Europe has missed a trick. Ukraine was primarily a European problem.

• To most Americans, the war in Ukraine “is a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing.”

By Tom Arms

Europe has missed a trick. Ukraine was primarily a European problem. Russia was threatening European security, and by extension, the NATO alliance as a whole. But to most Americans the war in Ukraine, as Neville Chamberlain said in 1938 about Czechoslovakia—“is a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing.”

But America coughed up billions. That is not to say that European countries—including the UK—have not dug deep. Since 2022 Europe has given slightly more than the US– $65.9 billion compared to $65 billion from Washington. Another $8.59 billion has come from non-European countries Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.

But the Biden Administration was far and away the single biggest contributor propping up Ukraine. With Trump in the White House that prop is likely to be kicked away—possibly as soon as this weekend’s Munich Security Conference.

Europeans admit that their over-reliance on the American military umbrella has made them complacent about their security. Since the end of the Cold War defense budgets have shrunk to a shadow of their former selves. Germany, for instance was in 1985 spending 2.87 percent of its GDP on defense. When Russia invaded Ukraine the figure had been cut by more than half to 1.33 percent.

Budget cuts meant cuts in troop numbers. 478,000 (1985 figure) in Germany to 183,000 in 2022. Britain went from 334,000 to 153,000 over the same period.

But more importantly was a drop in investment in defense industries. Troop levels can be boosted relatively easily. But researching the latest weapons, building a factory and assembly line and starting production takes time. 1985 figures for European investment in defense industries are difficult to find, but since the invasion of Ukraine there is a clear recognition that it was not enough. In 2021 the figure was $222 billion and in 2024 it had jumped to $330 billion.

Defense investment, however, is still inadequate. Planners reckon that Europeans need to invest an additional $550 billion over the next decade to replace American weapons in Europe. But even worse, it would take 5-10 years before the tanks, drones and howitzer shells start rolling off the assembly line in anything approaching sufficient numbers.

There is a solution: Buy American. At least until Europeans have rebuilt their defense industries and boosted troop levels.

One must report, however, that American defense industries are also struggling to meet Ukraine’s needs. But—a technological lead, larger industrial base and market and excellent collaboration between government and private industry—means that the US is much better placed to ramp up production.

On top of that, the current transactionally-minded US president thinks almost exclusively in dollars and cents. It should be possible to persuade Donald Trump to look upon Ukraine and Europe as a cash cow rather than a money pit. He has, for instance, already sounded out President Volodomyr Zelensky on exchanging Ukraine’s $500 billion worth of rare earth minerals for American weaponry.

If Europe—which includes the UK—is to act it must do so immediately. This weekend 60 world leaders are meeting at the Bayerische Hof Hotel for the annual Munich Security Conference. Ukraine is top of the agenda. The American delegation is led by US Vice President JD Vance. He is scheduled to meet President Zelensky.

Meanwhile, Trump’s special envoy on Ukraine, General Keith Kellogg, will be chairing fringe meetings at which he will privately suggest peace proposals before travelling to Kyiv for more talks with Zelensky. Trump has said he will meet Vladimir Putin in Saudi Arabia “in the near future.”

The run-up to the Munich Conference has involved a 90-minute telephone conversation between Trump and Putin. Trump and Zelensky have had a 60-minute phone chat, although diplomatic sources fear that there is a real danger of the Ukrainians—and Europeans—being side-lined.

On Wednesday possible peace parameters emerged when Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth told reporters that Ukraine’s hopes of a return to pre-2014 borders was “unrealistic” and that the US would oppose Ukrainian membership of NATO.

As for the rest of Europe, Hegseth was quite clear: “Europe must take over assistance to Ukraine as the US focuses on its own borders… I want to directly and unambiguously express that stark strategic realities prevent the United States from being primarily focused on the security of Europe.”

The Europeans, meanwhile, have started drawing red lines for any negotiations on Ukraine. A joint statement by the governments of Britain, France, Germany, Poland, and Italy vowed to protect Ukraine’s sovereignty and made it clear that “Ukraine and Europe must be part of any negotiations.”

The problem is that the European red line could be dismissed by Putin and Trump as no more than pale pink because of Europe’s inability to back words with deeds.

At the moment Putin appears to have won. His clearly stated aims were to stop the eastward expansion of NATO; weaken the Transatlantic link; reduce Ukraine to a vassal state and position Russia for expansion elsewhere in the Black Sea region, Eastern Europe and the Baltics. He has shown that Pax Americana has been replaced with Might is Right.

World Review

It is becoming increasingly clear that the only thing standing between Trump and unfettered power is the American judicial system.

His spineless acolytes in the Republican Party control both houses of Congress and the geriatric Democratic Party appears to be sinking under a sea of Executive Orders.

The courts, however, have acted. So far they have ordered the administration to lift its funding freeze on USAID and the salaries of thousands of federal employees.

The question now is: What will Trump do? Legally, he should abide by the court’s ruling and—if he is determined to get his way—appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, where, he hopes, the 6-3 conservative majority will rule in his favour.

But that is not Trump’s way, and Supreme Court support is not a given.

The signs are that Trump will simply ignore the court rulings and either carry on and appeal or—even more likely—carry on and not bother to appeal. If he takes either approach Donald Trump will have created a major constitutional crisis.

The power of the judicial system relies on the two other branches of government respecting and accepting the court’s judgements. It is called checks and balances and THE RULE OF LAW.

There is nothing in the US constitution which gives enforcement powers to the judiciary—except the legal principle of contempt of court. If Donald Trump ignores court rulings then he can be held in contempt and detained or fined until such time as he “purges the contempt.”

