Opinion
Transatlantic relations facing a ‘darkest hour’

The Munich Security Conference, which ended on February 17, unexpectedly turned into a “struggle session” where the United States openly criticized its European partners. Moreover, it witnessed what many saw as the “darkest hour” of transatlantic relations, as the U.S. openly negotiated with Russia over Ukraine’s future without European involvement.
In September 1938, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Germany reached the “Munich Agreement,” which sacrificed Czechoslovakia and paved the way for World War II. This year’s Munich Security Conference was seen by many European countries as the “Munich Conspiracy,” where the United States is backstabbed transatlantic relations and sacrificed another small European nation—Ukraine.
The internal storm between the U.S. and Europe sparked by the Munich Conference has yet to subside and is escalating into a war of words between American and European leaders, especially those of Ukraine. This rift is even exacerbating internal divisions within the United States regarding values and foreign policy. On February 23, a critical parliamentary election was held in Germany; the far-right emerged as the second-largest party. On February 24, on the third anniversary of the Russia-Ukraine war, the United States, for the first time, blocked a United Nations General Assembly resolution condemning Russia as an “aggressor.” Yesterday, French leader Macron made a rare emergency visit to the United States to repair severely damaged transatlantic relations. Next week, the British Prime Minister is also expected to visit the United States. Meanwhile, following a rapid foreign ministers’ reconciliation meeting in Riyadh, the U.S. and Russia are preparing for a summit between their presidents, potentially at the end of February.
All of this indicates that within just one month of Donald Trump’s “return to power,” he has already begun dramatically reshaping Europe’s political and geopolitical landscape, fundamentally altering transatlantic relations, and arbitrarily resetting the global balance of power and security system.
On the eve of the Munich Security Conference, Trump, newly back in office, demonstrated behavior that harmed U.S.-Europe relations and even provoked European partners. This included withdrawing from multilateral treaties and mechanisms that European allies staunchly supported, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the World Health Organization (WHO), and UNESCO. He also sought to acquire Greenland from NATO member Denmark, threatened European trade partners with new tariffs, encouraged European right-wing parties to seize power through Elon Musk’s influence, and pressured NATO’s European members to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP. Additionally, Trump increasingly pursued a unilateral approach to ending the Russia-Ukraine war as quickly as possible.
Despite European partners’ prior anticipation and precautions against “Trump 2.0,” recognizing the challenges he would bring, the political tsunami unleashed during the Munich Conference still caught them off guard, making them momentarily be stung. Christopher Heusgen, the conference chairman, was moved to tears during his farewell speech on February 16, visibly overwhelmed. Although some questioned the connection between the video of his tears and the conference, German media quoted the seasoned diplomat as describing the event as “a nightmare for Europe in some sense.”
The “European nightmare” in Munich began with a blunt barrage of criticism and lecturing from U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance during his opening speech on February 14. Regarding immigration, democracy, and other issues, Vance argued that the real threats facing Europe did not come from external forces like Russia or China but from Europe’s internal deviation from its “most fundamental values.” He repeatedly questioned whether the U.S. and Europe still shared a common agenda.
Vance also accused EU leaders of suppressing freedom of speech and religion, failing to curb illegal immigration, and singled out the UK, Germany, Romania, and Sweden for their numerous “misgovernances.” He questioned whether Europe’s current values were still worth defending by the United States. Vance’s rapid-fire, saturation-style criticism left many European leaders in attendance shocked, bewildered, deeply humiliated, and outraged, completely disrupting the usual rhythm and planned agenda of the Munich Security Conference.
Not only that, but Vance, as the newly appointed Vice President of the United States, made his first visit to Europe, disregarding basic diplomatic etiquette by refusing the official meeting invitation from the host, German Chancellor and SPD leader Scholz. Instead, he held a 30-minute private meeting with Weidel, the leader of the far-right opposition party, Alternative for Germany (AfD). Vance’s actions completed the policy and directional “closed loop” that Elon Musk had repeatedly echoed across the ocean with the AfD and Weidel, forming a chain of evidence of systematic U.S. interference in Germany’s internal affairs.
