[DEBATE] Ukraine: European powers must step up to the plate

The old world order based on Atlanticism—US hegemony—which has existed since WW2, has collapsed, politically and economically. Despite spats between them from time to time, Trump is now in Putin's camp. In the US itself bourgeois democracy is in free fall. Any progressive proposal for the Ukranian struggle must start from these realities.

Trump and Putin share a semi-fascist authoritarian ideology which includes climate denial, misogyny, and opposition to civil rights, national rights and workers' rights. Whilst Trump is erratic everything Putin has done has been consistent with his strategic objective—which is to defeat of the Ukrainians either on the battlefield itself or via a sell-out deal which destroys its national rights.

Trump enthusiastically invites neo-fascists like Nayib Bukele of El Salavador, Giorgia Meloni of Italy, and Benjamin Netanyahu, into the White House with red-carpet treatment. He will do the same with Marine Le Pen if she wins presidential office. He has nothing but praise for the likes of Javier Milei of Argentina, Victor Orbán of Hungary, and Herbert Kickl of Austria. He is also a personal friend of Nigel Farage in the UK.

He also continues to double down on his outrageous proposition that Greenland, Panama, and Canada should be annexed by the USA. Nor has he ruled out military force as a means of achieving these objectives.

Russia is winning the war

Whist Ukraine has an army that is fully capable of winning the war if it gets the aid and weapons it needs, recent Russian advances are real and should not be minimized. Russia is deploying more missiles and drones than at any time since it invaded the country, and there is credible evidence that they are about to launch a summer offensive. It also has 12,000 North Korean troops on the battlefield and the political support (at least) of China.

The peace negotiations (with the Ukrainians excluded) were entirely fraudulent. Everyone involved were appointees of Putin or Trump, and all were in favor of the dismemberment of Ukraine and its absorption into the Russian Federation.

The end of Atlanticism raises some important strategic questions which have to be answered:

• Who will supply the arms necessary for Ukraine to win the war now that the US has withdrawn?
• Who will defend Europe against Putin?
• Who will provide the long-term security guarantees that Ukraine needs?

Prior to the arrival of Trump over half of military aid to Ukraine came from the USA—including some of the most crucial items like air defenses. Until this aid is not only replaced but substantially surpassed Putin will remain a grave threat to Europe and beyond.

It is, therefore, time for European Powers—both inside and outside the EU—to step up to the plate on this. They have relied on the USA for far too long and the chickens are coming home to roost with a vengeance.

The principles are clear. Ukraine has the right to obtain arms from wherever and whoever it likes in order to defend itself against invasion. If it was right to demand that the US—the preeminent imperialist power—supply the arms necessary for Ukrainian to oppose Putin's invasion, it must be right to demand the same from European Powers. The principal is identical.

No one on the left wants to see military spending increased by imperialist powers, of course. It is in our DNA to oppose it. No one, however, wants to be overrun by Putin either—and that means giving the Ukrainians whatever they need to win the war. A failure to invest in this now, moreover, could mean a bigger investment in the future.

Those who say that the European powers are simply using this as an excuse for the imperialist, rearmament of Europe, are wrong in my opinion, but it is a matter of political judgement. The need for a military victory in Ukraine coincides with the defense of their own countries, and the rest of Europe, for protection against Putin and Trump. It is a rational response to developments on the world stage and the implications of a Putin victory over Ukraine.

Increased military spending, however, should not include nuclear weapons which have no role to play in the region. Even Putin has failed to play the nuclear card to any affect.

It is time for the nuclear power plants in Ukraine to be decommissioned by the international authorities.

The European response

Most of the European powers—on the face of it at least, and with the exception of the far-right minority—broadly agree with this.

Germany has transformed its response under its new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, who stood on a conservative Christian Democrat ticket and has radicalised to meet this threat. He has said of Trump's second term in office: "This is the beginning of a new, dangerous era in European security. It would be his “absolute priority immediately after victory for the CDU/CSU, to create unity in Europe as quickly as possible, so that, step by step, we can achieve independence from the US". He has since committed to a big increase in arms to Ukraine including long-range missiles.

Macron and Starmer have put themselves forward as leaders of what they term a “coalition of the willing”. They backed Zelensky against Putin, and pledged to replace the US as the main guarantor of the Ukranian struggle but wanted a US backstop for the struggle to continue.

An emergency conference of the EU itself was held on March 4, for the EU to take a position on rearmament. Crucially, there was no talk of a US backstop, only of a big injection of military aid for Ukraine.

The President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said that they were facing an extraordinary situation involving the necessity to “rearm Europe” in order that the EU could support Ukrainian in the absence of the USA. She proposed an additional 800bn Euros to the EU defense fund, most of which would come from a loosening of the fiscal restraints currently on member states as far as military sending was concerned. It would boost the defenses of EU member states and lessen the impact of US withdrawal.

Of course it could all be just words, if so, however, it will become clear very quickly since events are moving fast. The future of the Ukraine war—and therefore of world politics—now rests on the political will of the European powers to shoulder this responsibility.

Putin on the rampage

The threat from Putin is real and serious, and the left should not object to military spending that is designed to counter it. Nor should we oppose spending on military support to Ukraine to resist invasion. Whilst Putin is unlikely to invade another country while the current war is inconclusive, a Russian victory would dramatically change this.

No European country would be safe. Some could face invasion—the Baltic states for example, and ex-Soviet Republics—others could face enhanced intimidation such as the manipulation of electoral systems, or the assassination of political leaders and/or financial and political support for far right and openly fascist parties and increasing cyber-attacks.

Putin is motivated by nationalism and great Russian chauvinism. His strategic objective is to reassemble as much of the old Russian empire (or indeed of the Soviet empire) under the hegemony of the hard right and will continue to do so until he is stopped.

Having annexed Crimea in 2014 in February 2022 he sent his armies into a neighbouring independent country in a full-scale unprovoked, illegal, war. His rationale was and is "Nato expansionism" and the (scandalously so-called) "de-Nazification" of the Ukranian leadership. Most of the far left, in the UK at least, agree with it—this includes the Stop the War Coalition which is entirely campist on Ukraine.

Although the initial Russian advance was halted on the outskirts of Kyiv, as Ukraine scrambled to mobilize, Russia has regrouped, and is now making dangerous gains.

NATO

Sweden and Finland have joined NATO not because NATO had some convincing arguments in a super recruitment drive, but because they were seeking any protection they could get against the rampaging of Trump and Putin. Canada, which is being threatened by Trump with annexation, is a founder member of NATO.

Whether NATO can offer such protection, however, is another matter. A defensive alliance only works if the most powerful nation involved is prepared to defend any other member state that comes under attack—what Biden calls the "sacred pledge". That Trump would not do so could hardly be more clear. He wouldn't even consider it. Such alliances are historically determined and very difficult to reassemble once the myth is exposed.

Conclusion

We are in a battle against the hard right that we have to win. If Putin wins we could well face a prolonged period of reactionary politics globally, during which the initiative will be with the hard right. Every right-wing nationalist would be strengthened, and in this we are warned in advance and we should heed it.