Breaking: Pope Leo XIV Demands End to Military Aid Europe Wars

Shifting Global Dynamics

As the global landscape continues to shift, the dynamics of military aid have become a tale of two continents. According to figures published to coincide with the start of the Munich Security Conference, European countries have allocated €88.7 billion in aid, compared to €66.1 billion from the U.S. However, in terms of military aid, the U.S. is still ahead, with €43.2 billion, just over €2 billion more than European countries.

However, the help from Washington is slowing down. In the first half of last year, the U.S. was giving an average of €2.8 billion a month, but in the second half of 2023, it was only €470 million a month. This slowdown has significant implications, particularly if Donald Trump wins re-election as U.S. president in November and leaves Europe to finance Ukraine alone.

The Stalemate in US Congress: Pressure Mounts on European Countries to Boost Aid

The current stalemate in the U.S. Congress is putting more pressure on European countries to boost aid. According to Christoph Trebesch, who leads on the think tank’s database covering military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine from allies — including EU countries and G7 members, “Europe will have to at least double its current military support efforts in case there is no further support from the United States.”

The Kiel Institute’s figures also show wild divergences among European countries. France, with one of Europe’s largest military industrial complexes, trails far behind. The Institute found that French commitments — aid given and promised — were €635 million, while Germany was €17.7 billion, second only to the U.S.

The Trump Factor

Donald Trump’s views on international relationships have been shaped by a long-held belief that the United States is being ripped off by its international relationships. This sense of being taken advantage of shapes his view on trade, which is probably the aspect of his foreign policy that has received the most attention.

Trump says he is in favor of trade, but he has come out against every trade deal in living memory. He calls NAFTA a disaster and is a strident critic of the forthcoming Trans-Pacific Partnership. He wants to slap tariffs on other countries — again harking back to 19th-century protectionism — and negotiate bilateral deals. Most economists believe this would create a downward spiral in the global economy, but Trump does not seem to care.

A Long-Held View: Trump’s Demand for Excessive Tribute

Trump’s demand for excessive tribute in exchange for protection is not a new phenomenon. In 1988, he told Oprah Winfrey that Kuwait should pay the United States 25 percent of their oil profits because the United States “makes it possible for them to sell it.” If he were president, he said, “the United States would make a hell of a lot of money from those nations that have been taking advantage of us.”

In his 1987 letter, he wrote, “Tax these wealthy nations, not America.” What he has in mind is not just other nations increasing their defense spending a modest amount or sharing more of the burden. It is excessive tribute in exchange for protection. There’s a name for that.

Protectionism and Trade Deals: Trump’s 19th-Century Approach

According to figures published to coincide with the start of the Munich Security Conference, as of January 15, European countries have allocated €88.7 billion compared to €66.1 billion for the U.S. In military aid, the U.S. is still ahead, at €43.2 billion, just over €2 billion more than European countries. However, the help from Washington is slowing: In the first half of last year, the U.S. was giving an average of €2.8 billion a month, but in the second half of 2023 it was only €470 million a month.

Christoph Trebesch, who leads on the think tank’s database covering military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine from allies — including EU countries and G7 members, stated that “Europe will have to at least double its current military support efforts in case there is no further support from the United States.” The Kiel Institute’s figures also show wild divergences among European countries. France, with one of Europe’s largest military industrial complexes, trails far behind.

The Institute found that French commitments — aid given and promised — were €635 million, while Germany was €17.7 billion, second only to the U.S. This demonstrates the uneven burden-sharing among European countries, with some nations contributing significantly more than others.

Donald Trump’s view on trade is shaped by a sense of America being ripped off by its international relationships. He wants to slap tariffs on other countries and negotiate bilateral deals, which most economists believe would create a downward spiral in the global economy. This approach is reminiscent of 19th-century protectionism, where nations imposed tariffs to protect their domestic industries.

Trump’s stance on trade deals is also noteworthy. He has come out against every trade deal in living memory, calling NAFTA a disaster and a strident critic of the forthcoming Trans-Pacific Partnership. This protectionist approach is likely to have far-reaching consequences for global trade and economic relations.

Rivals, Enemies, and Allies

Managing allies and partners is just one part of a foreign policy. The other is dealing with rivals and enemies. Trump has certainly cast himself as a ferocious critic of the Islamic State and Iran, but he has a curious view of two countries — Russia and China — that are not enemies but are perhaps better described as a rival and a competitor, respectively.

For most makers of foreign policy, the challenge posed by Russia and China is to U.S. allies and the U.S.-led order, not to the U.S. homeland. But since Trump does not care as much about the allies, it is not surprising that he takes a more lenient view.

There is another factor that endears authoritarian leaders to him — his respect for “strong” and “tough” leaders. This is evident in his admiration for Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, who have consolidated power and implemented authoritarian policies in their respective countries.

Trump’s view on Russia and China is shaped by his desire to negotiate bilateral deals and secure concessions from these nations. He believes that by being tough and demanding, he can extract better terms from these countries and improve the U.S. position in international relations.

However, this approach is likely to have unintended consequences. By alienating U.S. allies and emboldening authoritarian leaders, Trump may inadvertently create a more unstable and volatile international environment.

Implications and Practical Aspects

The Pressure on European Countries to Double Military Support Efforts

The slowdown in U.S. support for Ukraine and European security is putting pressure on European countries to double their military support efforts. According to Christoph Trebesch, Europe will have to at least double its current military support efforts in case there is no further support from the United States.

The Kiel Institute’s figures show that European countries are already contributing significantly to Ukraine’s military efforts. However, the uneven burden-sharing among European countries is a concern, with some nations contributing much more than others.

The pressure on European countries to increase their military support efforts is likely to have far-reaching consequences for European defense policies and international relations. It may also lead to a reevaluation of the current security architecture in Europe and the role of the U.S. in European security.

A World Without US Support – What’s Next for Ukraine and European Security?

A world without U.S. support would be a significantly different and more challenging place for Ukraine and European security. The U.S. has been a key player in maintaining stability and security in Europe, and its withdrawal would create a power vacuum that could be filled by other nations with competing interests.

Ukraine would be particularly vulnerable in such a scenario, as it would lose a key supporter and ally. The country would have to rely more heavily on European countries for military and economic support, which could be a challenging and uncertain prospect.

European security would also be impacted by a world without U.S. support. The continent would have to rely more heavily on its own military capabilities and come together to form a more cohesive and unified defense strategy. This could be a challenging and complex process, but it would also provide an opportunity for European countries to take a more proactive and leading role in international relations.