Connect with us

Europe

Trump cancels Tomahawk deployment to Germany as Berlin warns of defense gap

Published

on

US President Donald Trump’s announcement that he is abandoning plans to station Tomahawk missiles in Germany has triggered a “defense crisis” in Berlin, fueling domestic tensions over the country’s security posture against Moscow.

According to a report by German Foreign Policy, calls to accelerate the development of indigenous German missiles capable of reaching Moscow are intensifying following Trump’s declaration that he will no longer deploy intermediate-range weapons to the country. Late last week, the US President indicated that he intended to withdraw 5,000 US troops from Europe and cancel the long-planned deployment of Tomahawk cruise missiles.

The move is being interpreted as a punitive measure in response to critical statements made by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz regarding the US administration’s strategy toward Iran. German officials warn that the absence of intermediate-range weapons will prevent the neutralization of Russian command centers in the event of conflict, creating a critical gap in the defense plans of Germany and other European nations. Consequently, the development of Germany’s own intermediate-range weapons, with a range exceeding 2,000 kilometers, must now be accelerated beyond the original timeline.

Criticism of Trump’s decision has also emerged from within the US military establishment. Officials have pointed out that the move weakens the infrastructure the US military relies on for global operations, such as the Ramstein Air Base.

US plans for withdrawal from Germany

As announced over the weekend, US President Donald Trump plans to withdraw approximately 5,000 US troops from Germany. Currently, more than 36,000 US military personnel are stationed in Germany, making the country the largest US military hub in Europe and the second largest worldwide after Japan, which hosts 55,000 personnel.

In total, there are just over 85,000 US troops deployed across Europe, including more than 12,500 in Italy and slightly over 10,000 in the United Kingdom. In December, the US Congress passed legislation stipulating that the number of US military personnel permanently stationed in Europe must not fall below 76,000 for more than 45 days. Any deviation from this rule requires the US Secretary of Defense and the Commander-in-Chief of US Forces in Europe to provide a comprehensive justification to Congress.

Observers believe the specific plan involves withdrawing an entire US combat brigade that former President Joe Biden had deployed to Germany for rotational exercises in response to the war in Ukraine. Furthermore, Trump intends to cancel the deployment of US intermediate-range weapons to Germany, including Tomahawk cruise missiles originally scheduled for this year, without proposing a replacement.

Merz’s stance on Iran “punished”

Trump is presenting this withdrawal, in part, as a punitive measure against German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for his comments on the conflict with Iran. Early last week, Merz stated that the Trump administration had entered the conflict “clearly without any strategy” and was “clearly not following a truly convincing strategy in negotiations.”

Trump subsequently launched a sharp verbal attack on Merz. He has now added the troop reduction announcement to his previous threat to increase tariffs on European automobiles to 25%.

Despite this, Trump has repeatedly confirmed his general intention to reduce the US military footprint in Europe and announced the first concrete measures regarding Romania in October. Accordingly, a combat brigade that had been rotationally deployed for military exercises following the start of the war in Ukraine was withdrawn at the end of the year without a replacement unit. The stated justification was that US troops were primarily needed elsewhere, specifically in Latin America and the Asia-Pacific region, which are the focal points of the new US National Security Strategy.

Part of US global war logistics

Serious dissatisfaction with the decision has been voiced in the US, including among Republicans. For instance, the Republican chairs of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees noted that Germany provides the US military not only with overflight rights for the Iran conflict but, more importantly, with unrestricted use of US military bases in Germany, including Ramstein.

According to these officials, “punishing” Germany now would send a risky signal. They argued that Ramstein, along with other US military facilities in Germany such as the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, are indispensable components of global US military infrastructure. Without these facilities, they contend, wars—particularly those in the Middle East—could not be conducted as they have been. Furthermore, these sites provide US forces with an “alternative route” to the Asia-Pacific region if necessary.

Retired Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, the former commander of US Army Europe, has stated that US troops in Germany and Europe “are not there to protect the Germans.” According to Hodges, American soldiers are in Germany “for the US,” not for the Germans. Therefore, any withdrawal from the country would primarily weaken US military logistics.

Disabling command centers

In Berlin, Trump’s announcement to cancel the 2024 agreement for the deployment of US intermediate-range weapons in Germany has caused particular concern. Initially, the deployment of such weapons, including Tomahawk cruise missiles, was planned as a means of applying military pressure on Russia. Officially, this was intended as a temporary solution for several years until Germany and other European countries developed their own intermediate-range weapons capable of reaching Moscow.

That temporary solution is now likely off the table. According to Christian Mölling, former deputy director of research at the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) and founder of the new think tank Edina (European Defense in a New Age), intermediate-range weapons were classified as “central elements” of rearmament against Russia, intended to make it possible to “destroy Russian command centers.”