Trump’s “welcome gift” to European partners upon taking office was so crude that it plunged European leaders into a dark tunnel of complete disillusionment and bone-chilling despair. They witnessed firsthand that the U.S. delegation did not come seeking friendship and cooperation, but rather to provoke and confront; not to uphold transatlantic relations, but to create friction and expand division; not to inherit the political legacy of U.S.-Europe ties carefully maintained by Obama and Biden, but to dig up the past and overturn everything; not to continue the role of Western leadership that the U.S. had long assumed after World War II, but to shift the burden, shirk responsibility, and even sacrifice Europe and the entire West to “make America great again.”
The “darkest hour” for Europe witnessed at the Munich Security Conference was not only the “free-fall” decline of transatlantic relations and the sense of European partners losing their footing, but also the U.S.’s rapid pursuit of compromise and rapprochement with Russia, leaving its European partners behind and even treating war-torn Ukraine — which the U.S. had supported for nearly three years — as a sacrificial pawn. The U.S.’s massive “U-turn” in policy, marked by its speed, intensity, and devastating consequences, left European partners and Ukraine reeling and unable to respond.
Before the Munich conference, the Trump administration had already openly invited Russia to attend the event, aiming to facilitate direct dialogue with long-estranged European partners. Moreover, the U.S. made a series of one-sided, flattering remarks toward Moscow regarding U.S.-Russia and EU-Russia relations, including advocating for the G7 partners to readmit Russia, thus restoring the G8. U.S. Secretary of Defense Hegses also explicitly told European partners, especially Ukraine, not to harbor illusions of reclaiming territories lost since 2014, including Crimea and large areas of eastern and southern Ukraine occupied by Russia.
While European partners were busy digesting the bruising effects of Vance’s verbal onslaught and interpreting Trump’s policy shift on Russia and Ukraine, a senior U.S. diplomatic and security delegation had already held a four-hour secret meeting with the Russian delegation in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia, more than 1,000 kilometers away from Munich. Foreign media revealed that the U.S. delegation included Secretary of State Rubio, National Security Advisor Waltz, and Special Representative for Middle Eastern Affairs Whitkov, while the Russian side was represented by Foreign Minister Lavrov and Presidential Assistant Ushakov.
This was the first high-level formal meeting between the U.S. and Russia since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict nearly three years ago, the second handshake between the two countries after two years of suspended direct contact, and a U.S.-initiated “ice-breaking” attempt to repair relations with Russia despite opposition from European partners, especially Ukraine. The four-point consensus ultimately reached by both sides marked a turning point in U.S.-Russia relations, signaling that Washington had moved beyond the Russia-Ukraine war and abandoned its European partners and Ukraine — the two geopolitical casualties of this conflict:
- Both sides agreed to establish a consultation mechanism and take the necessary measures to normalize the operations of their diplomatic missions.
- Both sides agreed to appoint senior teams to end the Ukraine conflict as quickly as possible in a lasting, sustainable, and mutually acceptable manner.
- Both sides agreed to lay the foundation for future cooperation, which would resume once the Russia-Ukraine conflict concludes.
- The participating teams agreed to maintain contact to ensure the negotiation process proceeds in a timely and productive manner.
Originally key players in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, European countries—especially Ukraine—have now become mere spectators in this U.S.-Russia deal that directly impacts their fate. It could even be said that Europe is not only experiencing a “darkest hour” and a “Munich Conspiracy” but is also facing a new “Yalta moment”: two great powers, the United States and Russia, are determining the course of the European battlefield, dividing the post-war geopolitical map and spheres of influence, and designing a new European security framework according to their own interests.
In a short period, European leaders have been repeatedly blindsided and betrayed by the United States, leaving them scrambling to respond. On the day the Munich conference ended—the day before the U.S.-Russia meeting in Riyadh—leaders of major European countries gathered in Paris for an emergency summit on European security. After the U.S.-Russia meeting, French President Macron again convened a European emergency summit to discuss countermeasures. Furthermore, Macron, along with British Prime Minister Starmer, planned an urgent visit to the United States, hoping to prevent the situation from becoming completely unmanageable.
