Nordic governments are rejecting U.S. President Donald Trump’s assertions that Russian and Chinese vessels are operating near Greenland, warning that the claims are not supported by intelligence and are fueling destabilizing rhetoric, the Financial Times reported on Sunday. Two senior Nordic diplomats with access to NATO intelligence briefings told the FT there is no evidence of Russian or Chinese ships or submarines operating around Greenland in recent years, directly contradicting Trump’s justification for U.S. control of the Arctic territory. “I have seen the intelligence. There are no ships, no submarines,” one diplomat told the paper. Trump has claimed that Greenland is “covered with Russian and Chinese ships” and argued that the U.S. must take control of the island for national security reasons — rhetoric that has intensified in recent weeks. Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide also told Norwegian broadcaster NRK that there was “very little” Russian or Chinese activity near Greenland, despite ongoing Russian submarine movements closer to Norway itself. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, meanwhile, said at an annual security conference in northern Sweden that Stockholm was “highly critical” of what the Trump administration was doing and had done in Venezuela, in regards to international law. “We are probably even more critical of the rhetoric that is being expressed against Greenland and Denmark,” Kristersson added, explaining that the rules-based international order is under greater strain than it has been in decades. Kristersson said the U.S. should recognize Denmark’s long-standing role as a loyal ally, instead of agitating about Greenland. “On the contrary, the United States should thank Denmark,” he said. Leaders of all five parties in Greenland’s parliament reiterated that stance late Friday, saying in a joint statement: “We do not want to be Americans, we do not want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that Kyiv is moving to step up pressure on Moscow with new operations targeting Russia, following a week of Russian attacks that knocked out power to Ukrainian cities as freezing temperatures set in. “Some of the operations have already been felt by the Russians. Some are still underway,” Zelenskyy said in his nightly address Saturday. “ I also approved new ones.” Zelenskyy said Ukraine’s actions include deep strikes and special measures aimed at weakening Russia’s capacity to continue the war. “We are actively defending ourselves, and every Russian loss brings the end of the war closer,” he said. He declined to provide details, saying it was “too early” to speak publicly about certain operations, but stressed that Ukraine’s security services and special forces are operating effectively. As part of Kyiv’s efforts to reduce Russia’s offensive capabilities, Ukrainian forces attacked the Zhutovskaya oil depot in Russia’s Volgograd region overnight Saturday, the General Staff said in a post on social media. Zelenskyy’s comments come after a week of escalating Russian strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, which left the regions of Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk without electricity and heating as temperatures plunged well below zero. In the capital, renewed attacks killed at least four people and injured 25 others. The city’s mayor urged residents who could leave to do so, as roughly half of Kyiv’s apartment buildings were left without power or heat. Russia also launched a nuclear-capable Oreshnik ballistic missile at Ukraine’s Lviv region on Thursday, striking near the EU and NATO border as part of a massive barrage.

Kyiv is in talks with the United States about a possible free-trade agreement, as Ukraine seeks to entice a reluctant Washington to provide firm security guarantees, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said. Such a deal would involve tariff-free trade with the U.S. and would give Ukraine “very serious cards,” Zelenskyy said in an interview with Bloomberg published late Friday.  He has not yet discussed it directly with U.S. President Donald Trump, Zelenskyy said, adding that he expects to meet with Trump either in the U.S. or at the Davos conference in Switzerland, which starts on Jan. 19.  Prospects of a trade deal come as all sides start to consider more seriously how to end the war in Ukraine and how to ensure peace in the future. Europe and the U.S. presented a detailed plan for Ukraine in Paris earlier this week, including security guarantees with American backing and a promise to deploy British and French troops after a ceasefire.  But Washington did not sign on to join a multinational force for Ukraine, raising concerns about its level of commitment. The offer of a free-trade deal could act as an additional incentive for the U.S. to remain committed to protecting Ukraine after the end of the war. Zelenskyy said in the Bloomberg interview that he wants specific commitments from Washington. “I don’t want everything to end up in them merely promising to react,” he said. “I really want something more concrete.” Zelenskyy said his negotiator, Rustem Umerov, had a call on Friday with Trump’s special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, and that U.S. representatives have been in contact with Russia recently in “some kind of format.” Ukraine has given its views on territorial proposals, which the U.S. side will share with Russia for its own responses, Zelenskyy said.  Ukraine also is considering a plan, proposed by the U.S., to create a buffer zone between the two sides after troops pull back. “The format is difficult but fair,” Zelenskyy said. Zelenskyy added that he is not opposed to European leaders talking to Russia. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Friday joined French President Emmanuel Macron in calling for dialogue with Moscow. 