Moscow within reach: Calls to accelerate the ELSA project

Calls to accelerate the ELSA project as much as possible are growing in Berlin. ELSA (European Long-Range Strike Approach) was launched by Germany, France, Italy, and Poland in July 2024 on the sidelines of the NATO anniversary summit in Washington. The project aims to develop and produce cruise missiles or hypersonic missiles with a range of at least 2,000 kilometers.

The goal was to be able to replace the aforementioned US intermediate-range weapons with indigenous missiles by the early 2030s. In mid-February, the defense ministers of the four founding countries, together with the defense ministers of the United Kingdom and Sweden, signed a memorandum of understanding to further formalize the joint venture.

In the long term, this initiative is intended to help Germany and Europe become militarily independent of the US. However, it remains unclear how the gap created by the non-deployment of US intermediate-range weapons will be bridged before the first European missiles are completed. According to reports, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius is in talks with the Trump administration regarding the delivery of US-made Typhon missile launchers, which are capable of firing Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Europe

Vučić scrapped plan to hold power after phone warnings, report says

Published

on

Former Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić was preparing to retain power by force following the country’s parliamentary elections, according to a report by the British newspaper The Times, citing politicians and a former commander of a specialised police unit.

However, he abandoned this scenario after receiving phone calls urging him to back down.

Spasoje Vulević, the former head of the Serbian police counter-terrorism unit, told the newspaper that 4,000 police officers and 3,000 people whom he described as “thugs” were deployed to central Belgrade on voting day, 25 October.

According to Vulević’s assessment, Vučić was preparing to reject the election results.

Vučić’s spokeswoman denied the claim. Speaking to The Times, she said the police presence in Belgrade was a response to threats of violence from protesters and was unrelated to any attempt to seize power.

Member of the European Parliament Sandro Gozi also said he received alarming messages from diplomatic sources on election day indicating that Vučić was preparing for a scenario involving the use of force.

According to the newspaper, Gozi’s political group issued a statement around 21:00 local time, as initial projections were being released, warning that supporters of Vučić’s party could be mobilized to provoke clashes.

Where did the calls forcing Vučić to back down come from?

Radomir Saičić, a leading candidate from the winning Student List, also argued that plans had been made to alter the results by force if the vote margin between the sides was narrow.

“If the results were close, there were plans to overturn the outcome of the vote by brute force,” Saičić said. “However, according to the information I obtained, numerous calls to him from the police and other figures prompted him to change his mind. They convinced him that executing this plan would end very badly for him.”

Former commander Vulević, on the other hand, was sceptical that police officers could have played a decisive role.

Noting that Vučić personally selected the unit commanders in Belgrade and that these figures were unlikely to oppose him, Vulević said: “I suspect that representatives of European governments called Vučić; these were talks conducted at the highest level.”

European Parliament member Gozi did not confirm the claim that the telephone calls had a decisive effect.

“I cannot rule out the possibility that phone calls took place, but in any case, the vote margin against him was far too large,” Gozi said. “Vučić was stunned.”

According to The Times, roads were closed in Belgrade during the evening, gendarmerie personnel appeared on the streets, and groups of men dressed in black headed toward the city’s Pioneers Park (Pionirski Park).

Vulević claimed these individuals arrived in groups of 20 to 30. However, the newspaper reported that at 21:30, an hour and a half after polls closed, Vučić backed down and his assembled supporters dispersed.

From the Novi Sad collapse to early election defeat

Early parliamentary elections were held in Serbia on 25 October.

According to Election Commission data, after processing results from 8,139 ballot boxes, the Student List secured 52.65% of the vote, while Vučić’s United Serbia coalition remained at 39.22%.

Vučić conceded defeat without waiting for the final results.

“It is obvious that we have lost these elections. The Student List has won,” the politician said, attributing the opposition’s success to support from European countries and the US “deep state”.

Prior to the election, the country was the scene of prolonged mass protests that began after the collapse of a railway station canopy in the city of Novi Sad in November 2024.

Protesters initially demanded accountability for those responsible and an investigation into corruption allegations, before subsequently calling for the government’s resignation.

Having dissolved parliament in September 2026 and announced his resignation from the presidency, Vučić was subsequently nominated as the candidate for prime minister by his party.

Continue Reading

Europe

EU scrambles for takers for remaining €21B in SAFE defence loans

Published

on

The European Commission has until the end of the year to convince EU member states to take up around €21 billion in unused defence loans and support Ukraine’s defence.

The worsening security situation in the Black Sea could encourage Romania to seek additional loans. Bucharest has already secured €16.7 billion under SAFE.

The remaining figure became final after Hungary and Italy significantly scaled back their requests under the EU’s €150 billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) programme.

On Wednesday, after approving Hungary’s spending plan, the final pending application, the Commission announced that it would soon launch a second call for applications.

The situation is very different from August 2025, when Brussels was confident that demand would far exceed the available €150 billion.

Applications from 19 EU countries eventually exceeded that sum by around €40 billion.

Now, national elections and pressure on public finances may make governments reluctant to take on additional debt.

