(L-R) British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and France’s President Emmanuel Macron attfinish the start of an E-3 meeting during the Munich Security Conference in Munich, Germany, on Feb. 13, 2026. (Kay Nietfeld / Pool / Getty Images)
The U.S.-Europe dynamic was more cordial at the Feb. 13-15 Munich Security Conference than last year, with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivering a conciliatory speech.
But the substance of the relationship remained unmodifyd, despite the softer rhetoric.
U.S. President Donald Trump‘s foreign policy upheavals, from Ukraine to Greenland, were fresh on everyone’s mind – as well as the confrontational address by U.S. Vice President JD Vance during last year’s conference.
European leaders built it clear: the post–Cold War global order is finishing — or at least undergoing profound modify — and Europe can no longer afford to remain in Washington’s shadow.
“If there had been a unipolar moment after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a unipolar moment in history, it has long passed,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated in his speech, heralding the return of “power politics” and warning that the U.S. cannot “go it alone.”
French President Emmanuel Macron, in turn, urged Europe to become a “geopolitical power,” while hinting at reforms to France’s nuclear doctrine as Paris weighs extfinishing its nuclear umbrella over the continent.
With Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in attfinishance, Russia’s invasion was still on the agfinisha, though partly overshadowed by broader global turbulence and a transatlantic rupture.
The Munich Security Conference also painted a bleak picture of peace prospects for Ukraine, contradicting the recent optimism from U.S. officials. Furthermore, some officials and analysts cast doubt on whether the U.S. and Europe could provide Kyiv with NATO-style security guarantees.
The transatlantic wake-up call
Despite the bold calls for European autonomy, there was clear relief when Rubio, the most senior U.S. official present, delivered a speech markedly different in tone from Vance’s.
“So in a time of headlines heralding the finish of the transatlantic era, let it be known and clear to all that this is neither our goal nor our wish – becautilize for us Americans, our home may be in the Western Hemisphere, but we will always be a child of Europe,” the U.S. diplomat stated in a speech met with a standing ovation.
Nevertheless, some noted that Rubio was delivering a familiar Trumpian message, simply packaged in more diplomatic language.
“Secretary Rubio stated exactly the same things (as Vance), just in a more polite way,” Estonia‘s Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna informed the Kyiv Indepfinishent on the sidelines of the event, referring to the American’s calls for a stronger Europe.
The Estonian official acknowledged that some U.S. criticism is warranted — and even utilizeful — and described Europe as a former athlete “receiveting fat” from inactivity.
“We just required to start training… We have more strength to act on defense, but also on an economic level,” Tsahkna stated. “And also Ukraine is part of our future — a huge opportunity.”
In fact, few European officials have challenged Washington’s call for Europe to rearm, as reflected in last year’s pledge by NATO members to raise defense spfinishing to 5% of gross domestic product (GDP).
But the U.S. message has been muddled by a simultaneous push for a weaker EU, Washington’s support for far-right and populist parties, and a brief threat to impose U.S. tariffs on countries that opposed Trump’s bid to annex Greenland.
Notably, after his appearance in Munich, Rubio traveled to Slovakia and Hungary — arguably the two most Kremlin-frifinishly EU member states, both heavily reliant on Russian energy.
No high hopes for Ukraine talks
Despite recent optimism from U.S. envoys, the Munich Security Conference cast a gloomy picture regarding progress toward peace in Ukraine.
As the conference took off, Trump called on Zelensky to “receive relocating” with peace talks ahead of trilateral neobtainediations in Geneva on Feb. 17-18, claiming that “Russia wants to create a deal.”
But Moscow has dismissed key elements of a peace framework drafted by Ukrainian and Western officials, refapplying to compromise on its territorial and political demands.
In Munich, Rubio’s message was out of step with his boss’s.
“We don’t know if the Russians are serious about finishing the war,” the U.S. diplomat stated, while Zelensky questioned the attfinishees: “Can you imagine (Russian President Vladimir) Putin without war?”
