The ambush by hired hand U.S. Vice President JD Vance at the White House Oval Office at high noon on Feb. 28 made for great theater, more 24-hour TV than diplomacy. At first, it seemed like an absolute disaster for President Volodymyr Zelensky and Ukraine, potentially risking the withdrawal of U.S. military support and even harder days ahead in Ukrainians’ existential fight for survival against Russia.
But after the dust settled on the Oval Office saloon floor, a few silver linings for Ukraine became clear.
First, while the minerals deal hardly seemed worth the paper it was written on for Ukraine — offering zero real commitments, whether security or financial, from the U.S. — it did give Zelensky one thing: time in the White House. A chance to make Ukraine’s case and, in the worst case, to truly assess where the Trump administration stands: with Russia or with Ukraine. If it was the former, at least Ukraine would know and could plan accordingly rather than be left in limbo.
As it turned out, the worst-case scenario played out. The aggression from both Vance and U.S. President Donald Trump toward Zelensky made it clear: they stand with Russia. Trump even repeated his infamous Helsinki summit claim — that he trusts Russian President Vladimir Putin more than Ukraine’s leadership.
Ukraine now knows the U.S. does not stand behind it, and it will be better prepared as a result. It will have to adapt its strategies and seek other options.
Second, the U.S. position has now been exposed to the world. It stands behind Russia and can no longer be viewed as a neutral arbiter in peace talks. In fact, Washington has lost its right to lead those negotiations.
Before the Oval Office showdown, Ukraine and Europe had largely been sidelined from the peace process, which was driven by the U.S. and Russia. Ukraine and Europe feared an imposed settlement — one unlikely to be sustainable. But the White House debacle forced Europe to step up and take the initiative. The result? Any future peace deal is now more likely to be in Ukraine’s favor and more durable.
"There are now zero excuses for Europe not to massively ramp up defense spending and rebuild its hard power. None."
Trump was casual about Ukraine’s legitimate security concerns, but Europe can now put them front and center. The initiative has shifted away from Russia and the U.S. — both of which had been working against the interests of Ukraine and Europe.
In fact, the four-point peace plan proposed by the U.K., along with Britain, Italy, and France leading the way, seemed pragmatic: arm Ukraine, give it the tools to defend itself, push for a one-month truce (focused on air and sea, where verification is easier), and only then move toward a full ceasefire. Europe has made clear that Ukraine needs security guarantees — and the arms to enforce them.
Third, the White House fiasco should be Europe’s final wake-up call: NATO as we knew it is dead, the U.S. security guarantee for Europe is over, and if Europeans care about their own defense, they need to act. And, judging by the weekend’s response, they have. There are now zero excuses for Europe not to massively ramp up defense spending and rebuild its hard power. None.
Yes, European defense spending will increase, but the continent still faces capacity constraints in military industries. In the short term, reliance on the U.S. is inevitable. But Europe has leverage — if it chooses to use it.
Europe will spend more on defense, but it will need to buy weapons from the U.S. in the short term. If it were smart, it would get ahead of the curve by committing to a long-term procurement deal — say, $1 trillion over 10 years. Call it the Trump Defense of Democracy Program, whatever strokes Trump’s ego. The reality is, Trump would struggle to say no to the jobs, jobs, jobs such a deal would create in the U.S. This would buy Europe time to scale up its own defense industry while securing weapons in the interim.
Longer term, there’s a lot of talk about a “Reverse Nixon” — a U.S. realignment with Russia against China. That would be an absurd long-term choice. Pushing away a $27 trillion European economy in favor of a $2 trillion Russian one? Europe will get its defense industries in order, and when it does, it will provide the U.S. with an unrivaled industrial base against China. Imagine Europe spending 4% of $27 trillion on defense in a decade — that’s $1.1 trillion, half of Russia’s GDP. Even going full war economy, Russia cannot match that. But Europe can.
It was also encouraging to see Turkey at the Lancaster House summit over the weekend. With an 800,000-strong land army, Turkey is the only European NATO power capable of putting tens — if not hundreds — of thousands of troops on the ground in Ukraine. It also has the manufacturing scale to help bridge Europe’s defense production gaps.
But Turkey wants something in return — technology transfers, financial access, and a deeper trade relationship with both the EU and U.K. These are low-hanging fruit. Turkey is no ally of Russia; it fears a Russian victory in Ukraine and the resulting domination of the Black Sea. Europe needs to engage with Turkey, not ignore it.
Fourth, the U.K. is back in Europe. Whether intentionally or not, Britain has found itself thrust into the peace process. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer — “Charmer Starmer” — played a blinder over the weekend, proving adept at talking to the U.S., Europe, and Ukraine alike. The U.K.’s first-class diplomatic skills, sorely missing since Brexit, are back in play. If Britain wants a safe and secure Europe, it has to put skin in the game — whether that means boots on the ground or brogues in the conference room.
Fifth, the Oval Office debacle exposed the real bullies and aggressors — and who the victims are. Zelensky stood up for the little guy. Imagine losing hundreds of thousands of people to Russian war crimes — murdered, raped, kidnapped — only to be told to say “thank you” to the U.S. for its aid. As CNN later revealed, Zelensky has already publicly thanked the U.S. 94 times. What more does Washington want? Groveling? Kissing Trump’s ring? The Global South will take note — and likely side with Ukraine.
Sixth, if I were sitting in Beijing, I’d be worried. The events in Washington made one thing clear: the U.S. is aligning with Russia against China. That’s a strategic disaster for Beijing. China needs to make more friends in Europe — now. And Europe should reciprocate. It’s time to show the U.S. that it is not Europe’s only option.
Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the views of the Kyiv Independent.
Sławomir Sierakowski
