g. Canada and South Korea were always intended by the parties to the agreements to be true free trade agreements, and now the US is treating them as something that the US can arbitrarily ignore. As long as the US government doesn’t change fundamentally, does it really matter that the US has not formally terminated those free trade agreements?
I would argue that it matters as long as the US is still participating in NATO military exercises (which it is, oddly). Once that changes, the European strategy should also change.
But is it safe to allow the US to participate in NATO military exercises, or will it leak sensitive European defense information? Ask what Greece and Turkey have done historically.
Whenever the US participates in something, and/or otherwise observes in a way that results in documents with information being created, it should be assumed that a Russian intelligence agency will soon possess copies of those documents.
"We're gonna send some more weapons we have to them, they have to be able to defend themselves, they're getting hit very hard now," Trump said alongside a U.S. and Israeli delegation at the White House.
Hopefully this really means additional weapons and not just those that were anyways intended to be sent to Ukraine.
It’s better not to get our hopes up. The US is effectively out, the main thing is to get the shipment to Ukraine that’s already in Poland and was halted this week.
Minna, good argument for needing time as Europe has the people, industry, and technology to make this happen. It is simply time to prepare. It is good to get confirmation that Europe’s obsequiousness toward the orange infant was a strategy as much as anything…but it is a bad strategy as he will only try to humiliate Europe more now. The narcissist in the Washington only respects power and force…look
How often Putin humiliates Donny? And he keeps going back for more!
I am currently in Spain and have heard little of Ukraine this visit. Maybe it is because I am on the furthest “EU Outpost” on La Palma in the Canaries. Help me understand what Spain is not doing and needs to do more.
I don’t think it’s really relevant for Europe whether Trump humiliates us or not. And there’s two ways to see this: it’s not our shame that he is the US president. It also ridicules Trump that everyone climbs down to his level.
Spain was the only one who didn’t fully endorse the new NATO 5 percent defence spending pledge. In a way I don’t mind that they refused to play along in the charade.
Thank for that piece of information. I think Spain being on the periphery is part of that while elections are also coming soon as that is in the news early and often.
As for “humiliation” it is the citizens of the US who should feel shame and humiliation for electing a cruel and petulant child. I am ashamed to carry a US Passport having voted against this clown 3 times. I am heartened to read that you think it is not relevant to be “humiliated” by such a clown. What matters is that Europe act, which is now doing…finally.
Well done Minna. This is an excellent post and one that I agree with whole-heartedly. I've been saying that Europe needs time and that they have the measure of Trump. I couldn't have put Rutte's behaviour any better. It may be hard to accept but it is the clever play and Trump is too stupid to realise he is being played like a fiddle by both Europe and Russia.
Thank you very much !
If flattering the Toddler in chief without making major concessions brings good results, it's worth doing however bad it goes down with your domestic audience.
While I'm sure Putin and his mates have great ambitions of expansion into Ukraine and Europe there's the issue of whether they can do it. Russian military progress in the last two years has been very expensive and as far as I can tell pretty inconsequential (except for the unfortunate but smallish number of Ukrainians who had to leave). Putin gives no sign of wanting to stop, is spending far more than he earns (Russia's economy is his private piggy bank) and the sovereign wealth fund is getting steadily closer to exhaustion. When that happens things are going to get reallly interesting for the Russian war machine. Or boring. My guess is it will just seize up.
In sum, I think the Europeans should be very concerned about Putin and his ambitions but have cause to be a lot less worried than they needed to be 2-3 years ago.
Keep up the good work Minna. You're producing stuff well worth reading.
Many thanks ! I’m glad to hear you enjoy reading the Europe Dispatch.
Your “Europe Dispatch” is definitely just about the pinnacle of what I find worth reading; I greatly appreciate your work!
Thank you very much ! Also for your contributions to the discussion.