The leaders of the five political parties in Greenland’s parliament have a message for U.S. President Donald Trump: Leave us alone. “We do not want to be Americans, we do not want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,” the party leaders said in a joint statement Friday.  The statement comes after Trump has become increasingly explicit about his desire to take over Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark — a desire made more real by recent U.S. strikes in Venezuela.  “We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not, because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor,” Trump told reporters during an event at the White House on Friday. “I would like to make a deal the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way, we will do it the hard way,” he said. But the Greenlandic leaders pushed back, repeating their request to be left alone to manage their own affairs. “We would like to emphasize once again our desire for the U.S.’s disdain for our country to end,” they said. “The future of Greenland must be decided by the Greenlandic people.” They added that they have increased their “international participation” in recent years. “We must again call for that dialogue to continue to be based on diplomacy and international principles,” they said in the statement. Taking over Greenland would be relatively simple, according to officials and experts, though Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has warned that doing so would spell the end of NATO. Eight of Europe’s top leaders backed Greenland earlier this week, saying security in the Arctic must be achieved “collectively” and with full respect to the wishes of its people.

When NATO members agreed last summer to increase defense spending, they lavished praise on Donald Trump for forcing the issue, believing that flattery would go a long way to keeping the president committed to the alliance and the cause of transatlantic security. But the takeaway for Trump, it turns out, was something else altogether — that bullying and threats were highly effective means of compelling longtime allies to act. And that’s largely why, when it comes to his pursuit of Greenland, he is returning to the same playbook, starting from a place of outward hostility, believing that’s what it will take to get Denmark to sell the island to the United States. “He got all these countries to pay their fair share into NATO security, and he did it by fear and sheer force of will,” said a senior White House official who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the president’s strategy. “He’s been proven right about that aspect, and he’s going to be proven right about this.” Indeed, Europe has already bent the knee to Trump on multiple fronts. Beyond the defense spending, a European “coalition of the willing” has taken on the entirety of backing Ukraine with billions in defense aid and the European Union swallowed a 15 percent U.S. tariff on most European goods to avoid any further escalation. But Trump’s obsession with taking Greenland is the kind of existential threat to European sovereignty that, in the eyes of some European officials and diplomats who spoke to POLITICO, demands a stronger response. The most they feel they could do to placate him is commit more troops. “Once you start changing borders by caprice or by force, you don’t know where you end up,” said one of the diplomats granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive subject. Trump’s saber rattling about taking Greenland from Denmark, echoed and amplified by a number of top aides, ratcheted up within hours of the successful military operation that removed longtime Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro from power. “It’s a very effective message,” the senior White House official said. “Everyone now knows that America is not playing around, especially now.” Trump, speaking to reporters during an event at the White House on Friday, stated that taking control of Greenland is only a matter of when — and how. “We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not, because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor,” Trump said. “I would like to make a deal the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way, we will do it the hard way.” Trump even questioned Denmark’s claim on Greenland. “I’m a fan of Denmark too,” he said. “But you know, the fact that they had a boat land there 500 years ago doesn’t mean that they own the land.” Denmark has controlled Greenland for roughly 300 years and in 1916 the United States formally recognized Denmark’s interests in Greenland in exchange for the Danish West Indies, which became the U.S. Virgin Islands. The president and his top aides have repeatedly emphasized that Trump’s threats should