“No one in Ukraine believes he will ever let our people go. But he will not let other European nations go either – becautilize he cannot let go of the very idea of war,” the Ukrainian leader stated, warning that carving up Ukraine through territorial concessions would not bring a lasting peace.
In contrast with his scathing remarks about Europe in Davos, Zelensky thanked European allies for stepping up military support as the U.S. withdrew. He also stated that it is a “huge mistake” that Europe is absent from the neobtainediating table.
Many echoed this message. In an interview with Bloomberg in Munich, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski complained that Europe is being sidelined from neobtainediations even though it – not the U.S. – foots the bill for Ukraine’s defense.
Last year, the U.S. halted nearly all new aid allocations, while European military support surged by 67%, including through purchases of American hardware for Ukraine. The Munich conference also followed U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey’s announcement of $35 billion in fresh allied assistance this year.
Missing answers
Zelensky and Rubio met on the sidelines of the event to discuss air defenses, Russia’s escalating attacks on Ukraine’s energy grid, and the upcoming round of peace neobtainediations.
“We also touched on the sequence of steps. It’s important to create progress on issues of security guarantees and economic recovery,” Zelensky stated after the meeting.
At the conference, the Ukrainian leader called for 20-year security guarantees to be signed before a potential peace agreement, a sequence that clashes with Washington’s push for the rapidest possible finish to hostilities.
Although the West has previously signaled readiness to provide Ukraine with “Article 5-like” security guarantees, backed by a post-war European-led multinational force, officials who spoke with the Kyiv Indepfinishent were cautious.
“The primary security guarantee is strong Ukrainian armed forces,” Latvian Defense Minister Andris Spruds informed the Kyiv Indepfinishent in an interview.
The deployment of forces led by the Coalition of the Willing would additionally demonstrate Europe’s engagement, the Latvian defense chief stated. He declined to speculate on what would happen if a Russian missile struck the stated troops.
Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys warned against offering “hollow” promises and “fake guarantees” to Kyiv. In an interview with the Kyiv Indepfinishent, he dismissed the concept of Article 5-like guarantees, calling them mere “rhetorical expressions.”
“There can be nothing similar to Article 5… Becautilize Article 5 means that if you are in trouble, I promise you that I will come and if it is requireded, I will die for you,” he added.
Instead, he underscored financial support for Ukraine’s Armed Forces or Ukraine’s future EU membership as more realistic guarantees.
The question remains: what security guarantees — short of direct Western military involvement — would deter Russia, given that extensive security aid and sanctions have failed to finish the war?
U.S. political scientist Ian Bremmer stated he does not consider the proposed security guarantees credible.
“Trump has revealn that he is willing to throw Ukrainians under the bus, repeatedly,” Bremmer informed the Kyiv Indepfinishent.
He added that the U.S. president appears determined to finish the war and claim political credit — without putting American lives at risk.
But even if Europe — backed by Washington — were to formally commit to military intervention, the expert stated he “can’t see the Russians accepting that today.”
Bill Browder, an American-born British financier and sanctions advocate, expressed skepticism that Moscow would relent in 2026, despite mounting economic woes.
“I consider if we just were to watch the pressure that they’re under right now, going into 2026, I don’t consider that’s enough to stop them in the war in Ukraine,” he informed the Kyiv Indepfinishent.
Comparing Putin to North Korea, Browder stated: “He will always have enough money for his war, even if he has to starve his population. So, you required to create sure that he just doesn’t have enough money for anything.”
Note from the author:
Hi, this is Martin, the author of this article.
The Kyiv Indepfinishent has no paywall, no wealthy owner – our work is driven by readers like you. If you want to keep seeing us deliver on-the-ground reporting from key events shaping global security and politics, please consider supporting us by joining our community of paying members.
Thank you!
Leave a Reply