Europe faces difficult questions as Ukraine marks two years since Russia invades

CNN
—

This week, as the world prepares to mark the second anniversary of President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Europe will be treated to an investigative interview about the war that unexpectedly erupted on its borders and how it will approach the next 12 months. You have to ask yourself questions.

Perhaps the most important of these questions is how long such depleting financial support for Ukraine can actually be maintained.

This idea is not new, but it is increasingly being echoed informally in some parts of government. It also reflects some harsh truths of our time.

The war has been at a standstill for some time, but last week Ukraine was forced to retreat from the main city of Avdiivka after months of heavy fighting, suffering its worst defeat since the fall of Bakhmut in May.

Much-needed funding from the United States passed the Senate but is stuck awaiting approval by the House of Representatives. Cohesion between the European Union (EU) and NATO is beginning to fray, with almost all major decisions on hold and under threat of a veto.

Although no serious Western voice wants to abandon Kiev, there is no denying that fatigue is building as the bill swells.

Since the crisis began, the EU and its regional allies have spent more than $100 billion on Ukraine defense efforts, according to the Kiel Institute’s Ukraine Support Tracker.

Earlier this month, EU leaders agreed to a $54 billion aid package for Ukraine between now and 2027. The United Kingdom, arguably the region’s leading security power, has also pledged more than $15 billion to Ukraine starting in 2022. The United States has spent $66 billion on the Kiel Institute, with another $60 billion in development.

The West’s massive support for Ukraine after 2022 has surprised many in the diplomatic community, but the longer the war drags on, the more fatigue will grow.

With no end in sight to the conflict, competition for political attention in the Middle East, and domestic concerns over an inflationary cost-of-living crisis around the world, it is politically difficult to commit large sums of money to Ukraine. There is a possibility that it will happen. Government stomach.

Political pressure on spending will become even more pronounced as European elections take place in June, as well as national elections in several countries, including the United Kingdom, a key ally of Ukraine.

European officials are concerned that financing costly overseas wars would be too much for them if they come into direct contact with domestic politics, only to consider that U.S. President Joe Biden is having difficulties with his own Ukraine policy. You can see what kind of impact it has on the real world.

Adding to these ominous distractions is the prospect of Donald Trump returning to the White House next year.

President Trump has not clearly stated what his Ukraine policy will be, other than claiming he can end the war within 24 hours. The former president’s anti-NATO rhetoric, general disdain for European institutions, and bizarre praise for President Putin are well known.

No one knows what a re-election of President Trump will mean in practical terms, but it is plausible to assume the worst-case scenario for Ukraine. The idea is to lose momentum on the ground while the new White House official decides that the United States has already spent enough.

This is a worrying prospect for European officials, who already believe that Putin is trying to pressure and exclude the West.

This is where the next 12 months will be crucial for Ukraine’s European allies. It is clearly in the continent’s interest that Putin does not win this war – few would disagree with that view.

So no matter what happens in the U.S., officials say it’s important for Europeans to hang in there and keep spending, no matter how difficult it may seem.

In the run-up to the US presidential election, the question of what will happen to European security without the US will inevitably be asked. And while it is true that Ukraine’s security is directly tied to broader European security, the pressing question of how to support Kiev is the This is slightly different from long-term goals.

Will Europe be able to continue funding Ukraine if the US withdraws financial support?

Most officials insist it is possible. Sure it will be difficult, but it is possible. “The EU is very good at raising money, but there are tools that we haven’t used yet,” one NATO official told CNN.

The Brussels government should begin considering using funds tied up in Russian frozen assets to provide financial aid to Ukraine within the next 12 months, the official said. “Although the funds cannot legally be used to purchase weapons, it is possible to free up arms funds from the EU and national budgets and use them to pay for compensation,” they said.

This raises eyebrows among those in the diplomatic community who are looking beyond Europe. Some worry that setting a precedent for using frozen assets to finance foreign wars could give countries like China permission to do the same in regional conflicts at home. Last year, the Chinese government introduced a new law that would make it easier to do the same with foreign assets within China.

The more thorny question is whether Europe can provide Kiev with the weapons it needs to win the war without American support.

The answer would be no. Europe currently does not have the manufacturing capacity to independently serve Ukraine over the next 12 months.

But Western diplomats are optimistic that arms deliveries to Ukraine fit perfectly into Europe’s much-needed move to reduce its dependence on the United States.

Officials pointed to a recent agreement brokered by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in which European countries pledged to buy 1,000 missiles from a U.S. company to be built at a new factory in Germany.

Europe’s desire to buy weapons and have its own security policy should not be realized at the expense of the United States, and dangling a carrot in a contract with the United States is one way to deal with it. Almost everyone agrees on that.

President Putin’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine is a farce that has cost unnecessary lives. If there are any positives to come from this, it should include that Europe is finally in a better position to defend itself and to work with old allies.

And, not surprisingly, most Western officials believe that if Europe can build up its fighting strength over the next year, it will be much easier to win over a future President Trump to its side.