Is America Abandoning Europe?

In 2007, Russia’s President Putin gave a now-infamous speech at the Munich Security Conference (MSC), announcing Russia’s new posture of hostility towards the US and Europe. In 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine, many looked back at Putin’s 2007 Munich speech as a revealing moment of his intentions.

This year’s MSC could be a similar watershed. This time, the warning bells ring from across the Atlantic. US Vice President JD Vance delivered one of the most hostile speeches by a US official to Europe in decades. Rather than addressing the Russian or Chinese threats, Vance argued that Europe faced a “threat from within,” accusing the EU and national governments of censorship and ignoring popular demands on issues like illegal migration.

Meanwhile, away from Munich, US President Donald Trump held a phone call with Putin, setting the stage for negotiations between the US and Russia for a peace agreement in Ukraine – without involving European counterparts in the discussions. The day before, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth announced some of the US expectations from this deal: Ukraine should drop its NATO membership bid, European countries would need to provide the forces to enforce the agreement, and these forces would not be covered by NATO’s Article 5 guarantees.

The transatlantic picture in which the MSC took place was even bleaker. Since Trump’s inauguration one month ago, the new president had promised (and now imposed) tariffs against countries across the world, including Europe. He has threatened to annex the territory of allies like Canada and Denmark.

Normally, the MSC is an opportunity for the United States to reaffirm its commitment to Europe and the Atlantic alliance. This year, it could be remembered as the time when the US started the process of abandoning Europe – or even going aggressively after it.   

An attack on Europe

Vance’s speech and the reactions to it have dominated the discussions at the MSC. Although the conference theme was “multilateralization”, the real topic on everyone’s mind was: how would Trump’s second administration approach Europe?

As the pre-conference report argued: “Donald Trump’s presidential victory has buried the US post–Cold War foreign policy consensus that a grand strategy of liberal internationalism would best serve US interests.” That this consensus was gone was clearly visible in the conference. Despite perfunctory references to shared values, Vance’s speech did not talk about the alliance between Europe and North America, nor about the common threats and how to face them.

And he has voiced support for anti-EU parties. Vance pronounced his speech in Germany, just weeks before federal elections, and argued that there should not be “firewalls” in government – a clear reference to the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) which has so far been kept out of governing coalitions. After the speech, Vance met with the AfD leader.

Additionally, Vance criticized Romania for canceling its 2024 elections and accused the EU of censoring free speech. But Vance failed to acknowledge that the very election that brought Trump and him to power in November was the subject of major foreign interference by Russia, China, and Iran. Rather than sitting idly by, US agencies took active measures to counter these malign actions and prevent disruptions – like raising awareness, coordinating with the media, and keeping politics out of the fight. With his speech, Vance seems to be arguing for the exact opposite approach.

All these issues did not touch on security and defense, the core of the MSC’s discussions. But they did lure in the background of Vance’s speech. A few months ago, Vance argued that the EU should not regulate tech companies owned by Elon Musk. If the Europeans did so, he argued, the US should reduce its security commitments to NATO. Hence, American assurances could become bargaining chips to resolve other issues.   

How will the EU respond?

Vance’s Munich speech marks a new era in US relations with Europe. While the themes are not new – Trump has never been a fan of NATO, and enjoys courting Europe’s far-right – the extent of the rhetorical change cannot be understated. Ukraine’s President Zelensky, speaking in Munich the day after Vance, spelled out the challenge in clear terms: “We can’t rule out the possibility that America might say ‘no’ to Europe on issues that threaten it.”

The reaction from European leaders has been strong so far. EU Commission President Von der Leyen called for an emergency clause in the EU treaties to allow member states to boost defense spending [8]. French President Macron called for a summit of European leaders in Paris on Monday, February 17 – to sketch out a common position on the upcoming negotiations over Ukraine, and on making up for US security guarantees from Europe.

The greatest challenge, however, will be transforming outrage into meaningful action. Europeans have long ignored calls to take charge of their own security. Domestic constraints over spending, divisions and the continued belief that Uncle Sam will have their back have stood in the way of ambitious choices. Will this time be different?  

This opinion was written by Giuseppe Spatafora for the Anadolu news website.

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

Iran is Writing The Final Chapter!

By Ziyad Farhan Al-Majali

In major wars, results are not always measured by the ‘noise volume’, number of airstrikes, or the extent of the military maps displayed on TV screens. Sometimes the noise is louder than the decisive action, and the roar is stronger than the ability to end the battle.

From this perspective, the Israeli-American war on Iran can be read as a tumultuous moment in the history of regional conflict. Here however, it was not the final moment which Israel desired and was looking for.

