Europe’s frustration is palpable following JD Vance’s latest jibe. He’s claimed that Ukraine won’t receive proper security from “some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years” and is better served by a ‘rare earths’ mineral deal with the U.S. But park his classic Trumpian exaggeration and the basic claim is difficult to contest.
Bad news for Starmer and Macron. Vance confirms the only US security guarantee in Ukraine will be the mineral deal. He also plays down British & French peacekeeping troops as “20k troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years”.pic.twitter.com/6bujpsjygX
— Antonello Guerrera (@antoguerrera) March 4, 2025
Of course troops from Britain and France—the countries Vance was clearly referring to, being the only two that have publicly offered to send peacekeeping forces to Ukraine—have seen action in recent decades, including alongside American soldiers. But that doesn’t mean their hollowed-out armies now possess the required strength to keep Russia at bay.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron’s repeated insistence that European security guarantees for Kyiv would depend on a US backstop—because, as one Continental diplomat put it, America has “capabilities that all of Europe lacks”—shows that even they know Vance is right.
So too does the response from Britain and France to the US vice president’s comments. If they had not rung true, the two outraged leaders would never have presumed Vance was talking about their nations.
Instead, politicians of all stripes in Britain bashed the “shameless remarks,” describing Vance as a “clown” who had brought about “another moment of profound national shame” for America. They focussed only on the low-hanging fruit while ignoring the point Vance was actually trying—albeit badly—to make. French armed forces minister Sébastien Lecornu also received a standing ovation in parliament after he demanded that his nation’s troops “deserve the respect of our allies.”
Vance later trimmed the fat off his casual remarks, saying that “I don’t even mention the UK or France in the clip, both of whom have fought bravely alongside the U.S. over the last 20 years, and beyond.” But in a further comment, he rephrased his original point far more directly, claiming that
There are many countries who are volunteering (privately or publicly) support who have neither the battlefield experience nor the military equipment to do anything meaningful.
This is especially true of Britain. But because Vance’s more recent comment contains no lazy mischaracterisations which can be picked out for criticism while leaving the main point intact, it will likely be ignored in public, while European delusions flourish. Indeed, France believes it is “fortunate” that the argument—damning of its military capabilities—was laid out plainly.
