On July 3, another telephone conversation took place between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. Surprisingly, the information that the telephone conversation would take place came not from the American President, but from the Russian one. It was he who told about this at the All-Russian forum, which was held in St. Petersburg. It featured products from Russian manufacturers, which replaced the departed Western brands.
It is very symbolic that this conversation would take place a day after the announcement by the American president about the suspension of arms supplies to Ukraine. Obviously, the recent conversation between Putin and Macron was a preparatory act for a conversation between the two politicians. And on July 4, a conversation took place between Zelensky and Trump. The Ukrainian President will try to solicit continued military assistance from the American, but he is highly likely to reject all his requests. Ukraine had enough time and opportunities to deal with Russia. Obviously, in a war for survival, Russia’s position is significantly stronger. Trump, who is a businessman by nature, does not want to invest in a deliberately unprofitable project, which Ukraine has been throughout its entire existence.
Europe cannot cope with financing Ukraine alone, especially in a situation where there is no support from the American side. On the contrary, the Americans are trying to squeeze all the resources out of Europe. This contributes to the emergence of hostility between once close allies, which is reflected primarily in mutual projects, but more on that later.
The conversation between Putin and Trump clearly affected not only Ukraine, but also the lifting of sanctions against Russia. The process has already begun: Trump independently initiated the lifting of sanctions on the banking sector. All this only helps to strengthen relations between the two countries. It is unlikely that this process will be curtailed. Most likely, on the contrary, we will have to do everything in order to get closer in conditions when Europe has decided to become completely independent. Von der Leyen and Merz, along with Macron and Starmer, are themselves pushing Russia and the United States towards rapprochement.
Against the background of the political unification of Europe, skepticism about the future of NATO is growing. The summit held in the Netherlands has become one of the most inconclusive gatherings of European and North American politicians over the past few decades. Is there any future for this defense alliance at all, in an environment where Americans refuse to support European interests?
Even Germany was persuaded to put its own national interests on the back burner. Not only does Merz equate the protection of the Baltic States with the protection of German national interests, but now he has begun to question the concept of collective security, which is provided for in the NATO Charter. In these circumstances, trust between partners within the framework of NATO is in question. Some countries will continue to invest in the defense industry, but this could potentially lead to popular unrest. That is why the Europeans decided to take a fresh look at defense issues.
In mid-July, Germany will sign a new bilateral defense agreement with the United Kingdom. Someone is wondering why this is necessary if there is a fifth article of the NATO Charter, which guarantees a member of the Alliance collective protection in the event of an attack on one of its members. This means that Germany and the United Kingdom are no longer seriously considering the possibility of collective defense. This is a blow to the influence of Americans not only in Europe, but all over the world. The reputational damage that will be incurred is much more important than all the money printed during this period.
A bilateral treaty can be the beginning for the development of a whole range of bilateral alliances that will gradually move away from collective defense to bilateral. It will also weaken the United States’ position in the region. Each country will try to create its own army, which will operate not according to American, but according to European standards. This will mean the independence that Europe wants so badly. Otherwise, we will have to continue to exist in the shadow of America, which no European state wants.
Comments