Vice-President JD Vance told Fox News on Sunday:
What
we said to Europeans is simply, first of all, this is in your neck of
the woods, this is in your backdoor, you guys have got to step up and
take a bigger role in this thing, and if you care so much about this
conflict you should be willing to play a more direct in a more
substantial way in funding this war yourself. I think the president and I
certainly think that America, we’re done with the funding of the
Ukraine war business. We want to bring about a peaceful settlement to
this thing. We want to stop the killing. But Americans, I think, are
sick of continuing to send their money, their tax dollars of this
particular conflict but if the Europeans want to step up and actually
buy the weapons from American producers, we’re OK with that, but we’re
not going to fund it ourselves anymore.
Before translating his statements, it is essential to clarify some basic points.
Firstly, there is no such thing as the “Ukraine war business.”
It
is an unjustified, unprovoked and horrific full-scale Russian war of
aggression in gross violation of international law. Ukraine is the
victim, and Russia is the internationally recognized aggressor. Full
stop.
The only one turning the war into a business opportunity is
the US. It has stepped away from a value-based foreign policy to a
transactional one. As a consequence, it has stopped supporting a
partner. It has started selling weapons to European allies for them to
donate to Ukraine. It is demanding access to Ukrainian minerals in
exchange for “nothing.” It is offering Ukrainian territories and
maritime economic zones for the restoration of US/Russian relations and
increased trade.
Secondly, Europe is not involved because it “cares so much” about the war.
In the words of Daniel Hannan (former member of the European Parliament), “We are backing Ukraine because it is the wronged party.
We are sending it weapons because it was attacked without provocation
by a neighbor to whom it presented no threat. We are training its
soldiers because, when Ukraine agreed to hand over its nuclear arsenal
in 1994, it did so in exchange for an explicit promise that its
independence would be respected within its existing borders – a promise
guaranteed by Britain, the United States and (never forget) Russia.”
Europe is standing up for principles Russia has grossly violated, and the US has flagrantly turned its back on.
Thirdly, the war is not in Europe’s “neck of the woods” or its “backdoor.”
The war in Ukraine is – as I have been persistently stressing – only a part of a much broader confrontation.
Russia’s strategic aims and objectives go far beyond Ukraine. It sees
the West as the enemy, demanding a sphere of interest over parts of NATO
territory. It is trying to rewrite international law and undermine
Western global dominance with the support of China, Iran and North
Korea. It is already waging a hybrid war in Europe and the US. It is a
war with global repercussions, a war that involves more than 60
countries and that is extremely worrisome, similar to the run-up to
World War II... Vance’s framing of the war as a “European problem” stands in stark contrast to the global realities.
Fourthly, Europe’s taxpayers are no less keen to fund wars than Americans.
Supporting
Ukraine is, however, no less crucial than funding our national defense,
internal security and law enforcement, emergency management and civil
protection, public health and biosecurity or cybersecurity and
infrastructure protection. We are doing it because failure to invest in
either of the mentioned areas – including Ukraine – will result in
catastrophic loss of life, economic collapse, and political instability.
It is not a matter of choice or whether taxpayers like it or not.
Europe is supporting Ukraine because it is the only smart thing to do
when facing a clear and present threat.
That said, several analyses show that most of the US past defense aid
to Ukraine remained within the American economy, creating jobs,
upgrading the Defense Industrial Base, strengthening the supply chain,
and replenishing US stockpiles with modern systems. Estimates suggest
that between 60% and 90% of funds were used domestically, strengthening both US security and its economy.
The
US’s decision to stop funding Ukraine means that it is effectively
stopping funding its national security. That is just plain stupid.
Lastly, Europe is not funding Ukraine. It is funding security and stability.
When European leaders call on Trump
to protect Ukraine’s interests during the forthcoming talks with Putin,
they stress that it is all about “Ukraine and Europe’s vital security
interests.” International law. The restoration of peace. Global
stability. The rules-based world order. It’s security and stability.
