Europe’s security hangs in the balance

It is hard not to notice the wrecking power that the Donald Trump 2.0 presidency is inflicting on the world. However, it might not be all bad. It might instill a new sense of purpose into old machines of government that have become inefficient, stale and, to the younger generation, outdated. The jury is still out on whether Trump’s domestic and international shake-up of processes and reform will amount to much. But the key factor is whether the world will be safer, more stable and certain and reliable or if it will be marred by divisions, discord, wars and instability.

The established wisdom about defense up until today has been whether we mobilize states and armies to defend borders, to defend ideas or both. In the current lens of world affairs, one sees that the Western world is splitting between two visions: one that wants to use brute force to change borders and/or utilize it in the pursuit of more land, hegemony and wealth, and another that still believes in self-defense, sovereign borders and the rule of law, as well as the defense of ideas such as liberty, freedom and democracy.

The advocates of the latter idea are the Europeans, who are finding themselves pushed into new territories of not only having to choose sides, but also having to be more active and ruthless in defending ideas, as not doing so is likely to cost them their borders, sovereignty and freedom.

Many historians have long argued that nation states need occasional shocks to wipe away the dust and cobwebs that have gathered over the years. Trump is certainly having this effect on the US and the rest of the world, especially its oldest Western allies in Europe.

Up until recently, NATO was an umbrella that shielded Western sovereignty and territorial integrity and, more broadly, freedom and democracy. But as Trump has been racing to break the norms and seek accommodation with Russian President Vladimir Putin seemingly at any price, leaders in the EU, UK and Canada are finding themselves unable to underwrite their own security. They are also struggling to offer enough guarantees to defend the territorial integrity of Ukraine and safeguard the international rule of law as far as Russia’s invasion is concerned.

Many new defense formats have been discussed. NATO minus the US is a nonstarter. The so-called coalition of the willing is yet to offer a functioning formula. The E5 — a core group of European powers made up of the UK, France, Germany, Poland and Italy — could offer interim support for Kyiv and prevent its total capitulation. But it remains less than perfect, as Italy could side with Trump and Putin. And many say that the E5 should widen to include the Baltic nations that share borders with Russia, as well as having good standing armies, defense budgets, advanced defense industries and mobilized societies.

Europe is increasingly having to face the inevitable questions and is being pushed to redefine its doctrines for politics, war, peace and its role in the world.

Many historians have long argued that nation states need occasional shocks. Trump is certainly having this effect

Mohamed Chebaro

Love French President Emmanuel Macron or loathe him, he was the first to highlight the need for an EU security initiative back in 2017. He even agreed with Trump and said that NATO is “brain dead,” arguing in 2019 that European countries could no longer rely on America to defend its NATO allies. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, 44 nations came together within a European Political Community that rallied to help Kyiv, but its members continued to work under US leadership on the conflict.

What Europe did not do in 2022, it needs to do in 2025. All states need to rally behind a united defense doctrine to do whatever is necessary to protect their borders, as well as their democratic models, values and freedoms.

The EU, UK and Canada need to stop wavering and agree that the US has changed. And maybe that is not all for the worse, especially if it instills in them the drive to finally become self-reliant. In their soul-searching exercise, they must agree that they will not stop being aligned with their oldest and biggest Western power and ally. But somehow they need to find a modus vivendi to coexist with, while being independent of, the new transactional, isolationist-leaning Make America Great Again leadership in Washington.

The US president is acting like a bull in a china shop. If the American people agree to that, then that is their business. It will also not be the business of the US’ Western allies if Trump goes on to change course domestically. But the sooner they embrace the fact that the norms and conventions guiding their policies and governance of recent decades have changed, the more likely it will be that they rise to meet the challenge in a realistic way.

Nothing is forever in life and that includes war and peace. So, maybe Trump’s actions, however disconcerting they may appear, will trigger the start of something better — something that ends the war in Ukraine and pushes those countries that are reliant on the US to redefine where their best interests lie and how best to achieve them, whether they are related to the defense of their borders or the defense of their values and way of life. Then they can put their money where their mouth is, even if it means redrawing the social contract and the purpose of the state and governance in the post-Western-dominated age that is forming as we speak.

• Mohamed Chebaro is a British-Lebanese journalist with more than 25 years’ experience covering war, terrorism, defense, current affairs and diplomacy.