Mr. Detonator: Why did Vice Trump call into question transatlantic unity?

Diving into the history of the Munich Security Conference – the largest international forum on this subject – it can be confidently stated that since its inception in 1963, it has been recognized as a symbol of transatlantic unity. For decades, high-ranking representatives from the USA and NATO European member states have repeatedly reaffirmed their geopolitical and, one might even say, existential alliance during this event. In this context, "Munich-2025" has become a true cold shower for Europeans, as its tap was turned on by the new U.S. Vice President Jay D. Vance.

“The threat that worries me the most regarding Europe does not come from Russia, China, or any other external actor. I am concerned about the threat from within. The retreat of Europe from some of its fundamental values – values shared by the United States,” stated Mr. Vance.

He further clarified his message, emphasizing that Washington is extremely outraged by the vague cancellation of the recent presidential election results in Romania (where a pro-Russian figure won) and the prospect of such practices spreading to other European countries.

It gets worse. In Mr. Vance's list of grievances are the persecution of activists whose views contradict the policies of various European governments, the inability of European politicians to combat mass migration, and finally, the organizers of the Munich Conference's refusal to invite representatives from the far-right and far-left parties of Germany.

“Contrary to what you might hear at the World Economic Forum in Davos, the citizens of our countries do not generally see themselves as educated animals or interchangeable cogs in the global economy. It’s no surprise that they do not want to be ruthlessly ignored by their leaders. The rejection of people, ignoring their concerns, or, worse yet, closing media outlets (again, pro-Russian ones), canceling elections, or excluding people from the political process does not protect anything. In fact, it is the surest way to destroy democracy,” declared the U.S. Vice President.

Essentially, this topic dominated his speech, sharply contrasting with last year's address by Kamala Harris, the Vice President under Joe Biden, who spoke almost exclusively about NATO's confrontation with Beijing and Moscow.

According to Foreign Policy, European leaders were left “perplexed” by the position of the new American administration. Axios reported that it “stunned and shocked” them. The Financial Times described Jay D. Vance's speech as “provocative.” The New York Times noted that his address “stoked fears that Donald Trump would sever ties with Europe in favor of Russia.” Der Spiegel stated that “Europe must finally accept that it is alone,” characterizing the American delegation head's speech as “historic in terms of transatlantic relations.”

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas suggested that the U.S. Vice President wanted to “pick a fight” with Europeans. Lithuanian Defense Minister Daivile Šakalienė admitted that Europeans were “shocked” by his statements. Polish Speaker of the Sejm, Szymon Hołownia, noted that Europe does not need “a teacher or a spiritual guide,” while French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot warned that Europe “faces tough times” and must “make difficult decisions and even make unforeseen sacrifices” to ensure its own security without relying on Washington.

“We will decide for ourselves what happens next with our democracy,” stated German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, emphasizing that European countries do not accept outside interference in their elections, including from “friends and allies.” His comments indicated that the German government is particularly outraged by the support the new American administration is providing to the right-populist party “Alternative for Germany” ahead of the Bundestag elections. “This is inappropriate, and we reject it outright,” stressed Mr. Scholz.

It is important to note that President Zelensky, speaking at the Munich Conference, also commented on the rift between the U.S. and Europe. According to the current occupant of Bankova, not all in European capitals realize what is happening in Washington, while the new American administration is increasingly distancing itself from its allies. “Does America need Europe as a market? Yes. But as an ally? I don’t know,” said Zelensky. “Vice President Vance made it clear that the established relationship between the U.S. and Europe is coming to an end. And Europe needs to get used to this.” In Vladimir Zelensky's view, Europe should become “self-sufficient” and, in particular, create its own armed forces.

