The recent dramatic shift in U.S. foreign policy, as articulated in the House of Lords by historian and peer Lord Roberts of Belgravia, marks a critical turning point in global geopolitics.
With the Trump administration’s latest actions—particularly the disgraceful scene in the Oval Office and an alarming United Nations vote—Washington has, in Roberts’ assessment, effectively switched allegiances in the ongoing war against totalitarian aggression.
The gravity of this moment must not be underestimated, nor should we delude ourselves about the repercussions it will have for Europe and the wider world.
Roberts’ historical comparisons are both instructive and chilling. The shifting allegiances of the Saxons and Württembergers at the Battle of Leipzig in 1813 decisively doomed Napoleon’s campaign. Similarly, the defection of the Stanleys on the morning of Bosworth in 1485 spelled disaster for Richard III.
History teaches us that a change of allegiance mid-conflict can be seismic, often determining the course of war itself. Now, in the 21st century, America’s sudden estrangement from Ukraine and apparent appeasement of Putin’s Russia present a profound and destabilising challenge to NATO and the Western alliance.
While few should be surprised by President Trump’s longstanding scepticism toward Ukraine, the blunt force of his recent actions has left even seasoned observers stunned. His administration’s insistence on transactional diplomacy has manifested in a brutal turn away from Kyiv at a time when unwavering support is most needed.
The UN vote, which saw the United States aligning with pariah states such as North Korea and Syria, is a damning indication of how deeply this policy shift runs. Even China—hardly a champion of Western interests—had the diplomatic tact to abstain.
Given the new reality, Lord Roberts has laid out a compelling and urgent strategy for the UK and its allies.
Firstly, NATO members must meet and exceed the 3.4% GDP defence spending benchmark set by the United States. For too long, Europe has relied on American military largesse, content to let Washington bear the lion’s share of defence costs. That era is now definitively over. If we are to deter aggression and preserve stability, European nations must urgently step up their commitments.
Secondly, the $300 billion in frozen Russian assets currently held in Euroclear in Brussels must be transferred to Ukraine. This money belongs to the Ukrainian people and should be used to fund their defence and reconstruction, rather than sit idle as a bargaining chip in diplomatic paralysis.
Furthermore, EU cohesion funds must be repurposed for defence, with military expenditure exempted from the bloc’s stringent fiscal deficit rules. If the European project is to mean anything beyond economic integration, it must prioritise the collective security of its member states. Missile defence systems must be rapidly deployed to Kyiv and Kharkiv, providing Ukraine with the means to defend its cities from relentless Russian bombardment.
Roberts’ most controversial suggestion concerns President Zelensky himself. The Ukrainian leader, whose resolve has inspired the world, may now have to make the hardest decision of his tenure—accepting a minerals deal that secures U.S. financial investment in exchange for Ukrainian resources.
It would be a bitter pill to swallow, but it may be the only way to ensure continued American engagement in some form. The precedent of Lend-Lease during the Second World War, which Churchill lauded as “the most unsordid act,” stands in stark contrast to the Trump administration’s cruder, more mercenary approach. But pragmatism must prevail, for Ukraine’s survival depends on it.
The West must also face a new and uncomfortable truth: security guarantees from the United States can no longer be taken at face value. Historically, such guarantees were underpinned by shared values and strategic necessity. Today, they appear to be subject to the whims of an administration that views international alliances as mere transactions. Europe, alongside willing partners such as Canada and Australia, must prepare to shoulder the burden of patrolling the 700-mile frontier between civilisation and barbarism.
The Fallacy of Drawing Russia Away from China
Some in Washington, notably Defence Secretary J.D. Vance, have posited that the U.S. must avoid pushing Russia further into China’s orbit. This notion, while superficially appealing, is historically flawed. Democracies have repeatedly failed in attempts to pry autocracies away from each other, with the Stresa Front of 1935 serving as a prime example.
Even if Moscow were to entertain such a shift, any supposed détente would be temporary and conditional upon Western concessions—concessions that would embolden further aggression rather than curtail it.
Moreover, the strategic and moral cost of America’s pivot away from Ukraine is already manifesting in public sentiment. Polling data suggests that pro-Americanism in the UK has dropped by 15% almost overnight. Should the U.S. experience another 9/11-type attack, as Roberts warns, there may no longer be the same unwavering solidarity from allies that followed the Twin Towers’ collapse in 2001.
The erosion of goodwill and trust between the U.S. and its European allies is an unseen cost of Trump’s foreign policy—a cost that does not appear on balance sheets but will have profound implications for transatlantic relations.
At another moment of crisis in 1938, Winston Churchill implored Britain and Europe to recover their “moral health and martial vigour” in the face of appeasement and impending war. His words ring true today. America’s decision to walk away from its responsibilities does not absolve the West of its duty to defend freedom. Rather, it demands that we act decisively and without delay.
Europe must now adopt the stance Churchill urged—a stance of unwavering commitment to the principles of democracy, sovereignty, and resistance against tyranny. There is no room for hesitation. NATO must rearm. Ukraine must be fortified. Russia must be economically and militarily contained. The U.S. may have defected to a morally bankrupt transactionalism, but Europe must not follow suit.
The path ahead is fraught with challenge. Yet, as history has shown, the resolve of free nations in the face of oppression can turn the tide of war. Britain, Europe, and their democratic allies must now take up that mantle, ensuring that this betrayal does not mark the beginning of Western decline but rather the rebirth of its strength.
Main Image: © House of Lords / photography by Roger Harris’
