Two Years Later: Reflections on Europe's Role in the War in Ukraine

"Is Europe doing enough?" German Chancellor Olaf Scholz posed this rhetorical question at the Munich Security Conference in the context of Ukraine. The implied answer, understood by every European representative in attendance, was a resounding "no." Europe has not done enough—not only in aiding Ukraine, but also in ensuring the security of its own citizens. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, speaking immediately after Scholz, offered an indirect yet pointed response to the chancellor’s inquiry: "Do not ask Ukraine when the war will end; ask yourself why Putin can continue it."

Two years ago, Ukraine’s determination and resilience in fighting the Russian invader surprised the world. Ukrainian society, and consequently its leaders, experienced great empathy from their Western neighbours. Alongside gestures of human solidarity came more significant actions, such as military and financial support for war-torn Ukraine. This situation persisted until last year, as reflected in the annual risk index presented in Munich, where five G7 countries viewed Russia as the greatest threat to security. This year, after two years of full-scale war, only two G7 members share that view. Much has changed over the past year, indirectly answering President Zelensky’s plea – Putin can continue the war due to these shifts in how G7 countries perceive him and because of changes in the global political landscape.

The perception of the war in Ukraine is also influenced by events in the Middle East and many African countries, where conflicts are no longer merely local but are beginning to engage neighbouring countries and the diplomacy of the broader Western world. In this context, one quote from Olaf Scholz’s speech in Bavaria resonated strongly: "Without security, everything else is nothing."

These words took on particular significance when two messages from Moscow reached the conference participants: the death of Alexei Navalny and the capture of Avdiivka by Russian forces. Thus, just as in 2007, Putin, though absent from the Munich conference, once again became its central figure. Western elites are once more shocked by his actions, but will the response this time be as short-lived as it was in 2007?

The German daily Suedkurier observed that "neither the Europeans nor the U.S. are willing or able to provide Zelensky with sufficient ammunition and weaponry. The message coming from Munich is that the West is helpless and indecisive." Similarly, Muenchner Merkur wrote, "Words are no longer enough. The conference of the helpless and desperate must send a signal to change the current situation. Deliveries of Taurus cruise missiles to Kyiv, a drastic increase in weapons production, a debate on a European nuclear umbrella, the appointment of an EU commissioner for armaments – all these measures must now be considered if the sacrifices of the heroically fighting Ukrainians are not to be in vain, and if Europe does not intend to passively wait for Putin to attack another country. But Chancellor Scholz must finally demonstrate the will to be a true leader."

Has Scholz demonstrated the will to be a leader? If we define that will according to the list of issues mentioned by the Muenchner Merkur journalist, then the answer is no. Less than two weeks after Munich, Olaf Scholz decisively refused to provide Ukraine with Taurus cruise missiles. He explained that if Ukraine were to receive such support from Germany, it would mean that Germany is engaging in the war as a party. Scholz's words, and thus his decision, were widely commented upon across Europe, but one opinion from Germany itself is worth highlighting. Katrin Goering-Eckardt, the deputy leader of the Greens in the Bundestag, criticized Scholz, stating that no one advocating for Taurus missiles for Ukraine wants Germany to become a party to the war. On the contrary, in her view, "For peace in Europe and beyond, it is essential for Ukraine to win this defensive war. The greatest threat to Ukraine and Germany’s security remains the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin maintains the upper hand, continuing his imperialist campaign." Thus, if Russia is already a threat to Germany, as it is to Ukraine, it becomes logical for Germany to engage in the war on Ukraine’s side. However, not for Scholz.

Read more: