There is a well-known saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The phone calls that Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre held with Russian leader Vladimir Putin may indeed have been motivated by noble intentions, as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reportedly personally requested them. Still, it is one thing for the leader of a country at war to grasp at every straw in the hope of ending the killing of his people. It is another for experienced politicians to think one step ahead.

Now, however, we see that Europe is divided over the usefulness of such contacts, and Moscow can only rub its hands in satisfaction. It is curious that both men emphasized they were speaking on behalf of their own countries, not Europe, as though Finland and Norway together were capable of ending the war in Ukraine.

If Europe were not standing in the way

Throughout the period following World War II, the United States was first the Soviet Union's and later Russia's number one enemy. The reverse was also true. Broadly speaking, this remained the case until Donald Trump became U.S. president in 2024, when things began to change. The United States stopped providing military aid to Ukraine and began making major concessions to Russia, particularly in the economic sphere (the diesel agreement). Several European countries instead became targets of Trump's criticism.

The White House preferred to believe that Kyiv, not Moscow, was obstructing efforts to end the war in Ukraine. Europe's growing support for Ukraine through increased arms and financial aid and ever-tougher sanctions against Russia made the continent Moscow's new primary adversary.

Moscow came to understand that as long as Europe stood behind Ukraine, there was no reason to expect Ukraine's surrender. This was why Russia launched hybrid attacks, acts of sabotage, and intimidation campaigns against European countries.

Castling

On October 25, Kremlin foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov told Kremlin-aligned television journalist Pavel Zarubin that Europe's involvement in peace talks on Ukraine was critically important. It was the first time Moscow had made such a concession. Previously, it had either ignored Europe or rewarded it with ironic remarks. Russia believed Ukraine could be broken through cooperation with the Americans.

Now a strategic castling has taken place in Russian thinking, as security analyst Dmitry Adamsky described it in Foreign Affairs on October 21. In other words, for Moscow, the United States and Europe have switched places.

Military aid to Ukraine now rests on an unusual arrangement: the United States no longer provides weapons directly, while Europe purchases U.S. weapons with its own funds and sends them on to Ukraine. This is the PURL program (Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List). If Europe were removed from the equation, Ukraine would be left without many of its weapons.

Europe's nuclear weapons

Interestingly, both the United States and Russia are concerned about Europe's nuclear ambitions. Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby has put forward the concept of "NATO 3.0." In broad terms, this would mean the United States drastically reducing its conventional forces and weaponry in Europe while maintaining its "nuclear umbrella."

France and the United Kingdom have increasingly begun discussing the idea that Europe should have its own joint nuclear deterrent. Germany, Poland, the Nordic countries, and the Baltic states have shown interest in such a development. For the United States, this would mean reduced influence in Europe, something it has no intention of giving up entirely. For Moscow, meanwhile, it represents a new "red line."

If NATO's European members acquire greater nuclear capabilities, it would be a blow to the Kremlin's main dream: the destruction of NATO. After all, it becomes much harder to argue that NATO should retreat to its 1997 borders.

That does not mean Moscow will stop trying to intimidate and humiliate Europe. Just three days after saying Europe's participation in Ukraine peace talks was essential, Ushakov stated that Europeans were not invited to the technical talks among Russia, the United States, and Ukraine in Abu Dhabi. However, if they wished, they could "buy" a ticket to attend.

That is why it is all the more important for Europe to speak with one voice to both Russia and the United States. Solo moves by individual countries could create a false start.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!