Yes, if FDR and Churchill could work with Stalin and flatter him, Rutte surely can humor Trump. And the Norwegians should make Trump an offer he can't refuse: if he sells Ukraine (via Europe) everything it wants, next year he gets the Nobel Peace Prize. Heck, the Swedes can throw in the Nobel Literature Prize for Art of the Deal and the Economics Prize for his tariffs (perhaps in 2027 and 2028 if he continues to support Ukraine AND Taiwan remains free). As much as Trump craves Putin's approval, there's absolutely no way such a narcissist will pass up a chance to become the first triple Nobel winner in history.
A brilliant idea but could we trust the Narcisst-in-Chief to keep his side of the bargain?
That's why I suggested staggering them all the way to October 2028 (by which time Ukraine should win, and if that happens because of Trump, his claim on the Peace Prize will not be entirely frivolous). The nominations close in February or so. The earliest Trump can be awarded any prize is October 2026. Over 15 months he can send A LOT of weapons.
You really do think of everything Andrew!
Of course, Trump is very transactional, and this is the ultimate transaction.
“If flattering the Toddler in chief without making major concessions brings good results, it's worth doing however bad it goes down with your domestic audience.”
In regard to career diplomats, I agree.
In regard to political leaders, I however disagree: A political leader is not primarily someone whose work is to get good results, or prevent bad ones like economy-disrupting tariffs. A political leader is first and foremost a political leader of their nation; the political leader’s primarily responsibility is to provide clarity to their nation. Being a hypocritical Trump-flatterer in public prevents fulfilling that primary responsibility.
"It is the American people and institutions who have to stand up to Trump, not Europeans."
You can replace the word "Europeans" with "Republicans" and you have the GOP philosophy in the Trump era.
Frankly, the European position is similarly craven. Is Putin a problem for the Russian people to solve? You have to accept that the U.S. is in the throes of an authoritarian coup. Expect a decade for the U.S. to be a functional ally again. Trump is supporting the far right parties of Europe, everyone else (Including U.S. Democrats) are the enemy, full stop. Putin & Trump are in a partnership to suppress Europe. Trump is in a hybrid war with the EU, if not NATO (see Greenland.)
I do think your essay is balanced. You acknowledge that Europe avoided decisive action for 3 years. In particular, Trump’s desire to kick Ukraine to the curb has been clear since he pressured Congress to halt aid to Ukraine in 2023. I know Europe craves a gradual military buildup. But they are two years late for that plan, Ukraine is predictably in crisis in 2025.
Europe is moving, perhaps to the limit of public support. More hair should be on fire. At least stop the pointless talk of Trump or Lindsay Graham easing the burden. (I’m not directing this at you, I’m thinking of the endless stream of Euro commentators reading imaginary tea leaves.)
Thank you for sharing your perspective. Frankly, I do think that Putin and what he represents is for the Russians to figure out. A military defeat could help them in the process. American people voted for Trump and whatever is going on in the US is beyond Europe’s reach. I worry that waiting for the midterms may be too late.
Well, agree people can not fix other countries. But you used the phrase "stand up to." All countries can and should stand up to Trump.
Let me give an example: Great Britain and Canada can stand-up to Trump by pursuing close relationships with the EU. It will take some risk and courage - Trump has already threatened to punish trade deals with EU. But it is in the long term interests of all parties, including the American people, that Trump's international power and influence is reduced. Canada has shown courage (and I would add wisdom.) Great Britain not so much.
Indeed we are still waiting on the Brits to dare to embrace Europe… that does need to happen.
We didn't vote for Trump. Evidence is mounting that he stole the election. Many were prevented from voting.
Sadly, there are a bunch of people who did vote for him, but the majority of Americans oppose Trump. Don't make the mistake of imagining that the US has free or fair elections -- international observers refuse to observe US elections due to the high rate of irregularities.
Putin has been far more successful co-opting the Democratic process from within in Europe (and obviously with Trump) rather than the military assault mode.
Further, as Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Iran demonstrate terror inspiring air campaigns are more likely to harden the resolve of the opponent than foment regime change.
