Media reports said as much as $700 billion could be allocated to Europe's defenses, though it was not clear how much of that amount would go to Kyiv.

Summary

European officials are preparing a multibillion-dollar defense package to bolster regional security and support Ukraine, announced by German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock at the Munich Security Conference.

The package, potentially valued up to 700 billion euros, will fund military training, arms deliveries, and security guarantees amid concerns over Russian aggression and diminishing U.S. contributions to NATO.

The move follows calls for Europe to boost its own defense spending while U.S.-Russian talks, which exclude Ukraine and Europe, on ending the Ukraine conflict continue.

  • mathemachristian[he]@lemm.eeEnglish
    4·
    3 days ago

    lol whyyy Ukraine’s cooked why are we shoving more public funds up the US’ ass? Genuinely what are they hoping to accomplish?

      • mathemachristian[he]@lemm.eeEnglish
        4·
        3 days ago

        The reality that Ukraine is cooked for the next several decades by any sensible metric is independent of any ideology, it’s just fact. It’s over, it’s done, Russia will get what they want and the US will get a neocolony, aka what they want.

        The only thing I don’t get is why we still finance lockheed martin? jk I think I have an idea for why UVDL is still hellbent on getting as much as possible out of public coffers and into the hands of foreign private investors.

        • perestroika@lemm.eeEnglish
          12·
          3 days ago

          Well, Ukraine quite recently rejected Trump’s neocolonial proposal.

          Which, for some reason, Biden has forgotten to even send …so maybe part of the US doesn’t really want that kind of stuff. ¹

          …and well, the title describes European countries rushing to turn the page on Trump - assemble about three (maybe four) times the resources the US has thrown in, worth about six or seven Russian annual defense budgets. It seems a move that’s not only intended to help Ukraine repel Russia, but end defense dependence on the US, on the premise that the partner no longer is reliable.

          ¹ IMHO, it’s just that the US has so much power invested in one damn person and an electoral system that prevents diversity. Which is tragic. :(

          • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            3·
            3 days ago

            It seems a move that’s not only intended to help Ukraine repel Russia, but end defense dependence on the US, on the premise that the partner no longer is reliable.

            Which is a good thing IMO. From this side of the large pond the USA looks more and more like a bully on par with Russia and China.

            East of UA is fucked for decades but Russia is fucked too. Both countries burnt through quite a lot of their arsenal from Soviet times and struggle to keep their troops supplied. UA has it easier because the European countries help with weapons, munitions and other equipment.

            Unfortunately Russia can sustain the current attrition rate by another 5-10 years before the situation becomes truly unbearable for them. My fear is that by then the UA might have collapsed.

            The best case scenario is that Putin dies shortly and his successor ends this stupid war.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      5·
      3 days ago

      They’ve actually been pretty much tied with the Russians for the last year, I’d say. Russia’s bigger, but also taking way more losses, so in the end the front line has stayed put.