The Current - Vance’s remarks cast uncertain cloud over U.S.-European relations

Episode Date: February 17, 2025

NATO leaders are shocked by U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance's recent beratement of European allies at the pivotal Munich Security Conference. As the U.S. recedes, there are questions about who will fill the void as Russia continues to flex its influence around the world. Matt Galloway talks to Kerry Buck, former Canadian ambassador to NATO, about the potential impact on Ukraine’s long-term security, the alliance’s unity and what Canada should do next.

When a body is discovered 10 miles out to sea, it sparks a mind-blowing police investigation. There's a man living in this address in the name of a deceased. He's one of the most wanted men in the world. This isn't really happening. Officers are finding large sums of money. It's a tale of murder, skullduggery and international intrigue. So who really is he? I'm Sam Mullins and this is Sea of Lies from CBC's Uncovered, available now.

This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, it's Matt here. Thanks for listening to The Current wherever you're getting this podcast. Before we get to today's show, wonder if I might ask a favor of you if you could hit the follow button on whatever app you're using. There is a lot of news that's out there these days. We're trying to help you make sense of it all and give you a bit of a break from some

of that news too. So if you already follow the program, thank you. And if you have done that, maybe you could leave us a rating or review as well. The whole point of this is to let more listeners find our show and perhaps find some of that information that's so important in these really tricky times. So thanks for all of that. Appreciate it. And on to today's show. The threat that I worry the most about vis-a-vis Europe is not Russia, it's not China, it's

not any other external actor. And what I worry about is the threat from within. The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America. That's US Vice President JD Vance who was speaking on Friday at the Munich Security Conference where NATO allies were meeting. That speech and its aftershocks have left that security alliance spinning. With the US receding, there are lingering questions about

who will fill the void as Russia continues to flex its influence around the world. Carrie Buck is a former Canadian ambassador to NATO. Carrie, good morning. Good morning. The vice president arrived in Munich, scolded European leaders, endorsed a far right party in Germany.

A member of the German parliament said the spirit of Vance's speech was hostility. What did you make of JD Vance's speech in Munich? leaders endorsed a far right party in Germany. A member of the German parliament said the spirit of Vance's speech was hostility. What did you make of JD Vance's speech in Munich? Well, if you want to alienate all of the European leadership, your closest allies and very important trading partners in the fastest way possible, then the new Trump administration appears to have done it.

I'm not clear what the purpose of the speech was. Perhaps it was the vice president speaking back to the White House to demonstrate his loyalty, and perhaps it's less about US foreign policy than it might be. That actually would be a good news or a better, more optimistic interpretation. But if the speech is about US policy, then it represents a seismic shift, I think, in US-European relations. It puts the Europeans on notice that the US can no longer be relied on as a guarantor of their security in Europe, but perhaps not even as a trusted security partner.

So that's a whole new world. Move away from the world of security we've been living in since the end of the Second World War. And I think toward a world where might makes right and for smaller, more open countries like Canada and for most of the Europeans, we wouldn't fare well in such a world. It wasn't just the vice president.

I mean, the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth was also in Europe. And I mean, all but suggested the tens of thousands of American troops that have been stationed in Europe for decades could be pulled out. What did you make of that? Well, I think we're starting to get a better understanding of US foreign policy under Trump too. He's definitely not isolationist.

It's something very different from that and potentially much more damaging. So I put those messages in the same basket as the proposals on Gaza, Greenland, Canada, and Panama. So what we're seeing, I think, in the early days of the presidency is a foreign policy that is marked by really extreme forms of US exceptionalism and the use of American power in an unrestrained, unilateral way. Either way, countries like Canada have to adjust tactically, conceptually, strategic level our foreign policy, our security policy to take into account that new US. Problem is it's not clear where they're going. Um, but the signals are very unfortunate.

European leaders are in Paris today, scrambling to be part of an emergency meeting, convened by the French president, Emmanuel Macron. What do you expect to come out of that meeting in light of what they heard over the weekend and at the end of last week? Well, they're holding the meeting today as an exhibition of European leadership

and hopefully unity. And that is, I think, primarily to parallel or counterweight to the US meeting that they're holding, I think, tomorrow in Saudi Arabia, direct face-to-face talks with the Russians about Ukraine peace process. So I hope that the European leaders in Paris will discuss practical steps to support Ukraine, build more European defense capacity, and how they're going to insist

that Ukraine is an integral part of the US-led peace process on Ukraine. Kind of seems like, you know, a no-brainer that Ukraine has to be at the table at some point. like a no-brainer that Ukraine has to be at the table at some point. But there's a bigger question looming too, whether Europe will be able to be united enough to insist on its place in talks on European security. Melanie Jolie held at Munich on the side margins of the Munich Security Conference last weekend, the first ever Canadian-chaired meeting of the G7 foreign ministers under Canadian chairmanship, and Marco Rubio was there. And it's worth a read, the statement that came out of that, and it looks more positive in terms of support for Ukraine and solidarity in seeking to contain or constrain Russia.

