Trump’s unpredictability could doom Ukraine, but Europe can save it

President Trump is currently irritated by his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. Last week, with Ukraine suffering the heaviest air strikes since the full-scale Russian invasion started, he told NBC News that he had reached a deal with NATO for Patriot air defense missiles to be supplied to Ukraine via the alliance. Germany will pay for two systems and Norway for another one.

The full measure of the president’s annoyance had been evident at a Cabinet meeting. “We get a lot of bulls--- thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth,” Trump said. “He’s very nice all of the time, but it turns out to be meaningless ... I’m not happy with Putin. I’m very unhappy with them.”

These are harsh words indeed. Only last month, Trump had spoken warmly of the Russian president: “Vladimir Putin made some very nice statements today. Look, he respects our country again.”

Context is everything. The air strikes against Ukraine — 539 drones and 11 missiles on July 4, 728 drones and 18 missiles on July 9, 597 drones and 26 missiles on July 11 — came after Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had paused some deliveries of weapons to Ukraine, including air-defense missiles. The stated reason was that America’s own stocks of munitions were inadequate for national security, though this was refuted by unnamed U.S. officials and by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee.

The Kremlin noticed. With deliveries suspended, Ukraine was vulnerable; there is apparently a particular shortage of PAC-2 and PAC-3 interceptor missiles for the Patriot systems. Ukraine’s ability to shoot down drones and ballistic and cruise missiles was compromised, and Russia unleashed the heaviest attacks of the war.

Hegseth did not inform the White House of his decision. He has acted unilaterally in this way twice before, in February and in May. Both times the decision was reversed, and Trump has since announced that the U.S. will now sell weapons to Ukraine, with NATO’s European members picking up the tab.

Anyone who supports Ukraine should welcome Trump’s decision and hope that the Patriot batteries arrive quickly and reinforce the country’s air defenses. We need to be cautious, however. Trump is driven by instinct, or rather whim, and his attitudes are not remotely consistent or enduring. On an impulse, he could turn 180 degrees tomorrow, with Putin back in favor and Hegseth allowed to keep choking off military assistance.

This is not just an inconvenience for President Volodymyr Zelensky and his courageous, inventive but hard-pressed armed forces. The conflict in Ukraine is finely balanced. According to the U.K. Ministry of Defence, Russia has lost a million soldiers killed or injured since February 2022, a quarter of them dead. But it is also increasing its drone production tenfold and will spend 7.7 percent of its GDP (over $170 billion) on defense this year.

In contrast, Ukraine has lost around 400,000 soldiers, of whom between 60,000 and 100,000 have been killed. Clearly that is much lower, but Russia’s population is more than four times that of Ukraine. It is true that Russia’s territorial gains over the past 18 months have been virtually nil, and that Russia is generally being outfought. Equally, however, Ukraine’s military is at full stretch.

All this means that a disruption in military assistance to Ukraine, even a relatively short one, could have a disproportionately decisive effect by creating a window of opportunity for Russia. Last week’s air strikes were probing for just that kind of advantage. The Trump administration seems at best indifferent to the outcome of the conflict, no longer seeing it in terms of international security but as a matter for European powers. It is quite possible that Trump would simply shrug if Kyiv were to fall.

European leaders have to acknowledge this potential scenario. U.S. funding has already been downgraded, and a complete cessation of support, while not inevitable, is not impossible either.

America has given generously, authorizing $185 billion in assistance, more than any other country. But in terms of support given or earmarked, Germany has spent $51.4 billion, the U.K. $24.7 billion, France $5.3 billion and Poland $4.1 billion, while the EU’s Ukraine Facility has made $50 billion available. Japan has given $12 billion.

The agreement at the recent NATO summit for member states to raise defense spending to 5 percent of GDP indicates Europe is ready to do more, as is shown by the new deal for the alliance’s European members to pay for U.S.-supplied weapons.

Americans who still support Ukraine must keep making the case that this is not merely a conflict between Ukraine and Russia, but summons more fundamental questions about the future of geopolitics. Can autocrats simply take what they want? Is force the only argument required? What does it mean if the West shows this green light to Putin, and how will it be interpreted in Beijing?

Europe can sustain Ukraine and help it develop its defensive capabilities, if every shoulder is put to the wheel. Together with the U.S., however, we could transform the conflict, stop Russia’s thirst for expansion and send a powerful signal around the world. As the old joke goes, I wouldn’t start from here — but it can still be done.

Eliot Wilson is a freelance writer on politics and international affairs and the co-founder of Pivot Point Group. He was senior official in the U.K. House of Commons from 2005 to 2016, including serving as a clerk of the Defence Committee and secretary of the U.K. delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.