Tel Aviv wanted to present the war as its declaration of its superiority, one that would be final. It wanted to say that its reach could penetrate deep inside Iran, that the old balance of deterrence was broken, and that the aftermath of the strike would not be the same as it was before.

Therefore, Israel’s “lion roar” was to be loud from the very beginning: Threatening rhetoric, painful strikes, psychological warfare — a clear attempt to portray Iran as a state exposed to Israeli and American power.

But the roar by itself, however loud it boomed, was not enough to bring about a political end. True, Iran suffered heavy blows, with sensitive facilities, infrastructure and sites sustained significant damage, finding itself facing a broad economic, military, and psychological siege and pressure.

Yet, despite all this, the war did not topple the Iranian government, nor did it remove the state from the regional equation, nor did it end its nuclear program as a negotiating issue, nor did it break its deterrent and maneuvering capabilities.

Herein lies the central paradox of this war. Israel raised the stakes to their highest points, but it did not achieve a decisive victory. Israel sought to eliminate the so-called Iranian threat with a single strike or a series of blows, only to discover that Iran is not a military site that can be wiped off the map, nor a single facility whose destruction would end the conflict.

Rather, it is a deep-rooted, expansive state with multiple levers of pressure: From the Strait of Hormuz to Lebanon, from missiles to air corridors, from allies to the capacity for long-term patience. Iran is a tough nut!

Perhaps the most dangerous revelation of the war is that it did not produce a definitive answer, but rather raised even greater questions. Can military force alone reshape Iran? Can bombing impose a stable political settlement? Will weakening Tehran lead to its expulsion from the region, or will it push it to rebuild its influence more cautiously and covertly? Was the war the beginning of the end, or the start of a new phase of a postponed conflict?

Iran emerged from the war wounded, but it didn’t exit the negotiating table. It appeared battered, but it did not collapse. Maybe besieged but it is still holding cards. Whilst today Iran might be in a predicament, but it has not lost its ability to negotiate, to threaten, and wait for the next move.

This is precisely is what is making the outcome far more complex than what Israel has tried to portray: The war may have succeeded in inflicting pain on Iran, but it did not  eliminating the Iranian state and its apparatus.

While Israel may have achieved a significant show of force, it did not achieve an outright and decisive victory. The decisive outcome it sought remained incomplete, and the deterrence it aimed to restore remained contingent on what would follow after the war: Would Iran back down? Would it retaliate? Would it accept American terms? Would it open the Strait of Hormuz according to Washington’s wishes? And would the Lebanese front be detached from Tehran’s calculations, or would it remain part of the long-term equation of retaliation?

Therefore, the war does not appear to be the end of the conflict with Iran, but rather a new chapter in a broader, protracted struggle. In this chapter, Israel raised its voice to the maximum, but it could not write the final chapter. States do not fall through mere bluster, regional projects do not end with a single blow, and conflicts that have accumulated over decades are not resolved in days, no matter how intense the fighting is.

In short, Israel’s “roar” was loud, perhaps painful, and perhaps unprecedented in some aspects, but it was not enough to topple Iran or remove it from the scene. The din of war has risen, the region has been shaken, and calculations have shifted, but Iran remains on the precipice, not outside history.

Therefore, the most accurate description of this phase is not a complete Israeli victory, nor an Iranian resistance without cost, but rather a war whose end is not yet in sight: A war in which Israel roared loudly, but was not able to bring down Iran.

This article was reproduced from the Jo24 Arabic website in Jordan and appears in the www.crossfirearabia.com.

Continue reading
Gaza Fishermen Dream of Life Prior to 7 Oct

CROSSFIREARABIA – The fishing industry, once a pillar of the Gaza economy, now stands in total devastation due to Israel’s continuing war on the 364-kilometer Strip that doesn’t seem to stop despite the fact that a ceasefire was signed on 10 October, 2025.

Zakaria Bakr, General-Secretary of the General Union of Workers in Fishing and Marine Production affirmed that the Gaza fishing sector — which for decades has been a primary source of income for thousands of families and a key pillar of food security — is now in ruins because of the more than two and a half years of Israeli bombing on the Gaza Strip, including on its beaches and coastal areas. Its a narrative of devastation. 

Bakr said the systematic targeting of the fishing industry by Israeli occupation forces has lead to its near-total collapse.

Speaking to Quds Press, Bakr said that this targeting has included an almost complete ban on fishermen and preventing them from going a few hundred meters after the shoreline; a situation  made with vehemence soon after 7 October, 2023 when Israel launched a destructive war on the Strip and with no let up.  

Bakr added that lethal force started to be used against fishermen not to step even meters into the Gaza blue shorelines.  They still take the risk because of the miserable economic situation they have been reduced to. But this has proved costly for more than 230 of them have been shot dead at point  blank range.