This is not a criminal law. It is not a civil law. It is the only weapon that the courts have to enforce their judgements. It was used against Trump in 2022 when he was fined $10,000 a day for failing to provide subpoenaed documents in his fraud trial.

The same law could also be applied to Elon Musk and his DOGE team.

________________________

A person cannot be pardoned for contempt of court. The Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity does not apply to contempt of court. So, where is the brave judge willing to take on Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the MAGA crowd?

As Germany’s federal election approaches the two front runners—the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Alternativ fur Deutschland (AfD) are battling for the young men’s vote.

Increasingly it is the 18-30-year-old men who are playing the kingmaker’s role in Western democracies. And they are swinging further and further to the right.

In the 2024 British general election, young men played a vital role in winning five parliamentary seats for Reform. 12.9 percent of men aged 18 to 30 voted Reform compared to just 5.9 percent of the women.

In the States it was disgruntled young men who dunnit for Trump. Sixty percent of the young male vote opted for Donald Trump, according to an Associated Press survey. Trump attracted only 20 percent of the women in the same age group.

Trump was especially popular with poorly educated young white men, but he also won half of the young male Latino vote and a third of the African-American young men.

In Germany the young male vote played a major role in the AfD winning 16 percent of the vote in the European elections and 31 percent of the vote in elections in Saxony and Brandenburg.

Why? The reasons are many, varied and overlapping, but at the top of the list is the fear that wokeism—both gender and ethnically-based—is marginalizing men in today’s world.

Other factors are globalism and the decline in manufacturing which was the traditional main employer of poorly educated young men. Add to that a housing crisis which has raised prices to the unaffordable level across the Western world and a fear of cultural erosion through immigration.

Finally—in Germany– the passage of time means that that country’s Nazi past is becoming increasingly irrelevant to the current generation.

Mainstream parties are perceived as having done more to exacerbate the problems for young men with their support for diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) programs than to listen to their problems. The gap has opened. The populist far right is filling it.

______________________

Austrian coalition talks have collapsed. It is now likely that a fresh election will be called and, if it is, Western Europe could see the creation of its first far-right government.

It was inevitable that the coalition talks between the far-right Freedom Party (FPO) of Herbert Kickl and the Centre-right Conservative People’s Party (OVP) of Karl Nehammer would end in tears.

For a start, the two party leaders hate each other. Then there is the fact that Kickl wanted the talks to fail. Failure meant another round of elections and opinion polls show that the FPO is expected to increase its share of the vote.

In weeks of talks, Kickl showed up for only seven hours. And in those few hours made demands that he knew were completely unacceptable. He began by demanding the FPO control of the finance and interior ministries as well as the chancellorship for himself.

Then he insisted that Austria lift sanctions against Russia and start deporting asylum seekers. The real crunch, however, was his demand that if the European court, commission or parliament ever ruled against the Austrian government, the ruling would be ignored.

The OVP’s red lines, meanwhile, were “the absence of Russian influence” and the insistence that Austria remain a “reliable partner to the European Union.”

President Alexander Van der Bellen does not want Kickl and the FPO. He tried to persuade the OVP, social democrats and liberals to form an anti-Kickl government but that failed. It looks like he has no alternative to calling fresh elections with Kickl and the FPO in pole position.

_______________________

Turkey has joined the elite—and increasingly overcrowded – club of 21st century space racers. Last month it sent its first astronaut to the International Space Station and this week the minister for industry and technology announced that Turkey plans to send a rocket to the moon within ten years.

Turkey is not alone in its lunar ambitions. India, Japan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Israel, Europe, Russia and, of course, China and America have all unveiled plans to fly to the moon and beyond.

So far five countries have landed on the moon: India, Japan, Russia, China and the United States. America is the only country to put a man on the moon.

Israel’s space program is run by a private company and uses Elon Musk’s SpaceX rockets to carry their satellites and lunar modules. Its first attempt at an unmanned moon landing—in 2017—ended in failure but they plan to try again in 2027.

India has had two successful unmanned moon landings—in 2019 and 2023 and Prime Minister Narendra Modi says India wants to land a man on the moon by 2040.

Last month Japan enjoyed a major success by landing a rover vehicle on the moon within a 100 meter target area. It is collaborating with the US on a moon orbiting station which will serve as a launch pad for missions to Mars.

Read: Türkiye’s Place in Space: Past, Present, and Future

The European Space Agency is collaborating with NASA to construct a lunar cargo vessel which will be used to ferry cargo, scientific equipment and minerals between Earth and the moon. The ESA has plans to start mining the moon’s minerals as early as next year. It is also contributing to the Gateway space station which is the name of the staging post to Mars.

Russia and China have a joint program to build an international lunar research station by 2035. China wants is planning their first manned trip to the moon in 2030. Russia has suffered several recent setbacks and the Ukraine War is hitting space program budgets. However, Moscow, is now saying that 2035 is likely to be the year that the first Russian Cosmonaut stands on the moon’s surface.

The next person to step onto the surface of the moon is expected to be an American woman. She may be on the moon as early as next year. NASA wants to set up a manned base on the moon—The Artemis Project—by 2030.

But the most ambitious space explorer is billionaire Elon Musk. So far he has tried and failed to reach the moon. But his real space target is the red planet. Musk says he will fly to Mars by 2030 and envisions that by 2054 he will have established a self-sustaining Martian city of 1 million earthlings.

_____________

Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and the author of “The Encyclopedia of the Cold War” and “America Made in Britain.”

Read: Observations of an Expat: Death of the Two-State Solution