标签： Europe

When Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky walked across a lilac carpet at a high-profile event in Saudi Arabia earlier this year, the moment caught many international observers off guard. What seemed like an unlikely detour for a leader mired in a full-scale war with Russia actually marked the start of a shrewd strategic gambit: leveraging the ongoing Iran conflict to turn an initially bad situation for Kyiv into a series of tangible gains.

When the conflict in Iran escalated, early forecasts painted a grim picture for Ukraine. The crisis threatened to pull U.S. attention away from Russian-Ukrainian peace talks, and the disruption to global oil markets handed Moscow an unexpected financial windfall. As shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy chokepoint bordering Iran, was disrupted, Russia was able to sell its oil at elevated prices to more buyers. The Trump administration, facing soaring global energy costs, even renewed a waiver that allowed nations to purchase sanctioned Russian crude, further padding Russia’s war budget. More revenue for Moscow meant a longer, more brutal war in Ukraine, a reality that spelled disaster for Kyiv’s position.

But since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has repeatedly defied gloomy international projections, and this moment proved no exception. Zelensky quickly moved to capitalize on the shared threat Gulf states faced from Iranian drone and missile attacks – the same type of assault Russia has pounded Ukraine with for years. Today, Kyiv confirms it has signed new agreements with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar to share battlefield-honed drone defense expertise and technology. The partnerships deepen Kyiv’s alliances with wealthy U.S.-aligned Gulf nations, open new business opportunities, and lay the groundwork for future defense deals Zelensky hopes will follow.

“We want to help [Gulf states] defend themselves. And we will continue building such partnerships with other countries,” Zelensky said of the new agreements. He has emphasized that Ukraine’s hard-won knowledge of countering low-cost Iranian-designed attack drones, like the Russian-used Shahed-136, fills a critical gap for nations targeted by Tehran. Zelensky points out that Ukraine has developed interception methods that cost as little as $10,000 per drone, a fraction of the multi-million-dollar price tag of traditional air defense missiles – a value proposition that has drawn attention not just from Gulf states, but from NATO members facing growing Russian drone threats across Europe.

The benefits of this outreach run both ways. Zelensky has made clear he is seeking reciprocal support from Gulf nations to bolster Ukraine’s own air defenses, at a moment when U.S. military stockpiles are strained by commitments to the Middle East. The Trump administration has openly acknowledged it is reallocating defense supplies between regions, leaving Ukraine scrambling to secure alternative sources of critical air defense missiles that Kyiv already lacks.

Beyond diplomatic and defense gains, the Iran conflict has also let Ukraine apply a key lesson on its own soil: targeting Russia’s critical energy export infrastructure. Using domestically produced long-range drones, Kyiv has made Russian energy facilities a top priority. While higher oil prices and eased sanctions boosted Russian export revenues to 2.3 times their pre-conflict levels in the third week of the Iran crisis, Ukrainian strikes in the following week erased roughly two-thirds of those gains, cutting $1 billion from Moscow’s earnings in a single week. Zelensky says Russia is already suffering billions of dollars in critical losses to its energy sector as a result of the campaign.

One of the most significant wins to come out of the crisis for Ukraine is the long-stalled release of a €90 billion EU-backed loan, which Kyiv says it urgently needs to purchase and manufacture military equipment over the next year. The loan had been blocked for months by Hungary’s pro-Kremlin former prime minister Viktor Orbán, a close ally of Donald Trump. But growing public anger over energy price hikes driven by the Iran conflict contributed to Orbán’s resounding election defeat last month, and his successor has adopted a far less Russia-friendly stance. The path is now clear for the funds to flow to Kyiv.

These cumulative gains have shifted Kyiv’s negotiating position ahead of any potential future peace talks with Russia. For months, Ukraine was forced onto the back foot as the Trump administration’s promised peace efforts stalled. Before his re-election, Trump pledged to end the war in 24 hours; since taking office, his administration’s focus has shifted entirely to the Middle East, and the president’s designated peace envoys – Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff – have repeatedly postponed planned trips to Kyiv. The pair have made multiple trips to Moscow, however, and Witkoff, who has a long history of private business in Russia, has met Putin on multiple occasions.

Trump has recently claimed he remains confident a solution for Ukraine can be reached “relatively quickly” following a “very good” conversation with Putin, adding that “some people” have made a deal difficult for the Russian leader – comments widely interpreted as implicit criticism of Zelensky. Ukraine’s president has called the repeated absence of Trump’s envoys from Kyiv “disrespectful,” noting that only low-level technical talks are ongoing, and no real progress can be expected until the Iran conflict is resolved – a timeline that remains entirely unclear.