Austerity, such as will likely occur from increased Canadian and European defense spending might be Putin's at least secondary goal here.
Generating sufficient economic growth in aging European populations to offset the drag of increased defense spending (which will, as you note, have to happen given the changes in the US) will be paramount.
Many thanks for this great analysis. If Europe is squeezed between Putin and Trump for now, things are slowly moving, as you say, and not to Putin's advantage, as too many analysts have somewhat hastily concluded. As Europe ramps up its own defence capabilities, its support for Ukraine, in short, its own agency, Putin will see that Trump is rapidly losing interest in Europe in general and Ukraine in particular, will not be able to help him subjugate Ukraine, and that he may have made a serious miscalculation by not taking the off-ramp that Trump seemed to be offering him a few months ago. How this will affect his strategy and that of his allies, China, Iran and North Korea remains to be seen. As long as they were sure that they were "taking a pot shot at America", in the words of Fiona Hill (in a recent interview with "Foreign Affairs") by helping Putin in Ukraine, they may not be so keen on being on the wrong side of a stronger Europe within NATO (including of course Canada, the UK, Norway and Turkey). Especially China. It's worth noting that Putin called in North Korean troops to help help Russia defend its territory in Kursk Oblast but those troops didn't cross the border into Ukraine. Was this Putin's choice alone, simply the result of catastrophic casualties or perhaps an indication that China was unwilling to see its vassal state accused of contributing to a war of aggression in Europe ?
Good anaysis, Minna. I especially liked your last comment on Rutte vis a vis Lavrov. Rutte has his moments...albeit few and far between. By this time, everyone knows what they have to do and all that remains is the hard part...to DO IT. As for the U.S. and Trump, the battle for the soul of the country is just beginning and, honestly, where it will end is unpredictable. Trump and his minions are creating a fascist state, complete with its own "gestapo" and with the complicity of its Republican legislators. If successful, what that will mean for relations with Europe will depend on which "camp" in his regime ends with the most influence. Will it be the "pro Putin" camp or the old Republican "pro Europe" faction? The less that has to do with the survival of Ukraine, the better...but it will factor in. Let's hope that this veritable "earthquake" in geopolitics transitions into a new power structure without further conflicts.
Indeed Rutte is perhaps not the politician we want, but the politician we deserve…
I'm going to warn that fascist Trump's grip on power is extremely weak. He is destroying American central-government institutions. But there are other centers of power in the US.
It is going to become vital for Europeans to understand SUBNATIONAL institutions like the states of the US. Just like Europeans needed to understand the states of the USSR before 1991 happened (most did not understand them)
I am happy to read the European Dispatch every Tuesday. As you say Europe just needs time which of course Ukraine doesn’t have. Still, good news to read that Germany has signed a $2.5 billion contract to supply IRIS-T missile systems and related warheads to Ukraine.
Thank you for flagging that ! Will include it in my list of good news :)
I enjoy your essays so much, Minna, and have learned a lot from them; this one is no exception.
I am very happy to hear ! Thanks for reading !
Very insightful. I haven't seen the European position towards the US described like this before, but of course you are correct. Trump is really our problem to solve, not Europe's.
I really liked Rutte’s lavrov remarks! I mean its just lies and lies why should we care about what he says. Its not gonna help anybody.
Very well said, I totally agree - thanks!!
Thank you. Trump hates being humiliated. How many weapons that Ukraine would find useful are actually still here in the US? We need reliable information.
Time for Europe to step up. Putin helped put Trump in office. Trump may never agree to giving Ukraine the help it needs. If Europe and Ukraine ever do anything that makes Russia look badly overmatched, Trump might want to take credit for that, but otherwise Uncle Vladimir will keep him in his place. There are two Americas today. Trump’s America has Allegator Alley camps.
I've been musing along those lines. If Ukraine turns the tide, Trump will likely get behind them. It's interesting to think about, but probably the smart money assumes that Trump is good for nothing.
