Can Europeans defend themselves without the Americans? – L’Express

At the heart of winter, on January 22, 2025, careful optimism still blows in European capitals. Donald Trump, freshly invested, is addressed to Vladimir Putin on his social network Truth. “Stop this ridiculous war! […] If we do not reach an agreement, and quickly, I will have no choice but to set up high levels of taxes, customs duties and sanctions on all that is sold by Russia in States -Unis and in other countries, “said, offensive, the American president. Europeans start to dream: will the new host of the White House surprise and be firm with the Kremlin Master? Or even tear him off “Deal” favorable to kyiv?

A month later, their hopes shattered. A one and a half call between Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart on February 12 will have been enough. His insults, the following week, against Volodymyr Zelensky, described as “dictator” and “modest actor”, finished driving the point. In European chancelleries, the expectation has given way to the dread to see Washington align with the Moscow agenda. In the background, the dizzying perspective of having to assume alone the burden of support for Ukraine, such as the defense of the continent against the imperialist ambitions of their Russian neighbor. A Copernican revolution for a Europe accustomed, since the end of the Second World War, to shelter under the umbrella of the world’s leading power.

Still groggy, the leaders of the old continent met in an emergency in Paris on February 17 and 19 to determine the procedure to follow. At the heart of the debates: the question of sending European troops to Ukraine to guarantee security in the event of a peace agreement – an idea formulated by the Donald Trump teams during his campaign. But deprived of American support, will they be able to resolve it? A month earlier, on January 21, Volodymyr Zelensky threw a pavement in the pond while evoking for the first time the number of European soldiers necessary according to him. “200,000 is a minimum. Otherwise, it’s nothing,” the Ukrainian president had gauged, on the sidelines of the Davos forum.

Multinational force of 30,000 to 50,000 soldiers

Do Europeans only have the means? “Without the Americans, a permanent presence of 200,000 men is impossible, decides Thibault Fouillet, scientific director of the Institute of Strategy and Defense Studies. To approach it, European States should put quasi- all of their military means in Ukraine. ” An unlikely scenario. Behind the scenes, we rather evoke that of a multinational force of 30,000 to 50,000 soldiers. “It would be the minimum, gauge the general (2s) Jérôme Pellistrandi, editor -in -chief of the National Defense review. Below, the risk would be not to be sufficiently dissuasive vis-à-vis Russia. “Above all, given a front spanning 1,300 kilometers.

To this terrestrial force would probably be added an air component, responsible for defending the Ukrainian sky. “If we were to hire our soldiers, we would not run the risk of being bombed by the Russians without means of protection,” notes Thibault Fouillet. What seriously build the anti -aircraft capacities of Ukraine, targeted daily by Russian strikes against its civil and energy infrastructure.

Russian diplomacy was not mistaken. During a first session of talks in Ryad on February 18 with his American counterparts, the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergei Lavrov, as one would expect, considered “unacceptable” any sending of European troops to his neighbor. “The Ukrainians will not accept any agreement which would not provide for solid security guarantees, objects Olevs Nikers, president of the Baltic Security Foundation and advisor to the Latvian government. As a sovereign country, we do not need or need The permission of Russia, or that of Trump to deploy troops. “

At this stage, several countries have opened the door to such an operation. Besides France, the United Kingdom said it was ready “if a lasting peace agreement is concluded”, like Sweden or the Baltic countries. Others, on the other hand, were more cautious. At the forefront of which Germany and Poland: the first judged this initiative “inappropriate”, and the second has already excluded.

Necessary rise in power

In the absence of the American big brother, one of the main challenges would be for Europeans to fill the holes in the racket. “There is already the question of command: knowing who gives orders, notes General Pellistrandi. In addition, Europe lacks logistics capacities, such as coarse-beating planes, to transport huge quantities of equipment to the Ukraine.” Devoid of the vast American arsenals, the twenty-seven encounter the problem of an insufficient mass of men and equipment. “Despite their highly qualified forces, most of the European armies do not have enough means to support a long -term conflict,” summarizes Tomas Ries, professor at the Higher School of National Defense in Stockholm.

For the time being, there are rare Europeans to consider action in Ukraine without guarantee of Washington. While recognizing that Europe had to “play its role”, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer estimated on February 17 that any peace agreement had to contain an “American security net” to dissuade Russia from attacking its neighbor again . This is the subject of his visit to Washington on February 27 – after that of Emmanuel Macron on Monday. A prerequisite however far from being insured. During a meeting with its European counterparts on February 12, the US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had thus indicated that the soldiers deployed in Ukraine would not be in the context of NATO and would therefore not be “covered by the ‘Article 5 ” – providing for mutual assistance between the members of the Alliance in the event of assault against one of them.

If necessary, the temptation could be great for Moscow to test the determination of the forces present on Ukrainian soil. “It is likely that the Russians will try to provoke an incident, judges General Pellistrandi. The rules of engagement will have to be clear if a European patrol were to be targeted.” Their ability to respond to any act of intimidation will be decisive. “Only strength is likely to dissuade Russia, abounds Olevs Nikers, from the Baltic Security Foundation. It will be necessary to show Putin that these forces are not just symbolic, but ready to fight if necessary.”

Whether they like it or not, Europeans may have little choice to prepare for a possible confrontation with Moscow, Ukraine or on their soil. In a note made public in early February, the Danish intelligence services estimated that Russia could be ready to carry out a “large -scale war” in Europe within five years if “it perceives NATO as militarily weakened or politically divided “. “It is urgent and fundamental that Europeans gain power in terms of defense, insists Tomas Ries, in Stockholm. We still have the possibility, but that will imply a significant political and economic effort.” According to a study Published on February 21 by the pro-European reflection group Bruegel, the increase in European military expenditure to dissuade a new Russian attack could quote at least 250 billion euros per year.