 "‘MUNICH. NEVER AGAIN’: Shocked Europeans play catch-up as Trump shifts Ukraine policy")
European leaders gathered in Munich this weekend amid a growing sense of alarm over the Trump administration’s shifting stance on Ukraine, Russia, and European defense. Stunned by Washington’s abrupt moves, officials scrambled to respond to the unsettling possibility that the US may strike a peace deal with Moscow that sidelines Europe and undermines Kyiv.
As Vice President JD Vance downplayed Ukraine in his address and Trump’s envoy confirmed that European nations would be excluded from negotiations, fears of appeasement loomed large—echoing the city’s dark historical precedent.
**Read Also: From ‘nothing without Ukraine’ to ‘everything for Putin’: How Trump’s ‘peace deal’ puts Kyiv in a bind**
Later in the day, it emerged that US and Russian officials will meet in Saudi Arabia in the coming days to start talks to end the war. US officials have insisted they will only settle for a ”durable” peace deal and Ukraine will be at the table.
But, meeting in Munich, a city synonymous with the 1938 pact to let Nazi Germany annex the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia, some European leaders at the security conference said openly they feared appeasement was once again on the agenda.
”As I stand here in Munich tonight, I cannot help but ask: Have we been here before?” European foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said on Saturday evening.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk chimed in remotely on Sunday via X: ”As a historian and politician, the only thing I can say today is: MUNICH. NEVER AGAIN.”
Europe reels as Trump upends Ukraine policy
Europeans are reeling from a blizzard of Trump administration moves in recent days, even as Washington has said it remains committed to the NATO transatlantic alliance that has been the bedrock of European security for 75 years.
On Wednesday, new U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared at NATO headquarters that a peace deal would not include NATO membership and it was unrealistic for Ukraine to return to its borders pre-2014, when Russia annexed Crimea.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsHegseth also said ”stark strategic realities” prevented the U.S. ”from being primarily focused on the security of Europe”.
Later that day, Trump said he had called Putin, gave an upbeat assessment of the conversation and said peace talks would start immediately.
Trump’s action upended years of Western policy, pursued by the Biden administration and European powers, of trying to isolate Putin and insisting peace talks should only begin when Ukraine was in a stronger position on the battlefield.
Many of these steps had been telegraphed by Trump in his presidential election campaign and had strong echoes from his first term, when he frequently criticised NATO and accused Europeans of failing to spend enough on defence.
But they have left European leaders frantically playing catch-up.
Having spent months debating possible European security guarantees for Ukraine, they have been pushed to act by an American diplomatic demand to detail what they could provide.
Two European leaders also called on Sunday for the European Union to designate a special envoy for Ukraine peace talks – several months after Trump named his own.
Still, many European officials expressed puzzlement as they tried to discern whether the Trump administration had a detailed plan for Ukraine and who the key players were.
Some drew hope from discussions with U.S. officials behind the scenes, which they said were more sober and constructive than the blunt public remarks from Vance, Hegseth and others.
But others said they feared for the transatlantic alliance as a whole, arguing the Trump administration was not just pursuing different policies from Europe but was actively opposed to the European political mainstream.
On Friday, Vance met leaders of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), which is shunned by mainstream parties, ahead of a national election on February 23.
”It is clear now that the U.S. wants to break the post-World War Two order that they created. And that includes destroying the EU. We will have to be prepared for that and change our attitude completely,” said one European diplomat.
Europe must do more for collective security
The French presidency said Sunday that European countries should do more for their collective security, ahead of a top-level meeting in Paris to address growing concerns over US efforts to end the Ukraine war.
“Because of the acceleration of the Ukrainian issue, and as a result of what US leaders are saying, there is a need for Europeans to do more, better and in a coherent way, for our collective security,” an adviser from President Emmanuel Macron’s office said.
Key European leaders are to meet in Paris on Monday to discuss “the situation in Ukraine” and “security in Europe”, according to the French presidency.
The heads of government of Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, Poland, Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark are expected at the meeting ahead of the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24.
Antonio Costa, who heads the European Council representing the European Union’s 27 nations, EU chief Ursula von der Leyen, and NATO secretary General Mark Rutte will also be present.
US Russia to meet in Saudi Arabia amid European concerns
Rubio said on Sunday the next few days will determine how serious Russian President Vladimir Putin is about peace in Ukraine, as U.S. officials fly out to Saudi Arabia for meetings with Russian officials.