I read reports 2 weeks ago that Trump remains convinced that Russia will win. It sounds credible and explains his behavior.
“The US, regardless of who its president is, remains our treaty ally, after all.”
Alas, not quite. The US under Trump have not only shown themselves to be very uncommitted to their “article 5” treaty commitment, they have also stated clearly and repeatedly that they want to take Canada and Greenland for themselves, in the latter case explicitly refusing to rule out the use of military force. In view of all that, the above-quoted statement sounds to me awfully like a delusion.
And yet, the US has not legally exited NATO. As long as they don’t do that, they remain technically a treaty ally. Article 5 has always been a question of interpretation and even if the US actually did do something against Canada or Greenland, it wouldn’t be the first time that NATO allies were on the brink of war (see Turkey and Greece).
It’s what it is.
“And yet, the US has not legally exited NATO.”
Likewise, Russia has not officially withdrawn their Budapest Memorandum commitments to Ukraine cf. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf
I take your point, but don’t think NATO can be compared to the Budapest memorandum.
I totally agree that the North Atlantic Treaty is a quite different kind of treaty from the Budapest Memorandum. The Budapest Memorandum was always intended (not only by Russia, but also by the US) to be a bunch of empty promises under a nice-sounding headline; NATO by contrast was intended to be a true defence alliance.
I’m not sure though that that distinction really matters that much now.
For example, the free trade agreements that the US has negotiated and agreed and ratified with e.g. Canada and South Korea were always intended by the parties to the agreements to be true free trade agreements, and now the US is treating them as something that the US can arbitrarily ignore. As long as the US government doesn’t change fundamentally, does it really matter that the US has not formally terminated those free trade agreements?
I would argue that it matters as long as the US is still participating in NATO military exercises (which it is, oddly). Once that changes, the European strategy should also change.
But is it safe to allow the US to participate in NATO military exercises, or will it leak sensitive European defense information? Ask what Greece and Turkey have done historically.
Whenever the US participates in something, and/or otherwise observes in a way that results in documents with information being created, it should be assumed that a Russian intelligence agency will soon possess copies of those documents.
"We're gonna send some more weapons we have to them, they have to be able to defend themselves, they're getting hit very hard now," Trump said alongside a U.S. and Israeli delegation at the White House.
Hopefully this really means additional weapons and not just those that were anyways intended to be sent to Ukraine.
It’s better not to get our hopes up. The US is effectively out, the main thing is to get the shipment to Ukraine that’s already in Poland and was halted this week.
Minna, good argument for needing time as Europe has the people, industry, and technology to make this happen. It is simply time to prepare. It is good to get confirmation that Europe’s obsequiousness toward the orange infant was a strategy as much as anything…but it is a bad strategy as he will only try to humiliate Europe more now. The narcissist in the Washington only respects power and force…look
How often Putin humiliates Donny? And he keeps going back for more!
I am currently in Spain and have heard little of Ukraine this visit. Maybe it is because I am on the furthest “EU Outpost” on La Palma in the Canaries. Help me understand what Spain is not doing and needs to do more.
I don’t think it’s really relevant for Europe whether Trump humiliates us or not. And there’s two ways to see this: it’s not our shame that he is the US president. It also ridicules Trump that everyone climbs down to his level.
Spain was the only one who didn’t fully endorse the new NATO 5 percent defence spending pledge. In a way I don’t mind that they refused to play along in the charade.
https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-nato-canada-defense-target-spending-gdp/
Thank for that piece of information. I think Spain being on the periphery is part of that while elections are also coming soon as that is in the news early and often.
As for “humiliation” it is the citizens of the US who should feel shame and humiliation for electing a cruel and petulant child. I am ashamed to carry a US Passport having voted against this clown 3 times. I am heartened to read that you think it is not relevant to be “humiliated” by such a clown. What matters is that Europe act, which is now doing…finally.