Europe Between the Shadow of Trump and Putin

Europe’s geopolitical landscape is undergoing profound changes as a result of the Russian–Ukrainian war. The consequences extend far beyond the immediate battlefield and current calculations of victory or defeat. They have disrupted the long-standing rules that have governed international relations and balances of power since the end of World War II.

The conflict is also redrawing Europe’s geopolitical map and creating new threats, particularly in light of the pressures Washington has placed on both Russia and Europe during attempts to reach a settlement over Ukraine. This explains Europe’s unease over U.S.–Russian contacts in recent months, as well as its concerns about the anticipated outcomes of the Alaska summit and the proposed peace deal.

European Security Concerns

In the run-up to the Trump–Putin summit on August 15, 2025, European diplomacy was marked by intense activity. Expectations surrounding the first direct meeting between the U.S. and Russian presidents since the outbreak of the war raised significant anxiety in both Europe and Ukraine.

European leaders openly expressed these concerns, convening a virtual meeting with NATO’s Secretary General and President Donald Trump prior to the summit. Another gathering took place in Washington shortly after, underscoring Europe’s deep preoccupation with Ukraine’s future and the impact of any U.S.–Russia deal on European security and geopolitical balance.

Europe fears that any agreement reached without consideration of its strategic interests would pose a lasting threat—especially after relations with Moscow collapsed almost entirely following the invasion of Ukraine, leaving Europe locked in open confrontation with Russia.

The meeting, organized by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, was seen as an attempt to bolster Ukraine’s position at the negotiating table and to persuade Trump of Europe’s perspective. Although formally a U.S.–Russia summit, European leaders argued that the talks directly concerned them and insisted that their demands not be ignored, pointing to concessions already made by the EU—such as increasing NATO defense spending and reaching new trade agreements with Washington.

Analysts described the pre-summit engagement as a preemptive move by Europe to prevent Trump from striking a deal with Putin at its expense, given Trump’s well-known appetite for “big deals.”

Core European Messages to Trump

European and NATO leaders emphasized several key points in their consultations with Trump:

• Do not underestimate Putin. Europeans worry about Trump’s overconfidence in his ability t0o secure peace quickly, overlooking the complexity of the conflict. His belief that one conversation could resolve the war has already strained U.S.–Russia relations.

• Territorial concessions are Ukraine’s decision. Europe insisted that only Kyiv can negotiate on matters of sovereignty and legal recognition of occupied territories.

• Any handover of Donbas cities would open the road to Kyiv. This, they warned, would embolden Moscow to push further into Ukraine.

• A ceasefire must be the first step. Any settlement must begin with halting hostilities and providing Ukraine with firm U.S. security guarantees.

Symbolism and Uneasy Outcomes

While Europeans pressed their concerns, their media closely analyzed the symbolism of Putin’s red-carpet reception in Alaska, seeing it as a troubling signal of his reintegration into global diplomacy. Publications like Der Spiegel described the summit bluntly: “Putin wins, and Europe watches from afar as its interests are negotiated.”

Although the summit did not yield an immediate ceasefire, it did open channels for negotiation. German Chancellor Merz cautiously welcomed this as a positive step, while French President Emmanuel Macron warned that Russia remained “a predatory giant” threatening Europe, with defense spending now exceeding 40% of its budget.

Fragile Optimism, Persistent Risks

Despite the cautious optimism, Europe remains skeptical. Since 2022, sanctions and other forms of pressure have failed to force meaningful concessions from Moscow. Further escalation in military aid carries the risk of direct confrontation, and Trump continues to reject any deployment of U.S. troops in Ukraine.

Europe’s security concerns are compounded by the fact that Putin views the war as part of a broader historical mission to “correct” twentieth-century wrongs against Russia. This suggests that any settlement not built on solid foundations will be fragile—merely containing the crisis rather than resolving it.

The broader reality is that Europe lacks the tools to force Russia into a just peace. The conflict has already entrenched new geopolitical divides and triggered a renewed arms buildup across the continent. The European Union’s defense strategies for 2030, alongside Russia’s massive military spending, highlight the prospect of an extended era of mistrust and militarization.

Conclusion

Europe categorically rejects any change to Ukraine’s territorial status. Yet, in practice, the war’s outcomes on the ground will define the country’s future. From this struggle, a new geopolitical conflict is emerging—one that could fuel long-term instability in Eastern Europe.

For now, Europe’s priority is to avoid an escalation that would draw the continent into direct confrontation with Russia. But as negotiations unfold, the balance of power they produce will determine whether peace in Ukraine is durable or fragile—and whether Europe faces stability or a new era of perpetual tension.

Support Dawat Media Center

If there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. Support the Dawat Media Center from as little as $/€10 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you
DNB Bank AC # 0530 2294668
Account for international payments: NO15 0530 2294 668
Vipps: #557320

  Donate Here