not be dismissed, especially if and when diplomacy runs aground. And the president and his top aides are repeatedly emphasizing that Trump’s threats should not be dismissed, especially if and when diplomacy runs aground. “My advice to European leaders and anybody else would be to take the president seriously,” Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday, calling on Europeans to take more steps to ensure Greenland’s security given the increased presence of China and Russia in Arctic waters. “If they’re not, the United States is going to have to do something about it. What that is, I’ll leave that to the president.” After Trump raised the idea of claiming Greenland at the beginning of his term, Danish officials sought to keep the matter low-profile, hoping it would disappear. Now, with Trump’s interest renewed, they have urged their European counterparts to be more vocal about it. Denmark and six European leaders issued a joint statement saying Denmark and Greenland are the ones who “decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.” With Secretary of State Marco Rubio expected to meet with his Danish counterpart next Wednesday in Washington, Vance and other administration officials suggested that military force was a long way off. Rubio privately told lawmakers earlier this week that Trump was looking to buy the island from Denmark rather than mount an immediate military operation, according to a person familiar with the matter and granted anonymity to describe the conversation. But senior officials have both publicly and privately refused to rule out taking Greenland by force, which would effectively end NATO altogether — a cost that Trump made clear he’s aware of in an interview with the New York Times, stating that, eventually, “it may be a choice.” Speaking so openly about rupturing a transatlantic alliance that has endured since World War II, however shocking to Europeans, isn’t new for Trump. His push for NATO to increase its defense spending began at the organization’s 2018 summit in Brussels where he threatened to withdraw the U.S. from the alliance if things didn’t change. Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, coupled with a growing belief among NATO countries that he might actually pull America out of the alliance during a second term, finally led member countries to increase their defense spending. Threatening a military takeover of Greenland as a last resort just days after the operation to oust Maduro has forced Europeans — and even some of Trump’s own allies and aides — to ponder just how far he might go. “The messages we hear regarding Greenland are extremely concerning,” EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told reporters in Cairo on Thursday. “We have had discussions among the Europeans [on] if this is a real threat, and if it is, then what would be our response?” Denmark is trying to find clarity and build relationships in the U.S. The Danish embassy earlier this year hired Mercury Public Affairs, the former home of White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. And this week, Danish representatives met with Republican and Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Danish Ambassador Jesper Møller Sørensen and Jacob Isbosethsen, the head of Greenland representation, “expressed an openness to discuss any measure that would enhance the security of the United States, while respecting the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark” during a Tuesday meeting, Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) said in a statement. At the height of the Cold War, the U.S. had 10,000 troops and operated multiple installations in Greenland. The U.S. pulled back when it ended and now has one base and about 200 troops there. Trump’s administration has rebuffed Danish offers for the U.S. to station more troops in Greenland or open additional bases. His advisers have sent mixed messages about what Washington is looking for in private meetings with European counterparts. And Trump’s comments to the New York Times this week suggested that a more robust defense agreement and joint investment deals may not be enough for the former real estate executive. “Ownership is very important,” he said. “Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success…ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document.”  MOST READ 1. The Supreme Court may leave alone the Voting Rights Act just long enough to keep the GOP from House control in 2026 2. Judge disqualifies US attorney in New York, tosses Letitia James subpoenas 3. The GOP’s Obamacare defectors were more numerous than expected 4. 