Some EU diplomats told Rapporteur that the conditions for the second round remain unclear, making it difficult to say whether their countries would apply.

The Commission must publish the second call by the end of December. Unlike the first round, where countries could use the loans for national procurement contracts until May 2026, the remaining money must be spent on joint procurement.

Poland benefited from the previous flexibility, securing €43.7 billion, the largest national allocation, and moved quickly to sign contracts.

Warsaw announced that 90% of the money would go to Polish companies.

Brussels also hopes the remaining money will be used to bolster Ukraine’s defence.

In July, during an official visit to the country, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen suggested that around €10 billion in unused SAFE loans could be directed to Kyiv.

Defence Commissioner Andrius Kubilius mentioned the Freyja anti-ballistic missile project among the initiatives under consideration while discussing the second SAFE call at an E5 meeting in Paris this week.

Military sources told Rapporteur that participation in the second round had been considered under Romania’s previous government, but the proposal would now require a fresh political assessment.

Diplomatic sources in Athens told Rapporteur that Greece has also shown interest. The country had previously made an unsuccessful push to increase its allocation by several billion euros.

Polish Deputy Defence Minister Magdalena Sobkowiak-Czarnecka told Polish media this week that Poland was also discussing the conditions for another possible application, while Ireland has shown interest in the remaining funds.

Italy, having already reduced its initial request, is considered unlikely to participate in the second round.

Continue Reading

Europe

EU prepares Ukraine peace mission to Abu Dhabi led by Björn Seibert

Published

on

The European Union is preparing to take a direct role in the diplomatic negotiations surrounding the war in Ukraine.

According to a report by Euronews television, the European Commission and the European Council are establishing a joint delegation of high-ranking officials to attend an upcoming round of talks between the parties. Björn Seibert, the head of cabinet to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, will lead the delegation.

The German diplomat, described in the report as an influential bureaucrat, is expected to head the team attending the talks scheduled to take place in Abu Dhabi in early November.

“We are strongly committed not only to ending the war, but also to achieving a just and lasting peace. This is our goal, and this is precisely the position we defend in the current talks,” a European Commission representative said in a statement on the matter.

Brussels’s key figure behind the scenes

A European bureaucrat of German descent, Björn Seibert has long been recognized as von der Leyen’s closest aide.

Seibert first joined von der Leyen’s team in 2013 during her tenure as Germany’s defence minister, later moving with her to the European Commission.

According to reporting by Politico magazine, Seibert gradually developed into one of the most powerful figures behind the scenes of European politics.

The magazine noted that Seibert has been directly involved in clearing senior appointments and has played an influential role in managing relations with both the European Parliament and the US.

This setup has also sparked controversy within the institution. Critics claim that concentrating power in the hands of the cabinet chief and von der Leyen leads to excessive centralization in administration, whereas supporters argue the model ensures rapid, efficient decision-making.

If these multilateral contacts materialize to bring together delegates from Europe, Ukraine, the US, and Russia under one roof, they will mark the first talks held in this specific format during the peace process.

Diplomatic engagements so far have been conducted either bilaterally between Russia and the US or as trilateral meetings that included Ukraine.

However, the EU delegation’s participation at the negotiating table is not yet finalized, as the issue remains under consultation.

European capitals have actually spent months searching for a similar diplomatic channel. Politico reported in January that EU member states had discussed appointing a special envoy to lead talks with Moscow over Ukraine, an effort backed by French President Emmanuel Macron and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

The Telegraph newspaper reported in October that, alongside Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, Czech President Petr Pavel, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen were being mentioned for the European representative role.

The newspaper noted that officials were also weighing the option of creating a joint delegation of representatives instead of choosing a single figure.

Reservations from Moscow over European intentions

Moscow, for its part, views Europe’s position as potentially decisive in resolving the conflict. “It is not enough to talk only with Kyiv; it is necessary to talk with the whole of Europe, which fully backs Kyiv in its desire to prolong the conflict. Perhaps Europe’s stance is of key importance here,” Russian Presidential Aide Yuriy Ushakov said.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitriy Peskov also stated that Moscow would support the emergence of an EU negotiator. “Having a negotiator is good. If that negotiator genuinely seeks to contribute to a peaceful settlement, it would be much better,” Peskov said.

Conversely, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov struck a cautious tone on 27 October regarding European countries’ interest in joining the talks. Lavrov stated that Europe wants a seat at the table without altering its outlook toward Moscow.

Arguing that Europe disregards Russia’s position on the root causes of the conflict, Lavrov emphasized that European nations do nothing beyond levelling accusations and demanding a halt to hostilities.

“This merely demonstrates the Europeans’ desire to join the negotiation process. However, the positions with which they would enter the process remain a major question mark,” the Russian minister said.

Despite these conflicting signals, Russian President Vladimir Putin previously noted that Moscow has not closed the door to dialogue with European nations.

As a preferred European negotiator, Putin previously named former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey