This article has been written for Easy History by Eddie Monkman.
An Unprecedented Moment in the Oval Office:
It was a scene unlike anything the world had watched before. The tone was set the moment Trump-supporting journalist Brian Glenn asked a petulant question about Volodymyr Zelensky’s attire. Donald Trump leant forward, his face aggressive. Vance lay back calm but abrasive whilst Marco Rubio slumped into his seat, looking uncomfortable and as if he wished to be anywhere else. Even his posturing in the wake of the meeting struggled to prove that Rubio is on the side of the disruptors. Despite being a member of Trump’s administration, Rubio has a foot in the ‘pre-Trump’ era of American politics. As he uncomfortably slumped into his seat, we were watching an era of foreign policy slump with him. Trump and Vance’s confidence came from one simple fact: Their era is now. The old norms have been ripped up.
What transpired in the Oval Office should not have come as a great surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to events in Washington this year. It was ostensibly a piece of iconography, a washing of dirty laundry on the most exposing stage in the world but it often needs these moments to force the world to notice. Incremental change rarely provokes a reaction but a shouting match in the White House likely will. The U.S has laid its cards on the table. As bitter a pill as it may be to swallow for Ukraine and its allies, Trump was not wrong when he told Zelensky that: ‘You do not hold the cards here.’ How Europe reacts over the coming weeks will be interesting to watch: Careful diplomacy will have to be executed with precision.
Careful diplomacy was not on display in the Oval Office last week. Zelensky had been in Washington in order to sign a deal that would see Ukraine and the U.S create a joint investment fund in order to aid the reconstruction of Ukraine using financing from Ukraine’s lucrative mineral resources. Whilst the deal fell short of the initial proposal for Ukraine to start repaying the $500 Billion they owed to the U.S, it was still a potential big step forward. After Washington spent the past month cosying up to Moscow, the deal looked to be an opportunity to bring Kyiv and Washington closer together. Trump loves a deal and he takes kindly to anyone who can offer him one. However, no deal ever panned out and we may never know whether Trump ever really intended for this deal to succeed. What became clear is that Trump wants Zelensky to bend. The idea of being portrayed as the weaker man or being under the control of another nation’s leader is unthinkable for Trump. He wants the world to see who is the boss, in his own words: ‘I can be as tough as anyone.’
A Difficult End to a Successful Week For Starmer:
Keir Starmer had enjoyed a successful maiden visit to Trump’s White House earlier in the week. Both Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron made their own visit to try and secure Ukraine – and Europe’s – relationship with the U.S. Both Starmer and Macron would have left Washington with a sense of optimism. Both men had enjoyed a productive visit and personable relations with Trump and both would have come back to Europe hoping – if not quite believing – that Trump could be trusted to work with Europe against Russia. The visit of Zelensky would have filled them with greater optimism. A deal with Trump could strengthen U.S/Ukraine relations. But, as Starmer and Macron watched the scenes unfold between Trump, Vance and Zelensky their thoughts will have changed from optimism to pessimism. The mood amongst various European governments would have likely been febrile late last Friday night, not least in the Ukrainian camp as they were kicked out of the White House early, with no minerals deal signed. Zelensky took to U.S media to try and reiterate his point – ‘we will never accept just a ceasefire. It will not work without security guarantees.’ The security guarantee that Starmer and Macron hoped to secure – and that they expected Zelensky to push further – now looks more distant than ever. Trump will not back down, and Zelensky will not be allowed back into the White House without ‘an apology for his behaviour’. It is hard to see how Zelensky can repair his relationship with the Trump administration without serious concessions. The security guarantee that he hoped for from the U.S will not be forthcoming.
Europe will now have to rip off the U.S Band-Aid and lead the future of Ukrainian security. Over the weekend, the first signs emerged that Europe is serious about pivoting away from U.S. security and taking the lead on Ukraine’s future. Keir Starmer hosted a meeting of European (and Canadian) leaders in London over the weekend in order to discuss the future of Ukrainian and by extension, European, security. The meeting had been planned before the events in the White House unfolded on Friday but the mood was heightened and the stakes would have felt higher. The headline announcement from the meeting came from what Starmer called a ‘coalition of the willing’. Whilst Starmer was not drawn on which nations would make up this coalition, he was insistent that it proved a unity within Europe as the continent looks to take security into its own hands.
Whilst hope still remains that the U.S will continue to support a ‘sustainable peace’, Europe has begun to slowly make provisions for the alternative. Starmer announced the UK would provide an additional £1.6 Billion of finance to buy more than 5,000 defence missiles for Ukraine. The President of the European Commission, Ursula Von Der Leyen told the press that the EU must work to turn Ukraine into a ‘steel porcupine’ in order to maintain a lasting peace with Russia. In the wake of the London meeting, European leaders have sought to be more definitive in their words and actions: Europe must step up and help guarantee the security of Ukraine. Starmer refused to be drawn on whether or not the U.S was now an unreliable ally for Europe however the actions and words of European leaders answer that question. Europe can no longer rely on U.S support and is now beginning to act accordingly. Russia has already begun to try and stir division between the U.S and Europe, describing the weekend’s meeting as an ‘anti Trump
meeting’. Whether Trump will take the Russian bait will become clear in the weeks ahead. Regardless of the fact, Russia is in a far stronger position in the war now than it was just weeks ago.
What lies ahead for Europe and Ukraine?
For Europe, the new geopolitical landscape can provide opportunities for progress and for failure. Starmer claimed that ‘European unity is at an extremely high level not seen for a long time’ but the truth of that statement is questionable. Perhaps this will be a moment for Europe to galvanise and unify but it assumes that the European public will continue to support money, resources and potentially men being sent to Ukraine at a time when European economies are under intense strain. The U.S elected Trump on the promise of U.S isolationism and Europe may well face the same internal threats to its external security. The Alternative for Deutschland (AFD) are now the largest opposition party in Germany after national elections last month and have been consistent proponents of relinquishing support for Ukraine. Perhaps the greatest threat to European unity is from within.
The geopolitical landscape is shifting, and the events of the past week have underscored a stark reality: Europe can no longer rely on the U.S as a steadfast partner in security. Trump’s White House has made it clear that American support for Ukraine – and by extension, European security now comes with conditions that Kyiv may find impossible to meet. While European leaders scramble to forge their own path, questions remain over whether the continent is truly prepared to take on the burden of leading the West’s response to Russia. A serious response will take time to coordinate. Time, and money. Europe’s defensive autonomy has remained a secondary concern for decades and suddenly in the space of weeks it has become of primary concern. Even if Europe can coordinate a response it will not be for a couple of years at least until it can be a
reliable alternative to the U.S.
For all of Starmer’s talk of European unity, the real test lies ahead. Economic strain, rising populism, and shifting public sentiment may fracture the resolve of Europe’s governments in the months to come. The challenge is not just military; it is political. Can European leaders sustain public support for Ukraine amid economic hardship? Will they be able to balance diplomacy with military strength in a way that deters Russian aggression without triggering further escalation? What is clear is that the post-Cold War order is crumbling, and the era of European dependence on American security is rapidly fading. Whether this moment becomes Europe’s wake-up call – or the start of its retreat – will be decided in the months ahead.
Sources:
- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1d4r9yvqzpo
- https://www.csis.org/analysis/breaking-down-us-ukraine-minerals-deal
- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/03/europe-trump-ukraine https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/03/02/eu-must-urgently-rearm-and-turn-ukraine-into-steel-porcupine-says-von-der-leyen
About the Author:
Eddie is a freelance writer and journalist based in London. In June 2024 he graduated from the University of Southampton with a degree in Political Science and since then has gained experience writing on European, American and North African politics as well as on contemporary art and culture.
- Threads: @eddiemonkman
- Bluesky: @eddiemonkman.bsky.social
Leave a Reply