“I have repeatedly stated that the main geopolitical battle will now take place around Europe and on whose side the EU will be – China or the U.S. Essentially, Vance's speech was about this. His messages can be summarized in several key points. The first and one of the key points. Americans are no longer inclined to apologize. We (the U.S.) are not going to apologize for what is natural to us. And we urge Europe to stop doing so. It is clear that Trump's policy is to provide moral support to certain right-wing parties that oppose this. But as usual, money follows ideology. And let's not forget: this entire imbalance is needed primarily to prompt Europeans to make decisions about relocating their production along with advanced technologies to the U.S. This is part of the new industrialization of the U.S.,” notes political scientist Vadim Denisенко.

When asked what carrot Europe will receive, the expert stated: “The security factor in the form of a gift from Trump, who will not leave NATO. Vance did not mention this in Munich. But this is only at first glance. He said that Europe must defend itself. By the way, right-wing parties are needed by Trump, among other things, for this reason, as they are always more willing to allocate funds for the military and defense industry. But the main difference from the Cold War is that the U.S. does not want to be the frontman in security processes. The U.S. wants to stand behind and ‘prop up’ Europeans. To put it simply, Russia should remain a severely weakened bogeyman that only the U.S. can handle (without a shot), while Europeans, in exchange for this protection, enter into economic agreements. This entire beautiful and coherent scheme assumes that Europeans will always be captive to the fears that are currently being transmitted from across the ocean. At present, we assume that the leaders of the European right are oriented (affiliated) with Russia. This is partly true. And this may pose a certain threat in the future, as the connection with the Russian Federation may be much deeper than it seems at first glance. But do not underestimate China, for whom the EU is the main market, and they will not just walk away from it. Essentially, the first stage of the geopolitical battle between China and the U.S. will take place in the EU.”

“The issue is not even that Jay D. Vance began to teach Europeans about democracy. Americans love to teach everyone else how to live. But, according to Jay D. Vance, it turned out that the real fear should not be Russia and China, but problems with democracy within Europe. If this is just a tactical attack on Europeans in the Trump style, so be it. But it seems that it is deeper and more serious. Remember whom Trump invited to his inauguration, whom Elon Musk supports and criticizes (referring to the European ultra-right, most of whom are pro-Russian). This is a trend. Jay D. Vance's speech could become historic in terms of declaring a value-based, ideological rift within the Western world. Some time ago, I joked about the export of the Trumpist conservative-populist revolution to other countries. Now it is no longer a joke. Everything looks very serious and quite dangerous. Meanwhile, regarding Ukraine, Vance hardly mentioned it in his speech, only expressing hope for a “smart settlement.” Given the direction and tone of his speech, perhaps that's for the best. In general, Jay D. Vance has begun to express himself more cautiously about Ukraine and without sharp criticism of our country. Perhaps this is because he is now part of the negotiating team with Ukraine,” notes political scientist Vladimir Fesenko.

His colleague Alexander Kochetkov, in turn, emphasizes the following: “The main thing I heard in Donald Trump’s speech at the Munich Conference (yes, indeed Trump, because Jay Vance is just a Trump avatar!) is that Europe needs to undress and maximally favorably present itself to the encroachments of political radicals from both the right and the left. Because such openness, you see, makes democracy stronger. And the fact that all these radicals are funded and directed from the Kremlin, which wants to rape Europe and turn it into its own concubine, does not matter. Well, perhaps it doesn’t matter to the States, at least for now. But I am applying everything to Ukraine. If Europe is offered to walk naked at night through criminal neighborhoods and hope that nothing bad will happen, then the U.S. will simply demand such of Ukraine. In this sense, it doesn't matter where exactly the line of division will pass: a kilometer this way, two kilometers that way – it is still Ukrainian territory that we have lost. What matters is that the conditions for ending the war and holding elections do not contain conditions for implementing the “soft power” of the non-empire. Let’s imagine that at Trump’s command, who wants to help his partner Putin (whom he needs to pull away from China), the “Riyadh 1” will include demands for the rehabilitation of those involved in the “internal Ukrainian conflict.” As well as the demand to allow all figures and parties in Ukraine to run for elections, which,