February 20, 2025

SHARE |

Breaking the Western Front: U.S.-Russia Talks Deepen European Uncertainty

Evelyn Hockstein/Pool Photo via AP

On Tuesday, U.S. and Russian officials met in Saudi Arabia to initiate peace talks regarding Russia’s war in Ukraine, drawing the ire of Ukrainian officials who were notably excluded from discussions. The in-person talks were agreed to during a landmark phone call between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump, a U.S.-initiated exchange that would have been unthinkable under the Biden administration. While U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expressed renewed optimism following the meeting––with Rubio highlighting opportunities for Russo-American partnership and Lavrov emphasizing the growing mutual understanding between the two nations––other key stakeholders observed with unease.

The decision to hold bilateral talks between Washington and Moscow––the most extensive since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022––without Kyiv’s participation underscores a tectonic shift in diplomatic dynamics between the two partners. With Ukraine sidelined, there are concerns that any agreements reached, without the consent of one of the war’s two official belligerents, will be illegitimate. To this end, Ukrainian officials have consistently insisted that no decisions about their country should be made without their participation. For Russia, the talks represent an opportunity to negotiate Ukraine’s fate with major powers rather than directly engaging with Kyiv, reinforcing Moscow’s narrative that Ukraine is a mere proxy rather than an autonomous actor.

By negotiating directly with Washington, Russia is also able to further the growing divide between the U.S. and its European allies. Moscow has long sought to weaken Western unity on Ukraine, employing an arsenal of disinformation and hybrid warfare tactics to exploit existing faultlines. The renewed sense of transatlantic unity that resulted from Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, nearly three years ago, now seems a distant memory; if this was Russia’s intention, it has succeeded. The exclusion of European leaders from the Riyadh talks has sparked alarm in European capitals regarding the bloc’s role in the peace process. Many are concerned that the bilateral nature of the talks between the U.S. and Russia will result in a deal that overwhelmingly favors Moscow’s interests, undermining European security in the long-term. Elected on a mandate to end wars, the Trump administration is acting with urgency to resolve the conflict, but its plan to expedite the process appears to hinge on excluding Europe and Ukraine.

Remarks made by Trump officials at last week’s Munich Security Conference forecasted such an approach while highlighting the growing divergence between U.S. officials and their European counterparts on the future of Ukraine. Before President Trump had announced the planned peace talks, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that returning to Ukraine's pre-2014 borders and NATO membership were "unreal" goals. His comments were criticized as pre-mature concessions, while others pointed out they were merely reflective of the battlefield realities. U.S. Vice President JD Vance warned that the Trump administration believes it will be critical “for Europe to step up in a big way to provide for its own defense,” indicating that the U.S. will “shift” its focus from Europe towards East Asia.

The comments in Munich and the Trump administration’s willingness to reengage with Moscow after years of political and economic isolation, are the latest in a string of wake-up calls for European leaders in recent years. Since the end of the Second World War, Europe has prospered under an American-led security architecture. Outsourcing defense to the U.S. was a successful strategy for decades, however, it has left Europe with an atrophied defense sector and hollowed out militaries structured for stability operations and combatting irregular threats––like terrorism––rather than conventional state threats. Although policymakers within European capitals and EU institutions are racing to address these known shortfalls, their efforts will likely go unrewarded without strong leadership from within.

While traditional European powers such as Germany and France may not immediately feel the consequences of their perhaps naive assumption that U.S. security guarantees would continue in perpetuity, nations like Poland, Finland, and the Baltic states stand to be the most affected by a weakening U.S.-European security partnership. Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, these nations have been among Ukraine’s most vocal and committed allies. Poland and the Baltic States––Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia––have invested heavily in military aid for Ukraine, expanding their own defense budgets, viewing Russian aggression not just as a regional conflict but as an existential threat to their own sovereignty. This strategic dissonance within the bloc is just one of the many obstacles Europe faces in its effort to develop a unified and coherent Common Security and Defense Policy. The prospect of Washington engaging Moscow in direct diplomacy without European input has reinforced longstanding fears of a geopolitical compromise at the expense of these smaller eastern European states. Policymakers on Europe’s eastern flank fear that an emboldened Russia could test its territorial boundaries with these countries in the near future.

However, nowhere is the strengthening U.S.-Russia relationship, as well as the U.S. rhetoric at the Munich Security Conference more concerning than in Ukraine. This shift in U.S. strategy likely signals that the Trump administration may follow through on a long-expected policy to pressure Ukraine into accepting an unfavorable peace deal by leveraging American aid. Should the U.S. reduce its support or pressure Ukraine into a settlement, the European Union (EU) would face increased responsibility to help uphold Ukraine’s sovereignty.

Filling the gap left by a U.S. withdrawal of aid to Ukraine would be an immense challenge for the EU, especially as the bloc struggles with internal divisions. The rise of far-right political parties advocating for reduced foreign aid and a stronger focus on domestic priorities further complicates the situation. Germany, the EU’s largest economy and a pivotal player in European policy, is at a political crossroads. With elections scheduled for February 23, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU)—both of which support reducing aid to Ukraine—are leading in the polls. The potential for a CDU/CSU-led government possibly requiring coalition partners raises questions about Germany’s future commitment to Ukraine.

A potential decrease in U.S. aid, combined with a possible reluctance from European nations facing domestic political pressures, could leave Ukraine in an untenable position. This is further exacerbated by ongoing Russian hybrid warfare campaigns—strategic efforts that blend cyberattacks, disinformation, economic coercion, and political interference to weaken Western resolve and shape public opinion against continued support for Ukraine. If these trends continue, Ukraine may find itself increasingly isolated and pressured into making concessions that compromise its territorial integrity and sovereignty.