Fracture in transatlantic relations: What next for Euro-Atlantic security?
The Cable | No. 07.2025
Welcome to the 30th Cable, our weekly roundup of British foreign and defence policy.
The events of the last week have the potential to transform the geopolitical landscape in unpredictable ways. The fallout from the recent statements made by the new administration in the United States (US) has shaken Europe, emboldened Russia and undermined Ukraine’s position in its ongoing war of survival. In this climate, His Majesty’s (HM) Government has begun to respond to the challenge, by leading with the emergence of a new European coalition.
Welcome back to the Cable!
After Munich: How will Europe respond?
It has not been a good week for the established parameters of European security. In a meeting in Brussels, Pete Hegseth, Secretary of Defence of the US, stated that his country can no longer be ‘primarily focused on the security of Europe’, that restoring Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an ‘unrealistic objective’, and that Europe ‘must provide the overwhelming share of future lethal and nonlethal aid to Ukraine’.
At the Munich Security Conference, J.D. Vance, Vice President of the US, gave a speech in which he stated that Europe’s greatest threats were not external but rather came from within. While some of these comments have since been partially retracted, Donald Trump, President of the US, poured cold water on the idea that Ukraine will join the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), posed the idea that Ukraine should pay America back for its assistance with its mineral wealth, and began unilateral talks with Vladimir Putin, President of Russia, to end the war – which will exclude Ukraine and European partners.
The imperious nature of the Trump administration comes as no surprise, but the geopolitical ramifications are by no means diminished – Britain and the European nations face an expansionist Russia to the east and a transactional and indifferent America to the west.
As a result, European leaders gathered in Paris on Monday for an emergency summit to discuss Ukraine and European security. Yet, while European leaders agreed their countries should increase defence spending and provide Kyiv with further support, the talks ended in underwhelming fashion, with no concrete plans. European leaders were divided over the idea of sending European forces to Ukraine – backed by the United Kingdom (UK) and France but dismissed by other key nations such as Germany and Poland.
The other key issue is that of military capabilities, insufficient defence spending since the end of the Cold War, a fragmented defence industrial sector and reliance on American strategic enablers (see Kratos for more) has undermined Europe’s ability to act. High debt to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ratios, stagnant economic growth and frustrated citizenry compound these problems.
However, these challenges are not insurmountable. Europe remains a rich and economically potent region with strong industrial and defence sectors. What the continent requires is leadership and greater cooperation on defence. If the continent can crack this, a new stronger Europe can emerge.
Key diplomacy
Between 10th and 11th February, the Artificial Intelligence (AI) safety summit was held in Paris, which saw political and business leaders meet to discuss the future of the disruptive and potentially transformative technology. The summit concluded with the signing of a declaration to ensure ‘AI is open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure and trustworthy, taking into account international frameworks for all’ and to make ‘AI sustainable for people and the planet’. The declaration was backed by over 60 nations, but both Britain and the US refused to sign, with J.D. Vance, Vice President of the US, warning against the over regulation of AI, while a HM Government spokesperson stated that the document lacked clarity on issues of global governance and national security.
Last week, Sir Keir held talks with several world leaders and diplomats, the most important being:
On 13th February, the Prime Minister hosted Mark Burnett, US Special Envoy to the UK, during which he took a call from President Trump and discussed his forthcoming visit to America. Sir Keir and Burnett also discussed the ‘special nature’ of the UK-US relationship, the strength of the alliance, and the potential for stronger collaboration on trade, tech and cultural matters.
On 14th February, the Prime Minister held a call with Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine. Sir Keir reiterated Britain’s commitment to Ukraine for ‘as long as it’s needed’ and that the UK will ‘step ’ its support to provide Kyiv with strong security guarantees.
John Healey, Secretary of State for Defence, and David Lammy, Foreign Secretary, met their US counterparts while in Brussels. The two ministers also wrote a joint commentary in the Daily Telegraph in which they outlined the need for a ‘strong and durable peace’ in Ukraine, which can only be achieved from a position of strength. They also warned that a ‘bad peace deal with Russia will cause damage far beyond Ukraine’.
As the crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) escalates, with the news that M23 rebels, believed to be supported by the Rwandan Government, have captured Bukavu – Eastern DRC’s second largest city – the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) released a statement calling for an ‘immediate cessation of hostilities…and a return to dialogue through African-led peace processes.’ The statement also warned that this new offensive ‘heightens the risk of a wider regional conflict’ and the actions of M23 and Rwandan forces are in ‘violation of DRC’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and a breach of the United Nations (UN) Charter’.
HM Government has announced new sanctions targeting a Russian cybercrime network, responsible for ransomware attacks around the world. These new sanctions on the network, called ZSERVERS and its UK front company, XHOST Internet Solutions LP, are part of a wider British, American and Australian response to protect the digital economy from nefarious actors.
Defence
Last week, Healey was in Brussels for high-level security meetings focused on Ukraine. On 12th February, the Defence Secretary chaired the 26th meeting of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group – a defence group focused on providing military support for Kyiv, made up of over 50 nations. At the meeting, Healey announced the latest British military aid package for Ukraine, worth £150 million, which includes thousands of drones, dozens of armoured vehicles and air defence systems.
HM Government ministers led defence and trade delegations to Ukraine and India last week:
Luke Pollard, Minister for the Armed Forces, led an international trade mission to Ukraine, which included representatives from Norway and the Netherlands, to ‘strengthen strategic partnerships and enhance defence cooperation in support of Ukraine.’