But again, the Trump administration out of the gates on its foreign policy, there are a lot of confusing and contradictory messages. Yeah. Well, one of the people who, I mean, to that point, one of the people who's paying very close attention to what was said at the end of last week and what might be unfolding in Saudi Arabia is the president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky. Have a listen to what he said this weekend. Let's be honest now we can't rule out the possibility that America might say no to Europe on an issue that threatens it. Many, many leaders have talked about Europe that needs its own military, an army, an army of Europe.

So Ukraine is not part of these negotiations in Saudi Arabia between Russia and the United States. Europe is not there as well. Donald Trump's Ukrainian envoy said that Europe will not have a seat at the table, but it perhaps could see its views taken into context. You have the leader of the UK, Keir Starmer, suggesting that if there's a peace deal, the UK could put troops in Ukraine as part of a peace force. Where does this leave the Ukrainians? Well, Ukrainians have to be at the table at some

point. But they're not, they're not at the table now. No, they're not. And honestly, there've been a number of contradictory messages coming out of the US administration. So what's the US plan? Maybe there's a plan, but if there is one, I think even senior American officials seem to be unclear

about what it is. So those contradictory messages, after calling on Europe to step up and provide security for Ukraine, Washington then said European leaders would be excluded from any peace talks, but then Marco Rubio, Mike Waltz, the national security advisor, insisted that Ukraine and the Europeans would be involved, hinting there is or will be a sequencing of talks, et cetera, et cetera. The White House also said, ruled out the presence of American troops after a ceasefire, proposing

instead that Europeans would be policing a demilitarized zone potentially, but then the White House since said that military leverage could be used against Russia. They've also gone out to European capitals with a questionnaire to ask what Europeans, who aren't engaged in the peace process, would be willing to ante upitals with a questionnaire to ask what Europeans who aren't engaged in the peace process would be willing to ante up to police suborder in a potential demilitarized zone in parts of Ukraine that will still be under a buffer between Russian controlled parts of Ukraine territory and the rest of Ukraine. It's pretty sloppy diplomacy. It's pretty unclear and I can see the Europeans getting, hopefully, the end result will be the Europeans are more united and more insistent

that Ukraine be eventually at the table and that they eventually be at the table. The big problem is that the US has already indicated publicly what they are ready to give up. It's an odd way of negotiating. So sec defense, Pete Hegseth in his speech at NATO Defense Ministerial last week said that the US had already taken off the table Ukraine's membership in NATO, taken off the table the possibility of a US presence in Ukraine to enforce that post-war security guarantees and also said it was unrealistic to expect Ukraine to walk back to pre-2014 borders. So the US has already indicated that they, the US, are willing to give up Ukrainian territory. As I said, it's an odd way of beginning negotiations. At best, it's a rookie mistake, but Trump later said that his sec defense's

original comments were pretty accurate. So I don't know what their plan is. They appear to be unclear on what their plan is themselves. They're engaging in negotiating tactics that appear already to throw Ukrainian President Zelensky under the bus. If you're Latvia or Estonia or Lithuania, what are you thinking as this is unfolding?

Oh, you're pretty nervous. Do you think, do you think that there is a force? I mean, the question is whether NATO is dead without the United States. They could have gone far, the Trump administration could have said many more negative things about NATO at the beginning and they haven't. So I suppose that's good news. Is NATO dead without the US? It's dying without the US. It depends how the US pulls back from NATO, right? There are many different ways it could cause tremendous damage to NATO.

So it depends how they do it and when they do it, but the risks of NATO being dead are pretty high. If, for instance, they were to pull back significant American presence, true presence in Europe, and Vladimir Putin tries to take a chunk of a NATO ally territory, which is why, as you mentioned, the Baltics should be pretty nervous right now. There are other ways that the US could choose to mortally wound NATO. It's not good for us, Canada. We rely on NATO for a whole number of things

that walk straight directly back to our own security and economic interests. What are we supposed to do just finally on this? What should Canada do? back to our own security and economic interests. What are we supposed to do just finally on this? What should Canada do? Well, I mean, Canada is doing, I think, what it can right now on the multilateral front. The G7 meeting was a useful counterpoint to some of the chaos coming out of the US administration. But the key thing we have to do right now is spend more on defense.

How much more remains to be seen? The NATO summit this coming June in The Hague will absolutely definitely raise the NATO target to somewhere closer to 3% of GDP. Not just because Trump needs it, that's a big driver for sure, he demands it, but also because current NATO defense plans that would protect the Baltics, protect European security, also need at least 3% to be put into effect.

So Canada needs to step up now, understand that the level that will be expected is even higher and also communicate to Canadian public this isn't just about bending to Donald Trump, not at all, that it's about preserving NATO, which is in Canada's interest. It keeps us connected to one of our largest security partners. It also acts as a counterweight for us to the US. Something we may need more of given our relations such as they are with the United States right now. Absolutely. It's the primary forum where we can sit down and get European allies to rally with us. And at times we've even used it in the past to seek to constrain excesses of US power. Carrie, good to talk to you as always.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Matt. Carrie Buck was Canada's ambassador to NATO from 2015 through 2018.