America’s top diplomat also played down European concerns about being cut out of the opening talks between Russia and the United States, saying in an interview with CBS that a negotiation process had not yet begun in earnest.
Earlier on Sunday, Reuters reported that U.S. officials had handed European officials a questionnaire asking, among other things, how many troops they could contribute to enforcing a peace agreement. But no European allies were invited to Saudi Arabia, where Russian and American officials are expected to kick off talks early in the week about ending the Ukraine war.
“President Trump spoke to Vladimir Putin last week, and in it, Vladimir Putin expressed his interest in peace, and the president expressed his desire to see an end to this conflict in a way that was enduring and that protected Ukrainian sovereignty,” Rubio said on CBS’ “Meet the Press."
“Now, obviously it has to be followed up by action, so the next few weeks and days will determine whether it’s serious or not. Ultimately, one phone call does not make peace."
U.S. Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz were due to leave for Saudi Arabia on Sunday evening, Witkoff said in a Fox News interview earlier in the day. Rubio noted he was due to be in Saudi Arabia anyway due to previously arranged official travel. The composition of the Russian delegation had not yet been finalized, Rubio said.
European role in peace talks or not
Rubio and Witkoff rejected concerns that Ukraine and other European leaders would have no place at peace negotiations, despite Trump’s Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg suggesting precisely that at this weekend’s Munich Security Conference.
Witkoff noted in an interview on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” that Ukrainian officials had met several U.S. officials in recent days at the conference, while Trump had talked with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy last week.
Rubio said that Ukrainians and other Europeans would be included in any meaningful negotiations.
“Ultimately, it will reach a point - if it’s real negotiations, and we’re not there yet - but if that were to happen, Ukraine will have to be involved because they’re the ones that were invaded (by Russia), and the Europeans will have to be involved because they have sanctions on Putin and Russia as well,” Rubio said.
“We’re just not there yet."
French President Emmanuel Macron will host European leaders on Monday for an emergency summit on the Ukraine war, Macron’s office said, in the wake of Kellogg’s remarks.
European officials have been left shocked and flat-footed by the Trump administration’s moves on Ukraine, Russia and European defence in recent days.
Chief among their fears is that they can no longer count on U.S. military protection and that Trump will do a Ukraine peace deal with Putin that undermines Kyiv and broader European continental security.
Asked if he had discussed lifting sanctions on Russia during a Saturday phone call with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Rubio declined to confirm this, saying only that they “did not go into any details”.
After that call, Moscow said that the two had discussed the removal of “unilateral barriers” set by the previous U.S. administration in relations with Russia.
Rubio said he did address the “difficult” operating conditions of the U.S. embassy in Moscow with Lavrov. If there was to be progress in Ukraine peacemaking, both Russia and the U.S. would need properly functioning embassies in the other country, he added.
US puts Europe on spot with tough questions on Ukraine
The United States has sent European governments a set of questions about what they would need from the U.S. in order to provide Ukraine with security guarantees.
A U.S. State Department spokesperson said that Washington “has been clear that we expect European partners to take the lead in establishing a durable security framework and look forward to their proposals.”
Here are the questions sent by the U.S. according to a document seen by Reuters.
What do you view as a Europe-backed security guarantee or assurance that would serve as a sufficient deterrent to Russia while also ensuring this conflict ends with an enduring peace settlement?
Which European and/or third countries do you believe could or would participate in such an arrangement?
Are there any countries you believe would be indispensable?
Would your country be willing to deploy its troops to Ukraine as part of a peace settlement?
- If third country military forces were to be deployed to Ukraine as part of a peace arrangement, what would you consider to be the necessary size of such a European-led force?
How and where would these forces be deployed and for how long?
What actions do U.S., allies and partners need to be prepared to take if Russia attacks these forces?
What, if any, U.S. support requirements would your government consider necessary for its participation in these security arrangements?
Specifically, which short-term and long-term resources do you think will be required from the U.S.?
- What additional capabilities, equipment and maintenance sustainment options is your government prepared to provide to Ukraine to improve its negotiating hand and increase pressure on Russia?
What more is your government prepared to do to increase its sanctions on Russia, including more strictly enforcing sanctions and better targeting third countries enabling Russia globally?
With inputs from agencies
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
