Breaking The Ukrainian Impasse And Rearming Europe – OpEd

The Renewed Power of Europe and Its Proximity to China

With Donald Trump’s return to the scene, his intervention in resolving the Russia-Ukraine clash has gained more traction. Under Trump’s mediation and his support in advancing the negotiations under the guise of ending the war, Russia can potentially preserve its occupied territories in eastern Ukraine. Consequently, Europe, sniffing the geopolitical games as an eminent threat to the continent, is determined to counter it to the degree that according to the European Commission President’s latest statement, “Europe must arm itself.” This echoes Macron’s 2018 statement that Europe needs its own independent army. 

Nevertheless, Ukraine and Western Europe are not the only parties for whom the Trump-Putin alliance has raised serious concerns. China is undoubtedly surveilling the situation closely. 

Given the gravity of such geopolitical equations, the depicted landscape may yield the following:

1)  The impending conflict between Ukraine and White House/Trump’s front will serve as a lever for Europe’s renewed military and economic independence.

2)  In broader terms, this major shift sets the stage for improving Europe’s proximity to China and potentially achieving global power equilibrium. However, Europe’s alignment with China is not ideological but rather commercial and perhaps, one day, military.

The Isolation of the United States

Trump’s strategy assumes that a peace deal in Ukraine would draw Russia closer, potentially creating a rift between Russia and China, weakening the latter. This was Nixon’s gambit, during whose office, the US engaged with China to create divisions among communist countries, pushing Russia away. Yet, such a plan today will likely yield indefensible consequences. Proximity to Russia would isolate US and push Europe towards China, granting the latter added influence.

3) Ultimately, Trump’s America versus Europe’s integrated empowerment and encouragement of China’s presence on the global stage profoundly jeopardizes world peace.

The time has come for both Europe and Canada to act independently of the United States. The Cold War mentality still grips Europe. If Europe enters the scene with full forces, establishing a unified global action with a robust military structure (the process which can be time-consuming, nonetheless), and even reaches some level of understanding with China, it sends alarming signals to both Trump and Putin, possibly urging them to reconsider jeopardizing the peace of the world. Only a third power can pacify these careless forces.

A Multinational European Army

In practice, Europe faces significant obstacles in establishing a powerful multinational military force. The United States and Russia will undoubtedly attempt to create divisions among European states to prevent such plots to advance. Historically, however, Western European nations have demonstrated greater political and strategic cohesion.

Hence, the first step in creating a European multinational army should be to establish its foundation in a core group of Western European nations rather than Eastern ones. This would likely include the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, followed by Italy and, progressively, other nations committed to the European project.

Moreover, if US were to withdraw from NATO, the remaining member states—with some exceptions aside, such as Turkey—might integrate into the new European military structure, transforming it into a powerful and influential force. In this scenario, Northern European nations would face fewer challenges in joining this new military alliance.

Considerations for Breaking the Deadlock

Achieving peace in parallel with these developments requires a series of strategic compromises:

1. Ukraine must renounce its aspiration to join NATO. This is the most crucial step toward initiating meaningful negotiations to end the ongoing war.
2. Ukraine must reach an agreement with the United States regarding its underground resources, a scenario that appears increasingly more likely to take hold.
3. Once such agreement is reached, the United States, in turn, must guarantee Ukraine’s security.
4. Russia would retain the occupied territories in Ukraine. While this is a contentious proposition, ending the war and preventing its expansion into other countries requires bold initiatives. Ultimately, it appears that this may be the only viable path for Russia’s withdrawal from further conflict.

However, such an agreement requires several key guarantees:

• First, Russia must pledge not to launch further military aggression against Ukraine or any other European country.
• Second, to ensure peace, Russia must accept that the United States and European nations act as the supportive guarantors of Ukraine’s security.

This could involve the deployment of Western (US and European) ground troops in Ukraine or the implementation of another security mechanism, which requires further deliberation by experts in the field.