The fundamental bottom line for Europe and Ukraine is that they cannot be excluded from any negotiations regarding war and peace in Ukraine. European countries, including Ukraine, are well aware of the nature of U.S. power diplomacy, which essentially operates as “table diplomacy”: *“If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.”* For the Trump administration, the current version of “table diplomacy” is clearly not about equal, mutually accommodating negotiations—it is a situation where the White House has the final say.
With the Munich conference over, the consequences of the “Munich Conspiracy” continue to unfold. In recent days, Trump’s disdain and dismissive attitude toward Ukrainian President Zelensky have become increasingly blatant, escalating into outright personal attacks and open questioning of Zelensky’s presidential legitimacy. Trump even reversed the narrative by blaming Zelensky for provoking the Russia-Ukraine war three years ago. Previously, Trump warned Zelensky that if Ukraine did not quickly agree to a ceasefire, “Ukraine would cease to exist.” He also hinted that Ukraine would eventually become part of Russia.
Trump’s attacks on Zelensky not only shocked European leaders but also deeply wounded the national pride and patriotic sentiments of both Ukrainian officials and citizens, who condemned Trump and expressed solidarity with Zelensky. This backlash, in turn, angered Trump’s loyal followers. For example, Vance publicly warned Zelensky and other Ukrainian leaders that “retaliating against the U.S. president is foolish” and would yield no favorable outcomes.
Trump’s recent foreign policy moves and rhetoric have not only offended and alienated European partners—particularly Ukraine, the “little brother”—but have also pushed the U.S. establishment, especially Democrats, to their breaking point. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, delivered a harshly worded speech condemning Trump’s unfair remarks about Zelensky and Ukraine, calling them “disgusting” three times in succession. This level of open, unfiltered criticism of a sitting president’s words and actions is virtually unprecedented in U.S. congressional history.
Trump’s increasingly provocative rhetoric after the Munich conference is essentially a retaliation against European partners and Ukraine for questioning his foreign policy. Previously, Ukraine had rejected a U.S. proposal to control its mineral resources. On the day the Munich conference opened, the U.S. delegation presented Zelensky with a document requesting his signature. The document would have granted the United States ownership of 50% of Ukraine’s mineral reserves as repayment for U.S. aid and a continuation of U.S. security guarantees. Zelensky politely refused to sign, citing the need to thoroughly review the terms—and, in reality, because he was unwilling to cede half of Ukraine’s mineral wealth to the United States.
Tragically, the idea of this “resources-for-security” swap was initially proposed by Zelensky himself. However, the revised U.S. version of the agreement, delivered by Treasury Secretary Bessent on February 12, was so exorbitant that Zelensky was forced to backtrack and withdraw his offer, unwilling to hastily sign what would be seen as a humiliating treaty of subjugation that could mark him as a historical traitor to his nation.
In response to recent events, The Economist and TIME magazines independently published cover illustrations of Trump wearing a crown, with the headlines “The would-be king” and “Long Live the King!” respectively. Notably, Trump himself took these ironic covers as a compliment, with both his campaign team and the official White House social media accounts reposting the “coronation” images. This series of actions highlighted Trump’s defiant, unapologetic governing style, signaling that the world must brace for the frequent “earthquakes” his domestic and global reshaping efforts will trigger over the next four—or even eight—years.
After 452 years as a republic, the Roman Empire transitioned to an imperial system in 27 BC, when Octavian was crowned Augustus as its first emperor. However, 248 years after its founding, the United States will not become the “American Empire” simply because of Trump’s “return as king.” Still, the intense domestic and international upheaval caused by Trump 2.0 is fundamentally altering both America and the world. The greatest casualty of this seismic shift is likely to be the transatlantic relationship, which has withstood a century of trials without collapsing—until now. Perhaps the sacrifice of Ukraine is just an unfortunate beginning—a dangerous omen of what lies ahead.