Donald Trump's return to the White House has prompted Kyiv and European capitals to confront a sobering question: What happens to Western support for Ukraine if the U.S. withdraws?
The United States has been the largest military donor to Ukraine, providing $67 billion in arms since 2022, according to President Volodymyr Zelensky—a figure surpassing the combined defense commitments of all European nations.
Recently, however, Trump has criticized Europe for its perceived lack of contributions, exaggerated Washington’s support, and signaled that the continent cannot depend on the U.S. for its future security.
If the U.S. withdraws, it remains uncertain whether Europe can fill the gap and finance both Ukraine’s defense and its own security needs.
Having been accustomed to decades of peace, Europe’s defense industry has struggled to meet the demands of high-attrition warfare in Ukraine, often falling short on timely arms and ammunition deliveries. To address this, Brussels has appointed veteran Lithuanian politician Andrius Kubilius as its first-ever defense commissioner.
The Kyiv Independent spoke with Commissioner Kubilius at the Munich Security Conference on Feb. 14 to assess whether the EU is ready to step up amid shifting U.S. policies. Kubilius pushed back against Washington’s criticisms while highlighting the strides made by the European defense industry since 2022. However, he acknowledged that catching up with Russia’s wartime arms production remains a major challenge.
The Kyiv Independent: U.S. officials recently stated that Europe should assume greater responsibility for Ukraine’s military support. Can the EU become Ukraine’s leading supporter if the U.S. reduces or withdraws aid?
Andrius Kubilius: First, we must examine the numbers. Over the three years of the full-scale war, the EU’s total support to Ukraine—including military, budgetary, and humanitarian aid—amounted to approximately 134 billion euros ($140 billion). By comparison, U.S. support totaled around $100 billion.
This means that overall, European support exceeds American support by 30%. In terms of military aid, the U.S. provided about $60 billion, while Europe contributed 48 billion euros ($50 billion).
However, both EU and U.S. support for Ukraine’s defense annually remains below 0.1% of GDP. If we want to achieve "peace through strength," we must increase military support significantly.
The Kyiv Independent: Reports suggest that Europe may purchase U.S. weapons for Ukraine. What are your thoughts on this proposal?
Andrius Kubilius: Ideally, we should prioritize buying more Ukrainian-made weapons through the so-called Danish model. This approach would allow us to procure twice as many weapons for the same budget, as Ukraine’s defense industry is rapidly strengthening.
Secondly, we should maximize production within European defense industries. If certain weapons are unavailable in Europe but produced by the U.S., we must explore ways to secure them for Ukraine.
It is unclear whether the U.S. will completely halt its support. I still hope American leaders recognize the importance of strengthening Ukraine. At this stage, we cannot react to every statement from Washington, as different officials express varying views.
The Kyiv Independent: The European defense industry has faced criticism for slow arms deliveries, such as the delayed supply of 1 million artillery shells. Have these issues been addressed?
Andrius Kubilius: Russia’s war has exposed serious weaknesses in Europe’s defense readiness and industrial capacity. In 2022, Europe produced only about 300,000 artillery shells annually. When we pledged to supply 1 million shells, it became evident that we lacked the production capacity.
To address this, the EU launched the ASAP program, which supports European industries in expanding production. By the end of this year, we expect to produce around 2 million artillery shells annually—an eightfold increase.
Europe is now outpacing U.S. production, but Russia, with its war economy and North Korean assistance, still produces more. We must continue expanding our defense production across all sectors. In our forthcoming white paper on European defense, we aim to define NATO capability targets that EU nations must meet urgently.
I advocate for a "Big Bang" approach to defense spending rather than gradual increases.
The Kyiv Independent: When will the European defense industry match Russia’s production capacity?
Andrius Kubilius: EU intelligence assessments suggest Russia could test Europe’s defenses before 2030—some, like Danish intelligence, even predict as early as 2027.
Our priority is to deter Russia by ensuring Europe is fully prepared for any military threats. We must act swiftly.
The Kyiv Independent: President Trump has urged NATO members to raise their defense spending to 5% of GDP—a level that no NATO country, including the U.S., met in 2024. How feasible is this target?
Andrius Kubilius: Increasing defense spending beyond 2% is necessary, but NATO must collectively decide on a realistic target. If Trump proposes 5%, he should also commit to raising U.S. defense spending, which currently stands at about 3.5% of GDP.
Several European countries, such as Poland, are already approaching 4.5%. The Baltic states are planning to increase spending to 5% or even 6%, but these decisions are driven by the threat posed by Putin, not by Trump’s demands.
We fully understand the risks of failing to enhance our defense capabilities in the short term.
The Kyiv Independent: You mentioned that Ukraine must negotiate from a position of strength. However, with Trump pushing for negotiations, does the EU have the momentum to ensure Ukraine is well-positioned?
Andrius Kubilius: The EU has been instrumental in supporting Ukraine—not just militarily, but also by stabilizing its financial system and providing humanitarian aid. In many respects, Europe has done more than the U.S.
If the U.S. criticizes Europe for not doing enough, we accept that challenge—but we also believe the U.S. could do more. Rather than debating who should contribute more, our focus must be on strengthening Ukraine and implementing a clear, actionable plan to support its defense.
Comments
Post a Comment