The statement “Europe is dying, long live Europe” is neither a casual truism nor a dramatic drumbeat, but suggests a profound transformation of the continent, particularly after a devastating three-year period of the Russia Ukraine conflict. This massive change can be construed from two primary perspectives: first, the visible effects of environmental disaster, and second, the unseen, yet profound, impact of this geopolitical conflict on the region’s ecosystem. The military adventurism on the part of Russian strongman Vladimir Putin or pseudo-patriotic defence on the part of Ukraine is expected to leave deep scars on nature, exacerbating the already dire situation caused by the offensive war strategies employed by both sides.

In all probability these strategies have led to the poisoning of water bodies, the aquifers, causing annihilation of flora and fauna, and the degradation of agricultural fields, irrigation canals, and wells, not to speak of huge labour shortage or the significant investments that would be required to rebuild the system or even “regional dissent” that the Kremlin faces. The environmental catastrophe precipitated by the geopolitical conflict will have a profound impact on Europe.

Advertisement

The visible effects of environmental disasters will be evident in the form of excessive toxic substances and suspended particles in the air, unleashing unprecedented bacterial infection, radiation and inflammation. The toll and impact of the environmental catastrophe will be the hardest to avoid, with far reaching consequences for the region’s ecosystem. Besides, the conflict has already triggered millions of displacements, criminalisation at refugee camps, and excessive inflation, making the situation dismal for human habitation and sustenance and threatening the survival of aquatic life. The degradation of agricultural fields in the country known as the “bread basket of the world” will have a significant impact not only on food production but is already exuding alarming signals insofar as food exports are concerned, thus accentuating food insecurity and economic instability.

As such the geopolitical conflict and its spiralling effects are a significant contributor to the environmental catastrophe in Europe. The offensive war strategy employed by both sides has in many ways wrought havoc on the region’s ecosystem. The conflict has resulted in the destruction of infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and buildings, which will require significant resources and years to rebuild. The humanitarian crisis caused by the conflict will also have a profound impact on regional society, with many people displaced, injured, or killed. Simultaneously the economic instability caused by the conflict will also have sweeping consequences, making it challenging for the region to recover.

The war has lasted for three years with glimmering hopes of its cessation set in motion by the mishmash of euphoria and apprehension generated by the recent meeting in Saudi Arabia between top diplomats from Moscow and Washington. However, after three years of extensive devastation, Europe will not be the same as it was before. That’s why a dedicated team must plunge into planned actions to mitigate the effects of the lingering conflict and environmental disaster.

It is not enough to say that Europe stands on the verge of a stupendous crisis, but the ongoing war in Ukraine has far reaching implications for the continent’s future political landscape. The egregious conflict has intensified geopolitical tensions, especially with President Donald Trump’s critical stance towards Ukrainian President Zelenskky, suggesting that the latter must alter his approach to Russia or face dire consequences.

Concurrently, the new US Defense Secretary Pete Hegeseth has articulated a clear warning that henceforth American involvement in Nato-led peacekeeping efforts aimed at supporting Ukraine and defending European nations against potential Russian aggression will not be easily forthcoming.

This marks a notable shift from Nato’s foundational principle of being a ‘security community’ and alters America’s traditional security guarantees to Western Europe. Such developments indicate a profound reconfiguration of alliances and defence strategies within Europe, highlighting the urgency for collective security measures in response to external threats. In the current geopolitical landscape, Europe faces a critical double dilemma: whether to strengthen its partnership with the United States or risk descending into a state of decline marked by vulnerability.

This choice is compounded by America’s own dilemma regarding its commitment to Ukraine. The US under Trump 2.0 is weighing the whopping cost associated with the ever-increasing military budget against the fundamental values of security and democracy that are at stake. The prospect of becoming a passive accomplice to Russian aggression, particularly towards smaller Western European nations, looms large, raising urgent questions about the implications of inaction vis-a-vis the SOS call for emergency support. As both Europe and Washington navigate these complex choices, the outcomes will significantly shape their futures and the broader international order.

There is no gainsaying the fact that Trump’s unpredictability is a defining characteristic of his political megalomaniacal persona, yet it mirrors a broader uncertainty within the European political landscape too. Despite notable advancements toward economic and political integration, the war exposes the gap that Europe grapples with – significant internal conflicts regarding sovereignty, the commitment to protecting refugees, and reliance on Nato. These fault lines are exacerbated by a faction of West European leaders who adopt a critical stance towards the United States while simultaneously resisting the financial responsibilities associated with Nato’s collective defence obligations. This complex interplay of national interests and regional dynamics contributes to an unpredictable milieu that challenges both American foreign policy and stymies European unity.

As nations navigate these multifaceted issues, the potential ignition for unexpected developments remains high, underscoring the intricate relationship between Trump’s erratic approach and Europe’s ongoing struggles for cohesion. In the ongoing discourse surrounding the Ukraine war, some strategic scholars fret about the after-effects of what would happen following the emergence of a victorious Russia from this conflict, potentially leading to increased aggression and sabre-rattling by Moscow especially in its immediate neighbourhood. While this argument contains elements of truth, it fundamentally overlooks a more critical Achilles’ Heel, the broader implications for Europe’s tumble and collapse. Hence the focus should not be on the spectre of Putin achieving a much vaunted military success or if Trump’s hasty diplomatic manoeuvres yield a tactical compromise.

Rather, it is essential to recognize that the real issue at stake is Europe’s collective loss and agony. This war has not only resulted in significant human suffering and economic disruption but has also exposed deep fissures within European unity and security. The ramifications of such a defeat extend beyond immediate territorial concerns; they threaten to reshape the geopolitical landscape of Europe for generations to come. A triumphant Russia would not merely signify a shift in power dynamics but would also symbolize a profound failure for European nations to collectively respond to aggression, and their naivety in stepping into the Russian trap, thereby undermining their own stability and future trajectory.

(The writers are, respectively, Professor and Head, Department of Political Science, Sidho-Kanho-Birsha University, and Associate Professor (Retd.), Chandernagore Govt. College)