17 Republicans vote to restore lapsed Obamacare subsidies 5. ‘Uninvestable’: Trump pitch to oil execs yields no promises Some Europeans have left private discussions feeling Trump is resolute about acquiring Greenland one way or another. Others say some of his aides like Rubio appear to be seeking an off ramp, according to two people familiar with the matter and granted anonymity to discuss it. The National Security Council’s director for the Western Hemisphere, Michael Jenner, has been the one to take meetings with diplomats about the Trump effort rather than the Europe director — highlighting the difference in how the U.S. and Europe view the matter. For European officials, Greenland is a European security issue, while for Trump and his team, it is the latest extension of the so-called Donroe Doctrine that envisions U.S. control over its backyard. “They’ve got this intellectual framework for thinking about the whole hemisphere, and they’re going to tie Greenland into that, which makes a lot of sense. So we didn’t have that holistic vision in the first term,” said Alex Gray, who served in the first Trump National Security Council and is now CEO of American Global Strategies. But Europeans have struggled to respond. “Danes and the Europeans at large need to do much better,” said former NATO policy planning director Fabrice Pothier, now CEO of Rasmussen Global, arguing that Trump’s desire for Greenland is not rational, economic or rooted in security concerns. “The problem is that this is not something you can easily address through economic sweeteners or national security arrangements,” he said. NATO, too, is now discussing options to strengthen its Arctic flank, after Trump’s claims that Russian and Chinese ships were swarming Greenland. That new effort is driven by a genuine need to beef up its Arctic presence, according to two NATO diplomats granted anonymity to describe the motivations, as well as a desire to take Trump’s concerns seriously. Some European officials fear that the Trump team might seek to acquire Greenland as part of a grand bargain for Ukraine. That is not something the president is likely to do, the senior White House official said. But, they said, everything is subject to change. “We’re gonna try to exhaust all our diplomatic options and see how, see if we’re moving in positive steps,” the official said. “What we have done with everything is we go along and then we reassess every step of the way. It’s just like a business deal.” Jacopo Barigazzi, Victor Jack and Seb Starcevic in Brussels contributed reporting.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Europe had barely switched off its out-of-office replies before geopolitics came roaring back. In the first days of January, events in Caracas — and rhetoric from Washington — jolted Brussels out of its post-holiday slumber and straight back into crisis mode. A U.S. special forces operation captured Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and left more than 100 people dead, reopening old questions about power, sovereignty and just how reliable an ally the United States really is. This week on EU Confidential, host Sarah Wheaton is joined by Allison Hoffman, Nick Vinocur, Eva Hartog and Bartosz Brzeziński to unpack what Donald Trump’s moves in Venezuela reveal about the world he’s shaping — and the uncomfortable position they leave Europe in. They dig into Moscow’s humiliation — and the opportunities it may see in chaos — renewed U.S. pressure over Greenland, Europe’s mounting doubts about American security guarantees for Ukraine, and how Brussels is trying to navigate a world where raw power seems to be back in fashion.

France’s President Emmanuel Macron and his Russian counterpart may be heading for bilateral talks on Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin “expressed readiness to engage in dialogue” with Macron on the issue, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Sunday, according to media reports. The Elysée responded positively. “It is welcome that the Kremlin has publicly agreed to this approach. We will decide in the coming days on the best way to proceed,” the French presidency said. Macron said at last week’s EU summit in Brussels that it would be “useful” for Europe to reach out to Putin to ensure that a peace deal in Ukraine is not negotiated solely by the United States, Russia and Ukraine. “I think that we Europeans and Ukrainians need to find a framework to engage a discussion in due form,” Macron told reporters as the summit wrapped up early Friday morning. The Elysée stressed that any talks with Russia would take place in “full transparency” with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European allies, Le Monde reported. Macron and Putin have rarely been in direct contact since Moscow launched its all-out invasion of Ukraine in early 2022. Their most recent phone communication was in July, following about three years of no contact.