The union chief says hundreds have been arrested as well, explaining the fishing sector has been subjected to mass destruction affecting up to 95 percent of its infrastructure, with fishing boats ruined and warehouses struck either by Israeli gunboats and/or missiles from the air.

UN figures as well testify to this fact, stating the fishing infrastructure include ice factories, storage facilities, maintenance workshops and wholesale fish markets which have been destroyed over the past two-and-a-half years of slaughter.

This has led to the near-total collapse of the fishing industry, depriving thousands of families of their only source of income. Today, it’s a stark contrast. Prior to October 2023, there were 4200 registered fishermen with 6000 support workers on the boats and the fishing sector sustained around 100,000 people in Gaza but no more.

The destruction of the sector has created an additional food security crisis. Before October 2023, the fish total annual tonnage production stood at 5,410 according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Today, its less than 7.3 percent.

It is indeed a hard life for fishermen.  Before October 2023 Gaza fishermen used to catch between them, 15,000 to 20,000 kilos, daily. Now, it is down to a trickle with UN feeds reporting a mere 2 to 5 kilograms of fish daily, and I dare say, if they can pass the Israeli gunboats and snipers who are waiting near the coast.

Bakr added that what Gaza’s fishermen are going through from the Israeli gunboat harassment is a blatant violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, particularly the rights to work, life, and dignified living. It directly contradicts the core principles established by the International Labour Organization regarding safe working conditions and the protection of workers, he pointed out.

Bakr said despite the hopelessness of the sector, his union continues to be active, recently sending letters to several international organizations to present them with the grim reality facing the fishing sector in Gaza. These organizations included the United Nations, the International Labour Organization, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Committee of the Red Cross, as well as other international and human rights institutions.

 “We informed these institutions, on behalf of the fishermen of the Gaza Strip, of the scale of the catastrophe facing this labor-intensive sector, which represents one of the oldest and most important economic, social, and cultural components of Palestinian life and society, and which today, is facing one of the harshest humanitarian and professional crises of modern times,” he added.

He noted that the union has called on international institutions to take a number of urgent measures, most notably providing immediate international protection for fishermen while working at sea, pressuring for the lifting of restrictions on access to fishing areas in a safe and unrestricted manner, and halting all forms of targeting against fishermen and their equipment.

He also called for support in rehabilitating the fishing sector, including boats and related infrastructure, providing urgent assistance programs for affected families, and dispatching fact-finding missions to document violations against fishermen and issue official reports on them.

Bakr stressed that what Gaza’s fishermen are enduring today represents “a stain on the conscience of the international community,” which remains powerless in the face of depriving civilian workers of their most basic rights to work and life.

He called on international institutions to assume their legal and humanitarian responsibilities and to take urgent action to put an end to this tragedy, ensuring that Gaza’s fishermen can safely return to the sea and restore their legitimate right to work and live with dignity.

A once proud fishing industry, today, it is not, thanks to the Israeli bombardment that topped over 100,000 tons of explosives and dynamite. Fishermen and their families will never forgive the hateful and vengeful Israelis who today reduced their sector to 50 small boats for the entire 40-kilometer coastline that stretches from Rafah in the south to Israel in the north.  

The Gaza fishing industry once used to have 2000 fishing vessels with more than a 1000 motorized boats and 900 rowboats generating $10-15 million to Gaza’s local economy, 3 percent of the entire Palestinian GDP.

“All my money is gone. Out of my big 17-meter boat and 10 smaller boats, nothing remains but metal sticking out of the water. The sea was an integral part of the Gazan economy; fishermen would feed their families with their catch and could make a good living. Now, everything is in ruins,” says Jamal Al Moodi, a once proud Gaza fisherman.

Dr Asmar is a writer based in Amman and is the editor of www.crossfirearabia.com

Continue reading

You Missed

Children of Gaza in Danger

Children of Gaza in Danger

Israeli Violates The ‘Gaza Ceasefire’ 10 Times

Israeli Violates The ‘Gaza Ceasefire’ 10 Times

Price of Israel’s War in Lebanon

Price of Israel’s War in Lebanon

Gaza’s Dead Mounts Despite Ceasefire

Gaza’s Dead Mounts Despite Ceasefire

In The Grip of Starvation: Israel Will Not Let Gaza Rest!

In The Grip of Starvation: Israel Will Not Let Gaza Rest!

Trump to Netanyahu: ‘You’re crazy. If it weren’t for me, you’d be in jail’ – Axios

Trump to Netanyahu: ‘You’re crazy. If it weren’t for me, you’d be in jail’ – Axios