MUNICH — During the Munich Security Conference, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy asserted that the moment has arrived for establishing an “armed forces of Europe,” reflecting concerns about whether the United States can be relied upon for continued support of the continent. This declaration came as German Chancellor Olaf Scholz confronted U.S. officials regarding their interference in German elections, particularly criticizing Vice President JD Vance for addressing European leaders about their democratic practices and meeting with representatives of a far-right German political party.
On the second day of the conference, both Zelenskyy and Scholz delivered compelling addresses that highlighted the growing strain in transatlantic relations, exacerbated by the recent policies of U.S. President Donald Trump. European leaders are grappling with the ramifications of Trump’s decision to change decades of American foreign policy by engaging in discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin, aiming for an end to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Trump’s envoy for Ukraine and Russia recently indicated that Europeans are likely to be excluded from any negotiations concerning peace in Ukraine.
Zelenskyy emphasized the need for a more robust European military presence, pointing to Ukraine’s ongoing struggle against Russia’s full-scale invasion as evidence supporting the idea of a unified European army—an initiative that has been under consideration by some European leaders for some time. “I truly believe that the time has come,” he stated. “The armed forces of Europe must be created.”
However, the reception of this proposal by European leaders remains uncertain. Zelenskyy has long advocated for increased military and economic assistance from the European Union, cautioning that other regions in Europe may also fall prey to Russia’s ambitions. While many European countries, along with the United States, have been staunch supporters of Ukraine, varying political views regarding the response to Russia and economic pressures—such as high national debt impacting defense budgets—complicate the provision of additional support.
In a related discussion, Zelenskyy revealed that he refrained from allowing his ministers to finalize an agreement with the U.S. concerning the extraction of minerals in Ukraine, citing concerns about the U.S. commitment to defending Ukrainian interests. Ukraine is looking to leverage its rare earth elements, critical for numerous technologies, in exchange for ongoing military assistance.
Zelenskyy also referenced a week’s phone conversation between Trump and Putin, in which Trump hinted at a forthcoming meeting to negotiate a peace agreement regarding Ukraine. This approach diverges sharply from the Biden administration’s firmer stance against Moscow following its invasion of Ukraine that began on February 24, 2022. On that note, a phone conversation was noted between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, reinforcing America’s commitment to resolving the Ukrainian conflict and examining potential collaboration on other bilateral topics.
Trump previously assured Zelenskyy of his intent to include Ukraine in discussions aimed at ending the war, with Zelenskyy insisting that Europe also deserves a seat at that table. He remarked, “Ukraine will never accept deals made behind our backs without our involvement, and the same rule should apply to all of Europe.” He pointed out that Trump did not mention the necessity of including Europe in such discussions, indicating a shift in the long-standing dynamic of American support for European affairs.
As part of this ongoing discourse, European leaders are striving to discern Washington’s new direction, especially regarding democracy and Ukraine’s future, as the Trump administration continues to redefine transatlantic relations that have been stable since World War II. General Keith Kellogg, Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, effectively sidelined European representatives from peace talks, despite Zelenskyy’s call for inclusivity. “You can have the Ukrainians, the Russians, and clearly the Americans at the table talking,” Kellogg stated during an event, suggesting that European participation is unrealistic in his view.
In response to the evolving dynamics, Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock described the current U.S. stance as a significant challenge that necessitates unity among European leaders for a viable peace in Ukraine. “This is an existential moment. It’s a moment where Europe has to stand up,” she asserted, emphasizing that a lasting peace cannot be achieved without broad European agreement.
Adding to the discourse, Iceland’s Prime Minister Kristrún Frostadóttir expressed concerns about the lack of clarity regarding U.S. intentions, suggesting that a clearer message would be beneficial by the end of the conference.
Earlier, Chancellor Scholz stated his satisfaction with the shared commitment with the U.S. to uphold Ukraine’s sovereignty while condemning Washington’s shifting political strategies and voicing his opposition to far-right elements. Scholz firmly rejected Vance’s remarks about the decline of free speech in Europe and underscored Germany’s historical stance against extreme right ideologies.
The implications of external involvement in Germany’s political processes were clear as Scholz emphasized that such interference would not be tolerated. However, not all responses from European officials were negative; Switzerland’s President Karin Keller-Sutter recognized Vance’s remarks as relevant to shared democratic values.
