Image: keystone
analysis
The realization is growing: only together can Europe defend itself against the two rulers.
Dec 13, 2025, 09:37Dec 13, 2025, 09:37
Herfried Münkler is considered Germany’s leading political scientist. In his most recent book, “Power in Transition,” he analyzes how Germany can assert itself in a world in which the previously valid rules are being thrown overboard and replaced by great power thinking, a way of thinking that was actually long considered outdated.
Unlike other political scientists, however, Münkler does not fall into abysmal pessimism. Of course, he also knows about the enormous difficulties that the old continent faces in a world that is no longer rule-based. However, he also sees the opportunities, specifically, he sees that, under pressure from Moscow and Washington, Europe can no longer do anything other than move closer together.
Political scientist Herfried Münkler also sees opportunities.Image: Ralf U. Heinrich
In fact, the war in Ukraine also changed the EU. A core group has now formed, a “coalition of the willing”. These include Germany, France and Poland. The United Kingdom is also taking part, and, to a lesser extent, Italy is also participating. The heads of this coalition now meet almost weekly, and Volodymyr Zelensky, the President of Ukraine, is often there.
Two things bind this coalition together: On the one hand, it is clear to everyone that Vladimir Putin is no longer just concerned with preventing NATO’s eastern expansion. Münkler assumes that the Russian president cannot be dealt with using rational criteria such as homo economicus, because the war in Ukraine is also an economic catastrophe for his country, the consequences of which will last for decades.
Rather, Putin is pursuing a megalomaniacal plan: He wants to restore the Russian Empire as it existed in the time of Catherine the Great. Specifically, this means that he wants to bring both the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea under Russian control. And that in turn means that Putin will by no means be satisfied with the conquest of Donbass. He wants to force the entire Ukraine and probably also the Baltic states back under his thumb.
On the other hand, it has also become clear that the USA under Donald Trump is no longer a reliable partner for Europe. What became apparent in JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference in May has become crystal clear since the publication of the new national security strategy: Even if Trump probably hasn’t read the ominous strategy paper, it is obvious that he wants to weaken the EU, if not destroy it. That’s why he is willing to work with right-wing radical parties like the AfD. However, he is not prepared to abandon his friend Putin.
JD Vance at the Munich Security Conference.Image: keystone
Given this situation, Münkler can imagine that Trump will not only throw Ukraine under the bus, but that he will also leave NATO. However, a US withdrawal would not mean the end of this defense alliance, but rather the beginning of a NATO under European control and thus a common European army.
The shenanigans in the Oval Office are unlikely to continue for the time being either. The coalition of the willing reacted decisively to the American “peace plan” drawn up by Moscow and worked out a counter-proposal together with Ukraine. At the same time, Friedrich Merz, Emmanuel Macron & Co. are also in the process of getting rid of frozen Russian assets worth around $200 billion. The Financial Times reports on a plan that is intended to simultaneously outsmart Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and bring Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever on board. Belgium is important because the Russian national treasury is stored there.
A picture from the old slimy days: the European heads of state in the White House.Image: keystone
When it comes to Russian funds, Trump and the Europeans also have different intentions. The US President once again sees this as a profitable deal. This arouses the mistrust of Europeans. The Wall Street Journal reports: “A (senior European official) compared Trump’s vision with his idea of the Gaza Strip as a new Riviera. Another compared it to the economic version of the division of Europe after World War II. ‘It’s like Yalta,’ said the official.” (Author’s note: In the Yalta Treaty, Josef Stalin ripped off Franklin Roosevelt.)
Europe, on the other hand, wants to use the frozen Russian state funds to buy weapons for Ukraine and rebuild the country. Putin seems to have once again convinced Trump that his army’s victory is only a matter of time and that an ending with horror is therefore preferable to terror without end.
However, there are very contradictory reports regarding the military situation. What is clear, however, is that Zelensky cannot under any circumstances agree to a land swap like the one proposed by real estate tycoon Steve Witkoff with kind Russian help.
Don’t think about surrender: soldiers of a Ukrainian brigade.Image: keystone
The Ukrainian constitution requires that he must have the consent of parliament to do so. It’s unlikely he would receive it. The President of Ukraine is only making concessions to Trump on one point: he is prepared to accept new elections, even though, according to the constitution, this is only possible in times of peace.
Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin continues to bluff. The situation in Russia is “much less comfortable” than he claims, as the Economist writes. His poorly trained army is only conquering small sections of the Donbass at a snail’s pace and with immense losses, support for the war among the population is decreasing and the economy is in stagflation, which means high inflation and stagnating growth.
Does this mean that the brutal war of attrition in Ukraine will continue for years to come? Not necessarily. David Ignatius, a generally well-informed columnist for the Washington Post, reports that a possible peace plan is emerging. Among other things, it stipulates that Ukraine will join the EU in 2027, that the USA will provide binding security guarantees and that Ukrainian sovereignty will be protected.
“Trump should negotiate a sensible deal that will last for a long time,” said Ignatius. “Otherwise he will be left empty-handed and the terrible conflict could develop into an even more destructive phase.”