Trump’s victory means Europe has no choice but to arm – and fast

His inauguration is in January. With boldness, that would be enough time to prepare for a US withdrawal of military aid from Ukraine

When the Democrats narrowly won the White House in 2020, they had one critical job: prepare a candidate strong enough to beat Donald Trump in 2024. Joe Biden’s age should have made it clear he would likely be a one-term president, yet the party – and the man himself – failed to acknowledge it.
Instead, for years, the American public was reassured that Biden’s age was not an issue. But for anyone watching the President up close both before and after the cameras stopped rolling – as I did twice, once at the UN General Assembly in 2023 and again at the D-Day 80th anniversary in June 2024 – it was evident he was too frail to contest, let alone win, another election.
By the time Democrats recognised this, it was too late to build up a new candidate. So they turned to Vice President Kamala Harris, who was already unpopular in a beleaguered administration. Further complicating her candidacy was her identity and background: a mixed-race woman from California, which presented additional historical and social challenges.
This choice was politically unsound, but she dealt a bad hand badly. Harris avoided long-form interviews, delivered speeches awkwardly, and promoted an economic policy that has left many Americans feeling worse off than they were four years ago under President Trump.
Geopolitically, two potential outcomes now loom of huge relevance to Europe. The first envisions a hardened version of Trump’s “America First” stance, where support for Ukraine could dwindle, pushing it to negotiate and cede masses of territory and millions to a terrible fate. Trump has voiced frustration with what he sees as a costly American commitment, claiming Europe is shirking its responsibility and that the US is unfairly shouldering the financial burden.
Though simplified, Trump’s stance reflects an underlying truth: the U.S. has funded Ukraine far more than any other country, even though this is fundamentally a European conflict. Trump and his advisors are more focused on China and view Ukraine as a distraction from the Pacific, even though Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan all wish Western powers would do more to arm Kyiv, foreseeing the dangers of anything resembling a victory for Russia and its Chinese, North Korean, and Iranian allies.
In this first scenario, Europe now faces a short window, little more than two months, to prepare for possible American withdrawal from Ukraine, and – perhaps – an even weaker US role in Nato.
Europe’s sluggishness in arming itself or ramping up production for Kyiv means leaders would have to think creatively. Although they could not replicate American military support, European nations could narrow the gap by purchasing pre-built US arms immediately and find collaborative solutions to increase production over time. 
In a letter published this week, over 100 defence senior experts – including many who have contributed to The Telegraph, like former Counsellor of the US Department of State Professor Eliot Cohen and Lord Dannatt, Chief of the British General Staff – said that there is still a pathway for Ukrainian victory even without US support, for example by “building a massed precision strike force for Ukraine, with no external restrictions on its targeting…[and] providing Kyiv with real security guarantees.”The broader West might also establish clear red lines, defining how much territory Moscow could seize – in extremis – before triggering a stronger response to protect the Continent’s security.
Of course, this all assumes Europe is genuinely committed – as so many of its leaders pledged it to be – to a Russia defeat rather than settling for a bad and therefore dangerous peace.
The other scenario is more optimistic. Ukraine will no longer have to endure a Biden administration whose indecision has steadily weakened Kyiv’s position over time – a “slow death” as one Ukrainian I spoke to referred to it. Trump could surprise us. His unpredictability might lead him to avoid an early foreign policy move that could resemble an “American defeat,” such as the Afghanistan withdrawal under Biden. Following former Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s line of thought, Trump could seek a tougher, more unforeseeable stance that deters the West’s adversaries. However, given Trump’s campaign rhetoric, and the advisers he has around him, this scenario would be an unexpected turn.
For now, though, Europe’s leaders should flinch at how the West’s opponents are relishing this result. Dmitry Medvedev – Russia’s former President – put it simply: “Kamala is finished… Let her keep cackling infectiously. The objectives of the Special Military Operation [in Ukraine] remain unchanged and will be achieved.”
Symbolically, as election results rolled in on Tuesday night, air raid sirens sounded over Kyiv – waking many to the news of Trump’s victory 10,000 kilometres away.
Ukrainians have never been complacent about the threats they face, but Europe has been. Perhaps now, Europeans, too, will finally awaken to the urgent realities before them.
Francis Dearnley is one of the presenters of The Telegraph’s daily award-winning podcast ‘Ukraine: The Latest’