Follow us on social

Diplomacy Watch Putin Trump Zelenskyy Ukraine

Diplomacy Watch: Is Europe out of bargaining chips?

Offered a stiff deal by Trump, the EU’s Ukraine-sparked security fears won out

Reporting | QiOSK

After licking its wounds after what many call an “unbalanced” trade deal with the U.S., the EU is mulling over its security needs and future altogether as war continues to rage nearby.

For some Europeans, one way forward means buying more weapons for themselves — and for Ukraine.

To that end, many European leaders plan to apply for Security Action For Europe (SAFE) loans, a $150 billion defense-lending scheme agreed upon by European ambassadors back in late May.

EU Defense and Economy Commissioners Andrius Kubilius and Valdis Dombrovskis hope some of the funds the SAFE loans provide to Europe will go toward purchasing weapons from Ukraine: for Europeans, but also for Ukraine, so that Kyiv can continue fighting. They suggest this additional weapons procurement will bolster Europe’s “collective security.”

"We strongly invite you to consider how to involve Ukraine in your plans,” they wrote earlier this month in a letter to EU member states. “Procurement for Ukraine, with Ukraine, in Ukraine, can make a difference for our collective security.”

But for others, the disappointment of the 15% tariff deal means challenging EU leadership outright, on the deal and in general.

"The EU has agreed to a deal that abandons fundamental principles of rules-based global trade. Instead of long-term stability, the agreement creates uncertainty," German Greens politician Sandra Detzer lamented at the Bundestag this week.

Although German Chancellor Friedrich Merz initially hailed the U.S.-EU tariff deal, saying it will help the EU steer clear of larger trade war with its ally, its unpopularity among German politicians, among politicians like Detzer, has led even Merz to instead contend the tariffs are a “considerable burden.”

Ultimately, security needs and concerns, especially those related to Ukraine, played a role in Europe’s agreeing to a deal many call unideal or burdensome. As Maha Rafi Atal, a lecturer at the University of Glasgow’s School of Social and Political Sciences writes in the Conversation: “the urgency of Europe’s security concerns in Ukraine made [recent tariff talks] different from trade negotiations in the first Trump administration, when Europe could afford to be more aggressive.”

“It’s not only about the trade. It’s about security. It’s about Ukraine. It’s about current geopolitical volatility,” EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič stressed on Monday along these lines, telling reporters “I cannot go into all the details.”

“The EU is in a difficult situation because we’re very dependent on the U.S. for security,” Niclas Poitiers, research fellow at the Bruegel research institution told AP. “Ukraine is a very big part of that.”

In other Ukraine war news this week

A Ukrainian drone attack on the Russian city of Salsk killed three people and caused damage to over 50 apartment units there on Wednesday, according to Al Jazeera.

CNN reported yesterday that Russia claims it has captured the long-sought after Ukrainian town of Chasiv Yar. If true, Russia controlling the town would give it a high ground in the Donetsk region, near Ukraine’s “fortress belt” of cities it still holds there. The Ukrainian military has denied Russia captured the town.

On Monday, Trump shortened his 50-day deadline for Russia to reach peace with Ukraine or face tariffs to ten days, according to Reuters.

"I don't know if it's going to affect Russia, because [Russian President Vladimir Putin] wants to, obviously, probably keep the war going," Trump explained his new deadline. "But we're going to put on tariffs."

Following a wave of major protests against his government, The Guardian reported that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed anti-corruption legislation into law Thursday. The new law effectively backtracks previous legislation, which had moved to give the Ukrainian government more control of anti-corruption bodies National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), thus compromising these bodies’ independence from it.

“This guarantees the normal, independent work of anti-corruption bodies and all law enforcement agencies in our country. It is the right decision,” Zelensky said Thursday, stressing that Ukraine remains a democracy. “It is very important that the state listens to public opinion,” he said in acknowledgment of the protests.

From State Department 

On Tuesday, spokesperson Tammy Bruce said during the State Department press briefing that the shortened 10-day deadline Trump set on Russia for a deal for peace in Ukraine, was generous considering Trump knows “what the situation [is].”

“Oh, you might not even have 10 days. I would just suggest, even when he set that 50-day timeline for Russia, I think one of the things I’ve said is that – who knows when that could happen,” Bruce said. “He has had timelines before in which he acted very quickly. So I – with the President, he also noted that he was going to – he shortened that timeline because he pretty much knew what the situation was.”


Top Photo: Trump, Zelenskyy, and Putin with Ukraine graphic. Credit, Khody Akhavi
Diplomacy Watch: Are Kyiv protests pent-up anger against Zelensky?
Reporting | QiOSK
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.