Lord Coaker, Minister of State for Defence, launched the UK-India Defence Partnership–India (DP-I) while at the Aero India 2025 international airshow. The DP-I will see the establishment of a: ‘…dedicated programme office within the Ministry of Defence that will serve as a one-stop shop for strengthening bilateral defence collaboration between the two countries.’ Additionally, a number of British defence firms took part in a UK-India Business Council roundtable meeting to discuss opportunities for India-UK defence industry collaboration.
Between 5th-7th February, over 120 members of the British Armed Forces, police and civil service simulated their response to a ‘large-scale security incident’. The exercise focused on testing the ability of the different branches of the security apparatus to cooperate in a national emergency.
Environment and climate
The Met Office released data showing that 2024 saw the fastest annual rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration since records began in 1958, the result of record high emissions and weaker natural carbon sinks. This increase confirms that forecasted emissions will exceed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPPC) pathways to keep warming below 1.5°C.
Carbon Brief reported that only 13 of the 195 countries signed up to the Paris Agreement have published their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) for 2035, by the 10th February deadline. Britain is one of the 13 countries which submitted its NDC on time, with Climate Action Tracker, a climate research group, declaring the UK’s new NDC as being ‘1.5°C compatible’, but stated that Britain needs to enhance its support for other countries, to help tackle their emissions.
Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, was in India last week to take part in the fourth UK-India Energy Dialogue with Manohar Lal Khattar, Minister of Power for India. Britain and India have agreed to deepen cooperation to enhance economic growth and tackle the climate crisis, with concrete steps being announced, such as a UK-India Offshore Wind Taskforce, aimed at developing offshore wind supply chains and financing models between the two countries.
How Britain is seen overseas
The Centre for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) published an article quoting H.R. McMaster, US National Security Advisor (2017-2018), analysing the impact of cuts to the British Army, which he stated ‘makes me want to cry’. Chiding HM Government for letting the British Army shrink to the smallest it has been since the Napoleonic era, he argues that the evidence from Russia’s war against Ukraine shows that modern militaries need quantity as well as quality, and that HM Government’s plans to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP will not make up for the lost capabilities that ‘decades of underinvestment’ have resulted in.
How competitors frame Britain
The People’s Daily reported on the recent visit of Wang Yi, Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to Britain (for more information, see our Observing China Tracker). Yi stated that ‘strengthening dialogue and cooperation between China and Britain is the right choice’ and that while both countries will have disagreements, is it important to have an ‘objective and rational perspective…in the spirit of mutual respect.’ The foreign minister went on to say that the UK and the PRC should ‘consolidate the momentum of stabilising and improving bilateral relations.’ All well and good, but improved relations with Britain requires Beijing to act as a responsible partner on the global stage.
Sputnik International released propaganda stating that the UK and European Union (EU) could be key actors trying to ‘stop peace’. Arguing that European nations are the main beneficiaries of the ‘2014 Maidan coup’, both the EU and Britain could ‘take over US commitments’ to Ukraine. However, the article states that this would cost them US$3.1 trillion (£2.462 trillion) over the next decade – an absurd amount. The only country responsible for preventing peace is Russia, which could end the war by ceasing its war of conquest.
Assessing national power
Recent statements from senior officials in the new Trump administration have sent many European capitals into panic mode. However, statements from Trump during the election campaign, along with the fact that the US has attempted to divest itself of European commitments since Barack Obama’s ‘pivot to Asia’, mean this should have surprised no one. Yet, the fact remains: European countries ignored these signs and there is now concern about the security of the continent. So the question should be asked: can European nations defend themselves without American capabilities?
In the immediate-term, the short answer is probably. But in order for deterrence to be effective, the answer must be far more conclusive. The clear threat is Russian aggression, either via direct conflict or through ‘grey zone’ activities. While it is true Russia has been unable to defeat Ukraine, many of Moscow’s assets remain potent, including the threat from the Northern Fleet and Russia’s ability (estimates vary) to rebuild its land forces over time.
On paper, the armed forces of Europe should be able to face down Putin without significant US forces present, but there are two problems with this. First, is the reality of the state of military strength in Europe and secondly, the leadership and strategic enablers which the US brings to the continent.
To take just one example of on-paper strength versus reality, the Swedish Defence Research Agency recently published a report on the military capabilities of select NATO members. Some of it makes incredibly stark reading. It estimates that, given three months’ warning, Germany could field just five to seven battalions from a force of three divisions. Others are not in such a terrible state, but readiness and stockpiles are a genuine concern.
The other point is that the US provides a suite of strategic enablers which European countries will find harder to replace. These enablers allow the US to provide leadership for NATO, especially on issues such as doctrine and standardisation. With a far less active US, European countries will find it far harder to agree on these areas.
Therefore, the top-level take-away is that, as things stand, Europe is less capable of deterring an adversary without a strong US military presence. However, while this is true in terms of immediate military capabilities, the continent has (by some margin) the latent power base to deter Russia were leaders to take action to bolster collective defence. There is a golden opportunity for the UK to lead from the front on this, particularly as a nuclear custodian of the alliance – but this will require political will to resource such an approach.
If you found this Cable useful, please subscribe or pledge your support!
What do you think about this Cable? Why not leave a comment below?