How willing is the coalition of the willing? When it was first convened jointly by the UK and France last March, it was described by Sir Keir Starmer as a “once-in-a-generation moment” for European security. It was and is, in truth, an attempt to rebuild the global Western alliance without the United States.
At that stage, the Trump administration had already given notice that it was stepping back from the Pax Americana established when Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill signed the Atlantic Charter in 1941.
The coalition of the willing remains a “work in progress” and still lacks a sense of unconditional common purpose. However, it is all that what used to be thought of as “the West” presently has to replace the old world order.
It was, therefore, far-sighted of the prime minister and President Macron to salvage whatever they could from the wreckage left by President Trump.
The evidence from the latest gathering of the coalition in Paris is that the “moment” where Western powers can feel remotely confident about their own security has still not yet been reached. The Trump administration’s new national security policy, irrationally hostile to the European Union and troubling to America’s Asian partners, plus the attack on Venezuela and threat to Greenland, though shocking, all merely confirm the scale of American disengagement – and worse.
With breathtaking speed, the United States has transitioned from being the guarantor of a global rules-based order and Western security, to “America first” isolationism, and now to the point where it behaves like a 19th-century imperial power – and simply does whatever the hell it wants.
This latest gathering of more than 30 nations, plus various supranational representatives, is, as ever, a superficially formidable affair. Sir Keir and Emmanuel Macron are joined by German chancellor Friedrich Merz, and dozens of other world leaders and delegations from across Europe, including Ukraine and Turkey – plus Donald Trump’s personal envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
The proceedings suggest that, even though their resolve over defending Ukraine is, at best, uneven, and they are reticent about recent events in Caracas, at least they can agree on that portion of the Kingdom of Denmark we know as self-governing Greenland. Albeit not formally issued by the coalition of the willing itself, the joint declaration on Greenland by the European leaders made it abundantly clear to the Trump administration that Nato, for whatever it’s still worth to the United States, will be finished if there are any attempts to undermine the territorial integrity of the province, let alone an invasion.
Even President Trump at his most arrogant cannot ignore the united front presented by President Macron, Mr Merz, Giorgia Meloni of Italy, Donald Tusk for Poland, Pedro Sanchez for Spain, and Sir Keir. They stand with the prime minister of Denmark, Mette Frederiksen, and the people of Greenland – and the message is refreshingly clear: so-called “Donroe Doctrine” or not, the future of Greenland is not for Washington to determine, and European allies want to bolster their “presence, activities and investments with the US to keep the Arctic safe and to deter adversaries”.
As for Ukraine, more progress was made on the current peace plan, including on the legally binding guarantees to come to Kyiv’s aid in the event of another attack by Moscow, viewed as essential by all concerned in Europe, whatever the eventual outcome of the war may be. But, even with Mr Witkoff and Mr Kushner present and relatively supportive, the question of territory remains as fundamental as ever, with the Ukrainians, with European support, refusing to contemplate conceding strategic land and many thousands of their free citizens to indefinite Russian occupation.
There is no sign, either, that Moscow is really interested in peace except on its own terms, and its incessant bombing of civilians hardly inspires faith in its intentions. Most likely, Mr Trump, weary as he is of Vladimir Putin’s evasions, won’t exert the decisive pressure on him to end the war that the Kremlin started almost four years ago.
The situation facing Europe, and the rest of America’s former allies, remains the same, and is well summed up in a recent social media post from Mr Tusk: “No-one will take seriously a weak and divided Europe: neither enemy nor ally. It is already clear now. We must finally believe in our own strength, we must continue to arm ourselves, we must stay united like never before. One for all, and all for one. Otherwise, we are finished.”
Europe’s economy is struggling, too dependent on foreign oil and gas, US arms and too unwilling and too divided to spend what is needed to guarantee its own defence. The coalition of the willing could convert its formidable financial and industrial power into unified military strength, ideally with a battle-hardened Ukraine on its front line and supportive ties to Tokyo, Seoul, Taipei, Istanbul, the Gulf, Ottawa and Canberra.
That is the prize. The coalition of the willing lacks a headquarters and a constitution, let alone an army, navy and air force. But the structures of Nato are in place and ready to be repurposed, if only the political will and the money were present. As Mr Tusk indicates, a coalition of the reluctant is no use to anyone.