PARIS — The military recruitment center across from the Eiffel Tower, in the posh 7th district’s historic École Militaire, is filled with promotional posters for the armed forces. In the lobby, I met 26-year-old Charlotte, who currently works in marketing for a private company but is considering joining the French army. “The geopolitical context is inspiring me to sign up and serve, using my skills,” she told me. “I’m sometimes wondering why I am doing marketing when I could be a linguist in the army or an intelligence agency.” The geopolitical context she’s referring to is obvious to everyone in France, which has been at the forefront of Europe’s efforts to cope with the changing U.S. attitude toward its NATO and EU allies. Charlotte, who I agreed to identify by her first name to protect her privacy, told me that she studied Russian and recognizes that Europeans need to become more “sovereign” because they cannot rely on U.S. President Donald Trump to defend the continent against Russia. And she’s ready to help. Trump continues to antagonize the United States’ traditional European allies, deriding them as he did in an interview with POLITICO earlier this month as “weak” and a “decaying group of nations.” And for its part, France wants to prove him wrong. Like many other European nations, France sees Russia has a growing threat to the continent. So it is preparing to defend itself against what the country’s chief of defense staff, Gen. Fabien Mandon, called a “violent test” from Russia in the next three to four years that it would need to counter without much, if any, help from Washington. To do that, France is boosting military spending, increasing weapons production and doubling the reserve forces. As of next year, France will also reintroduce voluntary military service for young adults, primarily 18- and 19-year-olds. The goal is to enroll 3,000 new recruits next summer, 10,000 in 2030 and 50,000 in 2035. These defense efforts come as most of Europe’s nations are having to rethink their security posture in the most meaningful way since the Cold War ended. The challenge is even higher as it’s becoming increasingly clear they can no longer rely on the United States as a primary security provider. Successive U.S. presidents — including Barack Obama and Joe Biden — have warned over the past decade that Washington would eventually have to focus on the Indo-Pacific region instead of Europe, but the Trump administration has already matched those words with action. That is putting the spotlight on France, the EU’s only nuclear power and a country with independent weapons makers that has long warned the continent should become more autonomous in areas such as technology and defense. According to Guillaume Lagane, an expert on defense policy and a teacher at the Sciences Po public research university, the way France and Germany, the EU’s largest countries, respond in the coming months and years will determine whether other European countries will turn to them for Europe’s defense or try to retain bilateral ties with Washington at the expense of EU and NATO unity. “If France and Germany propose credible options, European countries may hesitate, otherwise they will not,” he said. “If only the American guarantee is credible, they will do everything they can to buy it.” To come across as a credible leader, he added, France could look into stationing nuclear-capable Rafale fighter jets in Germany or Poland; compensate for the capability gaps potentially left behind by the U.S.; and replace U.S. soldiers who are leaving Europe with French troops. They are going to need a lot of Charlottes. In Paris’ corridors of power, the French elite has always known this moment would come. “We’re neither surprised, in shock or in denial,” a high-ranking French defense official told me in an interview. “Our first short-term test is Ukraine. We Europeans must organize ourselves to face this reality and adapt without being caught off guard.” For the past week, I’ve been talking to French and European officials in Paris and elsewhere to gauge how they are metabolizing the antagonism from Washington. In many cases, I agreed to withhold their names so they could speak more candidly at a moment of high tension with the United States and among European allies. France’s distrust of America dates back to 1956, when U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower forced it and Britain to back down from a military intervention to regain control of the Suez Canal from Egypt, leaving Paris feeling betrayed and humiliated. Since then, unlike most other European countries, France’s defense policy has been based on the assumption that the U.S. is not a reliable ally and that the Western European nation should be able to defend itself on its own if need be. The memory of the Suez incident contributed to former French President Charles de Gaulle’s decision to leave NATO and develop its own nuclear program. Now, European capitals — who until now have been reluctant to think about the continent’s security architecture without the U.S. — are starting to increasingly realize France might have been right all along. “There is a kind of intellectual validation of the French position, which recognizes that interests do not always converge between allies and that the U.S. involvement in European security was the result of an alignment that was not eternal,” said Élie Tenenbaum, director of the Paris-based IFRI security studies center. Since Trump came back to power in January, the clues of Washington’s disengagement from — if not disdain of — Europe have been hard to ignore. Trump’s disparaging comments about Europe earlier this month came only a few days after a U.S. National Security Strategy made thinly-veiled calls for regime change in European countries. A leaked longer version of the document openly says the U.S. should pull Austria, Hungary, Italy and Poland away from the EU. In the months leading up to the strategy’s release, the Trump administration has repeatedly cast doubt on America’s commitment to NATO’s collective defense pact, Article 5 of the NATO charter, and announced a U.S. troop reduction from frontline state Romania. Even more strikingly, the U.S. threatened to annex Greenland by force and is cozying up to Russia, including in peace talks to end the war in Ukraine. Less than one year after Trump returned to the White House, influential German voices — in one of Europe’s most transatlanticist countries — are no longer looking at Washington as an ally. Denmark’s military intelligence service has now classified the U.S. as a security risk. In this context, smaller European nations expect the larger ones to step up. “We need the bigger countries to lead the way,” a European defense official from a mid-size nation emphasized in a private briefing. “France has been consistent on that for quite some time, Germany is also important. It’s always helpful if they lead by example.” A Paris-based European diplomat echoed that call for French leadership: “We need Macron to take the initiative [on European defense], who else is going to do it if not France?” Another European official said France could become a “political and military hub,” adding that Paris is ready to lead together with other capitals such as London, Berlin, Rome and Warsaw. Since the war in Ukraine started in 2022, Paris has pivoted to Europe and reinvested in NATO. For decades, Paris had neglected the alliance — rejoining its integrated military command only in 2009 — and focused mainly on faraway lands such as the African Sahel region, from which the French military ultimately had to withdraw after a series of coups d’état. Now, France is leading a multinational NATO battlegroup in Romania, has beefed up its military footprint in Estonia and is in talks to deploy soldiers in Finland. For frontline states, having a nuclear power present on their soil remains a crucial deterrent against Russia. In a first test for Europe’s ability to think about its own security without the U.S., Paris — otherwise a laggard in terms of military aid to Kyiv — has set up alongside London a so-called coalition of the willing to plan security guarantees for post-war Ukraine. That’s a significant step in European-led defense planning and France’s leadership role has been welcomed in European capitals. However, many of them are still reluctant to deploy military assets to Ukraine without American backing. While the French elite has seen this moment coming, not everyone in France is on board, at least not yet. At this year’s Congress of France’s mayors — an influential gathering held annually in Paris — Mandon told the country’s local elected officials to ready their constituents for a potential war against Russia in the coming years. Standing on a white, round platform in front of French and EU flags, he warned them that France is in danger unless it’s prepared to sacrifice. “If our country falters because it is not prepared to accept losing its children …[or] … to suffer economically because priorities will go to defense production,” he said, “If we are not prepared for that, then we are at risk. But I think we have the moral fortitude.” About 24 hours later, that was all the country was talking about. Far-right and far-left parties alike accused Mandon of war-mongering and overstepping. It’s not up to him to speak to the mayors, they argued; his job is to follow political orders. Even in Emmanuel Macron’s camp, lawmakers privately admitted the general’s wording was ill-advised, even if the message was valid. Eventually, the French president publicly backed him. France’s moment to demonstrate leadership is arriving at a challenging time for Europe’s heavyweight. “If you’re right too early, then you’re wrong,” a high-ranking French military officer told me. Macron’s ill-fated decision to call for a snap election in 2024 has embroiled the country in a political crisis that is still unresolved, and the far-right, NATO-skeptic, EU-skeptic National Rally is on the rise and could come to power as soon as 2027. “Intellectually, we are mentally equipped to understand what is happening in terms of burden shifting, but we don’t really have the means to lead the way at the European level,” said IFRI’s Tenenbaum, adding that Germany is currently in a better position to do so. “French leadership makes sense, it is logical given our relative weight, experience, and capabilities, and European countries recognize this, but there is a mismatch between words and deeds,” he added. Even as Macron pledged more defense spending, it’s very