Compounding Kyiv’s concerns is the Trump administration’s broader policy shift toward Russia. The recent U.S. National Security Strategy notably declined to label Russia a security threat, a position that stands in direct contrast to the view of Washington’s NATO allies, and drew public praise from the Kremlin. The document frames ending the war not as a push for a durable, fair peace for Ukraine, but as a step toward achieving “strategic stability” and a potential future partnership with Moscow that would free up U.S. resources for other priorities. Under Trump, harsh new sanctions that could force Russia to the negotiating table on acceptable terms have failed to materialize, and U.S. military and economic assistance for Ukraine has all but dried up.

With the world distracted by events in Iran, Russia has only stepped up its attacks on Ukrainian civilians and civilian infrastructure. European intelligence officials broadly believe the intensified assaults reflect Moscow’s ongoing determination to continue the war, not a last-minute push before negotiations. While Russia’s economy is stagnant under sanctions, it has fully transitioned to a war footing and is not collapsing. Many European leaders and analysts warn that if Russia secures a favorable peace in Ukraine, it will quickly turn to destabilizing other parts of Europe, potentially even targeting a NATO member.

Many international analysts argue that Putin’s imperial ambitions, not just economic considerations, are driving the conflict. “If Russia had a rational government, it would end the war,” explained Luke Cooper, Associate Professorial Research Fellow in International Relations at the London School of Economics and Director of the Ukraine programme at pro-peace consortium PeaceRep. “The economy is stagnant or in recession. Russia is sending enormous numbers of men to die who could be in work, the private commercial civilian economy is suffering by the imposition of the war economy… and what has Russia achieved? A sliver of Ukrainian territory. Surely, a ceasefire would be advantageous, if it included sanctions relief? But Putin isn’t thinking in those terms. This is all about the decisions of one person, with imperial ambitions, running an autocratic system.”

Privately, many Ukrainian officials say they are skeptical that the Trump administration will ever deliver the hard action or ironclad security guarantees Kyiv needs to ensure any peace deal is permanent and lasting. Analysts note that reaching a consensus on reliable security guarantees that satisfies all parties – Ukraine, Russia, the U.S., and European nations – remains an enormous hurdle.

European leaders are under growing pressure to take more decisive action, analysts say. Tom Keatinge, Director of the Finance & Security Centre at the Royal United Services Institute, argues that Trump’s well-documented impatience could lead him to pivot away from the Iran conflict at any moment if a solution there proves elusive, making it critical for Europe to act now. Keatinge criticizes European leaders for timidity in confronting Russia, noting that while the EU is one of the world’s largest trading blocs, it has hesitated to use the full weight of the €210 billion in frozen Russian central bank assets held in EU jurisdictions, instead opting for a €90 billion loan underwritten by European taxpayers. Critics argue Europe has prioritized managing the conflict over aggressively pursuing a just peace.

Despite the many challenges Zelensky and Ukraine face, the recent string of wins has left Kyiv in a far stronger position than it was just months ago. While the Trump administration has reacted coolly to Ukraine’s drone technology deals in the Gulf, declining to take up Zelensky’s offer to share Kyiv’s expertise publicly, Zelensky says he remains undeterred. For him, the visibility of these deals serves a core purpose: keeping Ukraine on the global agenda at a moment when all eyes are on the Middle East, and pushing Washington to turn its attention back to Eastern Europe sooner rather than later.

BERLIN – The Pentagon’s recent announcement that it will withdraw roughly 5,000 U.S. troops from Germany over the next 6 to 12 months has been met with measured calm from German defense leadership, even as the move signals a fresh erosion of trust between Washington and its key European allies amid a series of escalating tensions under the second Trump administration.

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius framed the drawdown as a long-expected development, echoing years of warnings from the White House that it would reduce U.S. military commitments in Europe. In comments Saturday to Germany’s national news agency dpa, Pistorius emphasized that the decades-long U.S. military presence on German soil has long served mutual strategic interests for both nations. “The presence of American soldiers in Europe, and especially in Germany, is in our interest and in the interest of the U.S.,” Pistorius said. He added that European NATO members have already acknowledged and acted on the need to take greater ownership of regional collective defense, with Germany ramping up military spending, accelerating weapons procurement, and expanding defense infrastructure in recent years to meet shifting security demands.

The 5,000-troop pullout accounts for approximately 14% — or one-seventh — of the 36,000 U.S. service members currently stationed in Germany. While the drawdown is sizable enough to shift the trans-Atlantic security dynamic, it is not viewed as a critical cut to U.S. force posture. Pentagon officials have so far released no detailed information about which units, facilities, or operations will be affected by the withdrawal. Across the entire European theater, the U.S. normally maintains between 80,000 and 100,000 military personnel, a number that rose after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. European allies have anticipated a post-escalation drawdown of this temporary reinforcement for more than a year.

Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in an official statement that the decision came after a comprehensive review of U.S. force positioning across Europe, and was made to align with current theater requirements and on-the-ground security conditions. Germany hosts some of the most critical U.S. military infrastructure outside of North America, including the joint headquarters for U.S. European Command and U.S. Africa Command, Ramstein Air Base — a key logistics and command hub for operations across the Middle East and Africa — the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center that treated thousands of casualties from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and deployed U.S. nuclear weapons.