National defense. Shared values.
The failure to fund any of these will have far-reaching global repercussions.
So, what was the VP really saying in the Fox interview?
If
you replace “Ukraine” with “Europe,” you get the gist of it. European
security and stability are directly linked to the destiny of Ukraine.
The latter has been protecting NATO territory – fulfilling the task of
the Alliance – for nearly four years. It is commonly recognized that
Russia will not stop at Ukraine’s western borders. It has repeatedly
told the West as much, as it is preparing for the next phase of the war.
Europe has slowly come to grasp that it risks a full-scale conflict with Russia by 2029-30. Its concerns grow by the day as the US seems dead set on enabling the Kremlin by rewarding its war of aggression.
President
Trump insists on negotiating European security over the heads of Europe
(and Ukraine, obviously). He is proposing recognizing occupied
territories as Russian, lifting sanctions and restarting trade. Trump is
supporting Putin’s demands for a change of the Ukrainian president and
government and is opposing Ukrainian NATO membership. He is prepared to
give Putin nearly all he is asking for in exchange for a reset of
relations and business opportunities.
Ignoring the broader confrontation – and utterly failing to understand our common strategic opponent and “the extremism of Putinism”
– President Trump is prepared to strengthen Russia’s economy, enabling
it to quickly reconstitute its Armed Forces and prepare for the next
assault.
When one replaces “Ukraine” with “Europe,” one realizes that Vance was
paraphrasing Project 2025. He talked about the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization and its commitment under the Washington Treaty.
The Trump administration wants Europe to handle Russia alone while helping America fight China. Project 2025
spells it out: “US allies must play their part not only in dealing with
China, but also in dealing with threats from Russia, Iran, and North
Korea.” It stresses that NATO must be transformed so that its “allies
are capable of fielding the great majority of the conventional forces
required to deter Russia while relying on the United States primarily
for… nuclear deterrent,” and other selected capabilities, while
“reducing the US force posture in Europe.”
The US does not want to commit to fighting wars in Europe but seeks to commit Europe to fighting wars in the Indo-Pacific area...
When the US stops funding Ukraine, it essentially stops funding
European security. It turns its back on its NATO commitment and
disgracefully fails to honor the thousands of European casualties
suffered in support of the US-led operations.
While President Trump reaffirmed the US’s commitment to NATO’s Article 5
during the Hague Summit, the sum of statements and actions by his
administration paints a very different picture. After all, President
Trump has threatened allies with landgrabs by military force, annexation, started a trade war and increasingly aligned his foreign policy with that of Russia. The President sees the EU, which represents most of the US’s European allies, as “worse than our so-called enemies.” He argues that the EU “was formed in order to screw the United States.”
On top of that, Trump is offering Russia generous concessions
before negotiations have even started. He is making concessions at the
peril of European security without inviting the US allies to the table.
European
security can no longer be based on the hope that the US will honor its
NATO commitment when all signs indicate that it will not. President
Trump and his administration have persistently demonstrated that they
cannot be trusted.
The US’s commitment must be put to the test.
Europe
must invoke NATO Article 5 because of Russia’s hybrid war. Since
Russia’s aggressions – its attempts to undermine NATO from within, its
influence operations, its acts of sabotage and assassinations, its
interruption of navigation systems, its cyberattacks and more – are on
record, an American decision to refuse Article 5 will tell us everything
we need to know.
It is, after all, far better to know today that
the US will not back it than the day after the war starts. This
realization will enable alternative solutions – like the Coalition of Like-Minded Countries I recently suggested – while it is still relevant.
If NATO has become a liability, effectively stopping all debates
about a new and credible military alliance, it is crucial to conclude,
as this will trigger a process that we most urgently need. Europe must
know. Not hope. It must act. Not wait.
Europe must embrace the US
as a part of the problem and Ukraine as a part of the solution. It
urgently needs to form a Coalition of Like-Minded European Countries."