unlikely that France’s fragmented National Assembly will pass the 2026 budget by Dec. 31. The French president said France’s military expenditures will increase by €6.7 billion next year, bringing the country’s total defense spending to more than €57.1 billion. In comparison, German lawmakers this week greenlit €50 billion in weaponry procurement — Germany’s military expenditures are expected to reach more than €82 billion next year. “There will be a new balance between France and Germany in the coming years,” said a third Paris-based European diplomat. Since Macron’s snap election in 2024, European embassies in Paris monitor France’s political situation like milk on the stove — especially in the run-up to a presidential election in 2027 where the far-right National Rally is currently leading the polls. While Germany and the U.K. could also see nationalists come to power, their next general elections aren’t scheduled before 2029. Paris-based European diplomats speaking to POLITICO have compared a presidency by National Rally leaders Marine Le Pen or Jordan Bardella to Trump’s return to the White House in terms of changes for France’s security and defense policy. Just a day after Macron pledged that France would join a multinational force to enforce peace in Ukraine if a deal is signed with Russia, Bardella, leader of the National Rally, reaffirmed his party’s opposition to sending French troops. Marine Le Pen confirmed in September she would leave NATO’s integrated command if she’s elected president. A second high-ranking French military officer downplayed that pledge, arguing top French military brass would be able to convince her otherwise. However, he conceded, the National Rally’s refusal to send boots on the ground in Ukraine would “become a problem” for the coalition of the willing. Le Pen also vowed to completely overturn Macron’s offer to have a discussion with European countries about how France’s nuclear deterrent could contribute to the bloc’s security. In a bid to show leadership, the French president is currently engaging with some nations to talk about the role French nukes could play to deter Russia beyond the French borders. Asked whether she’d be open to storing French nuclear weapons in Poland and Germany (something even Macron hasn’t suggested), she replied: “Give me a break. It’s an absolute no, because nuclear power belongs to the French.” Some European countries want to do as much as possible with Macron now, in anticipation of a potential drastic policy change in 2027. Others are concerned about France’s political future, worrying how a leadership change could affect Paris’ commitments. According to an influential French lawmaker who works on defense policy, Poland’s recent decision to award a submarine contract to Sweden instead of France was partly driven by concerns in Warsaw about France’s political future. “The instability of French political life is frightening. Poland is scared to death of Bardella,” the lawmaker said. Countries such as Romania continue to see France as a crucial security provider and would welcome more troops to compensate for the outgoing U.S. soldiers. But officials from the southeastern European country know there could be an expiration date to Paris’ involvement. “There is an election in two years’ time, Macron’s successor will be less inclined to have troops outside of France,” one of them told me. Amid the uncertainty, the French military will continue to try to strengthen the ranks of its armed forces and attract young people like Charlotte. She is still deciding whether she actually wants to join, and regardless of who’s elected president in 2027, the geopolitical environment is unlikely to improve. “It is very important that our generation is aware and knows how to serve their country,” she said.

HELSINKI — European leaders can rebut Donald Trump’s claim they are weak by cementing a deal to unlock hundreds of billions in frozen Russian assets for Ukraine, Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal told POLITICO Tuesday. Last week, the U.S. president branded Europe a “decaying group of nations” and lambasted its leaders, days after his administration released a sweeping security strategy that rebuked the continent. “I think they’re weak,” Trump told POLITICO in an exclusive interview, “They don’t know what to do.” Now, those same leaders “absolutely” have an opportunity to correct Trump, Michal said in an interview, as they gather for a critical EU summit on Thursday that will determine the fate of its plan to provide a €210 billion loan backed by frozen Russian assets to keep Kyiv afloat. “Europe can act together, we have the funds to back up Ukraine for many years, and these funds are taken from Russian assets — this is a very strong message,” Michal said in the run-up to a gathering of leaders from eight EU frontline countries in Helsinki on Tuesday. “We are not against America, we are with America,” he said, but getting an agreement this week would prove we are “a strong partner [which] is better than to have a weak partner.” The comments underscore the sky-high stakes at play as the bloc’s 27 leaders meet this week. Ukraine is facing a $71.7 billion budget shortfall next year, and unless its EU backers find a compromise, Kyiv is set to run out of