NATO spokesperson Allison Hart noted Saturday in a post on X that the alliance is collaborating with U.S. officials to work through the details of the force posture adjustment. “This adjustment underscores the need for Europe to continue to invest more in defense and take on a greater share of the responsibility for our shared security,” Hart said, adding that allies have made steady progress toward the alliance’s new target of each member devoting 5% of gross domestic product to defense spending.

Despite the measured official response from Berlin and NATO, the withdrawal marks a clear new low in U.S.-German relations and ties between Washington and European allies more broadly. For years, Trump has publicly floated the idea of cutting U.S. troop numbers in Germany, and has repeatedly attacked NATO for refusing to back U.S. policy in the conflict with Iran that began with U.S.-Israeli strikes on the country in late February. The president has also openly expressed frustration that NATO allies have declined to join his anti-Iran campaign, and has launched verbal attacks on multiple top European leaders, including German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Just last week, Merz publicly criticized U.S. strategy in Iran, saying Washington is being “humiliated” by the Iranian leadership and has no clear policy for the region. The trans-Atlantic rift has spilled over into trade as well: Trump recently accused the European Union of failing to comply with its existing trade agreement with the U.S., and announced plans next week to raise tariffs on all EU-produced cars and trucks to 25%. The new tariffs would hit Germany particularly hard, as the country’s economy relies heavily on automotive exports to the U.S. At least one senior EU lawmaker has already labeled the planned tariff hike “unacceptable,” accusing Trump of breaking yet another major U.S. trade commitment.

NATO allies have been preparing for a U.S. troop drawdown in Europe since Trump began his second term, after repeated warnings from Washington that Europe will need to take full responsibility for its own security in the coming years — including security support for Ukraine. The reporting for this article was contributed by Sarah Burrows from London, with additional reporting from Jamey Keaten in Lyon, France.

LONDON – In the wake of a terror-linked stabbing attack that injured two Jewish men in a London neighborhood with a large Jewish population, United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer has called for stricter enforcement against inflammatory rhetoric at pro-Palestinian demonstrations, acknowledging that the rise in antisemitic violence across the country has put British Jewish communities on high alert. The incident, which took place on Wednesday in Golders Green – a longstanding hub of British Jewish life – left two men hospitalized, and a 45-year-old suspect has already been charged with attempted murder. London’s Metropolitan Police have formally classified the attack as an act of terrorism, marking the latest in a growing string of antisemitic incidents targeting Jewish people and sites across the capital, including recent arson attempts at local synagogues.

Speaking to the BBC on Saturday, Starmer emphasized that while the UK upholds the fundamental right to peaceful protest, authorities must not tolerate language that incites violence and hatred. He specifically called out the chant “globalize the intifada” – a phrase that translates to “globalize the uprising” – as an example of rhetoric that demands far tougher legal action. Starmer also noted that repeated large-scale pro-Palestinian marches have created a cumulative effect that has contributed to the sharp spike in antisemitic incidents recorded across the nation. When pressed on whether future protests could be restricted, the prime minister did not rule out formal bans for demonstrations that cross the line from peaceful protest to hate speech and intimidation.

The severity of the current threat to British Jews was underscored by the UK’s most senior law enforcement official, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley, who warned Friday that Jewish communities are now facing the most sustained and widespread security challenge in modern British history. Rowley blamed the proliferation of antisemitic content on social media platforms for normalizing anti-Jewish hatred in mainstream public discourse, noting that Jewish people have become a shared target for almost every extremist faction operating in the UK today. “The ghastly fact is that Jews are on everybody’s list, all of those hateful groups – whether you’re extreme right, whether you’re extreme left, whether you’re Islamist terrorist, whether you’re right-wing terrorist, and some hostile states as well now with some sort of Iranian-related threats,” Rowley told The Times. “There’s a ghastly Venn diagram that they’re at the middle of.”

Following Wednesday’s stabbing attack, UK authorities raised the country’s official terror threat level from “substantial” to “severe” – the second-highest ranking on the government’s five-point threat scale. A “severe” classification indicates that intelligence agencies assess a terrorist attack to be highly likely within the next six months. Government officials clarified that the adjustment was not triggered solely by the Golders Green incident, but reflects a broader increase in risk from both Islamist and far-right extremist actors, most of whom are individuals or small independent groups based within the UK.

Data from the Community Security Trust, a charity that monitors antisemitism and protects Jewish communities across the UK, confirms that hate incidents have skyrocketed since the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel and the subsequent outbreak of war in Gaza. The organization recorded 3,700 antisemitic incidents nationwide in 2025, a more than 120% increase from the 1,662 incidents recorded in 2022 before the current conflict began.