cash by spring. Beyond the impact on the front lines, the worry is that would weaken Ukraine’s hand in ongoing peace talks. Michal’s call also adds to the pressure on Belgium, the key country opposing a deal. The EU institutions’ host country also houses Euroclear, the financial institution that holds most of the bloc’s Russian reserves, and has repeatedly sought changes to the deal over fears of becoming liable if Moscow claws back those assets. During a late-night meeting of EU envoys Monday, Belgium again rebuffed the latest proposals from the European Commission, arguing they did not provide sufficient reassurances. EU leaders have repeatedly urged the country to back down, arguing that backup options such as issuing joint debt would be still harder to achieve, given it would require unanimity from the bloc’s 27 members. This means Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has long been skeptical of support for Ukraine, could block the initiative. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on Monday warned the EU would be “severely damaged for years” if the bloc fails to finalize a deal. At Tuesday’s frontline states summit in Helsinki, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk told POLITICO that Belgium should show “unity with us.” Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda, too, asked for “political goodwill from the side of Belgium.” Michal struck a more constructive tone. “There are sensible questions and sensible details that Belgium is asking,” he said. “We’ll discuss them in a calm, rational manner.” “But after that it comes down to [this],” he added. “Is Europe rising to the occasion that we need … and sending a message that we also can be tough on security questions?” In the meantime, the Estonian premier warned that unless Russia is held to account after a peace deal is agreed, it would only further encourage Moscow’s revanchism across Europe. “If Russia is not [held] responsible for the things done, for example paying for the damages done,” he said, then “that will give a message that it’s OK to use force to change borders.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and U.S. envoys arrived in Berlin on Sunday for another round of peace talks, with Kyiv emphasizing that strong security guarantees are an essential component of any prospective deal to end the war. Zelenskyy said there will be “meetings in Berlin today and tomorrow” to discuss the proposals on the table to find an end to the conflict in Ukraine. Zelenskyy said he will meet personally with U.S. President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner in Berlin. Ukrainian, U.S. and European officials will hold a series of meetings in Berlin, Zelenskyy said. But the exact timing and scope of the talks haven’t been disclosed. Delegations will be meeting on Sunday, according to media reports, followed by a summit on Monday that will include U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “The summit in Berlin is important: we are meeting with both the Americans and the Europeans,” Zelenskyy told journalists in a WhatsApp group chat on Sunday, according to a transcript of his remarks. “It is important for us. And believe me, we have done a lot to ensure that these parties all meet together.” Zelenskyy emphasized the need for Ukraine to receive firm guarantees from the United States and European allies that would be similar to those offered to NATO members, according to the transcript of the group chat. “These security guarantees are an opportunity to prevent another wave of Russian aggression,” the Ukrainian leader said. “And this is already a compromise on our part.” Zelenskyy emphasized that the security guarantees would need to be legally binding and supported by the U.S. Congress. He said he expected an update from his team following a meeting between Ukrainian and U.S. military officials in Stuttgart. “Most importantly, I will be meeting with envoys of President Trump, and there will also be meetings with our European partners, with many leaders, concerning the foundation of peace — a political agreement to end the war,” Zelenskyy said in an address late Saturday. Merz this week said Germany is inviting Washington to join a meeting in Berlin to discuss Ukraine. But whether Washington joins will “very much depend” on progress in negotiations “over the weekend” on the underlying documents, he added. The chancellor’s spokesperson, Stefan Kornelius, said separately that “numerous European heads of state and government, as well as the leaders of the EU and NATO, will join the talks,” which will follow the meeting of the German, French and U.K. leaders in Berlin. The talks in Berlin are to discuss the latest version of a 20-point peace plan brokered by the U.S. just days after Ukraine sent its revised version to Washington. The plan proposes a demilitarized “free economic zone” in the Donbas region where American business interests could operate. A major sticking point in the negotiations is the fate of territory in eastern Ukraine, which Kyiv refuses to cede after Moscow’s occupation. European leaders are racing to assert their relevance in the process amid concerns that Washington’s proposals lean toward Russia and put demands on Ukraine that Zelenskyy will not be able to accept.