There are several people who are apprehensive about a World War III breaking out due to the unfolding events in Ukraine. This apprehension appears to be taking the shape of reality as Ukraine-US tensions mount and the European Union rallies behind Ukraine in its war against Russia.

On 2nd March 2025, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced a ‘four-point’ plan to aid Ukraine against Russia. After a summit with European leaders in London on Sunday, the British PM announced a slew of financial aid and military deals for Ukraine.

Britain wants to bring peace in Ukraine, ironically “With boots on the ground and planes in the air”

“Through my discussions over recent days… We have agreed that the UK, France and others will work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting…Then we’ll discuss that plan with the United States and take it forward together. The purpose of today’s meeting was to unite our partners around this effort…To strengthen Ukraine…And to support a just and enduring peace… For the good of all of us. Our starting point must be…To put Ukraine in the strongest possible position now…So that they can negotiate from a position of strength. And we are doubling down in our support,” Starmer said during a press conference on Sunday, March 2.

Just days after US President Donald Trump publicly rebuked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House, the British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced a 2.2 billion British pounds ($2.8 billion) loan to Ukraine to provide military aid to Ukraine funded by frozen Russian assets. Besides, the British Prime Minister also announced a new deal allowing Ukraine to use 1.6 billion pounds ($2 billion) in export finance to purchase over 5,000 air defence missiles made in Northern Ireland’s Belfast. While people are losing their lives in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, PM Starmer boasted that UK-made missiles would not only help Ukraine deter Russia but also create jobs in the British defence sector. Apparently, war is a business.

“I am announcing a new deal…Which allows Ukraine to use £1.6 billion of UK Export Finance…To buy more than 5,000 air defence missiles…Which will be made in Belfast…Creating jobs in our brilliant defence sector. This will be vital for protecting critical infrastructure now…And strengthening Ukraine in securing the peace, when it comes. Because we have to learn from the mistakes of the past,” Starmer said adding that there needs to be a strong deal, unlike the weak Minsk Agreements which the Kremlin defied with ease.

 Starmer also called on the European nations to step up and share the burden as he announced a four-point plan. The first point of this plan, chalked out after discussion with the EU leader,s is to continue providing military aid to Ukraine, and simultaneously, put economic pressure on Russia. The second point emphasised that Ukraine must be at the table of any peace deal to ensure its security and sovereignty. The third point is to boost Ukraine’s defence in the event of a peace deal to deter Russia from future invasions. Lastly, the British Prime Minister asserted that a “coalition of the willing to defend a deal in Ukraine” would be developed.

“First, we will keep the military aid flowing and continue increasing economic pressure on Russia to strengthen Ukraine now. Second, we agreed that any lasting peace must ensure Ukraine’s sovereignty and security, and Ukraine must be at the table. Third, in the event of a peace deal, we will keep boosting Ukraine’s own defensive capabilities to deter any future invasion. Fourth, we will go further to develop a coalition of the willing to defend a deal in Ukraine and to guarantee the peace,” Starmer said.

Asserting that Europe must do the heavy lifting, Starmer said, “Not every nation will feel able to contribute, but that can’t mean that we sit back. Instead, those willing will intensify planning now with real urgency. The UK is prepared to back this with boots on the ground and planes in the air, together with others.”

The British PM, however, emphasised that such an effort would require strong US backing and that he agrees with Trump on the urgent need for a durable peace. “To keep the pace behind these actions…And to keep working towards this shared plan. We are at a crossroads in history today. This is not a moment for more talk – It is time to act….” Starmer said.

Notably, Keir Starmer had in January signed a “100-year partnership” agreement with Ukrainian President Zelensky in Kyiv, committing £3 billion ($3.6 billion) annually in military aid, in addition to providing funding for air defence systems and economic recovery. Keir Starmer had also expressed willingness to deploy British troops as a part of peacekeeping force post-ceasefire, contingent on wider international backing including that of the United States. And now on 3rd March, Starmer reiterated his plans for Ukraine as he announced financial support to procure missiles.

Unsurprisingly, the European leaders also agreed that they must increase their defence spending to counter Russia. In this vein, French President Emmanuel Macron said in an interview that European countries should raise their defence spending to between 3.0 and 3.5 per cent of GDP to respond to the USA’s policy shift after the Trump administration took over, as well as Russia’s militarisation highlighting that the Kremlin has been spending 10 per cent of its GDP on defence.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, however, refuted the prospects of Italy deploying its troops as a part of a peacekeeping force and said that “it was never on the agenda”.

Meanwhile, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen asserted that there was now an urgent need to “re-arm Europe”. Similarly, NATO General Secretary Mark Rutte also emphasised the need for European countries to make sure that Ukraine has all it needs to “stay in the fight as long as it has to continue”.

The summit held on Sunday was attended by leaders from France, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, Norway, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Romania, Finland, Italy, Spain and Canada with most of the countries agreeing on forming a “coalition of the willing” to bolster Ukraine’s defences and guarantee ‘peace’ post-conflict. Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron also floated the idea of deploying European troops for peacekeeping under a ceasefire.

While the European countries are not involved in active combat against Russia, their financial and military aid to Ukraine has sustained Ukraine against Russia in the war which entered its third year in 2025. However, the European nations are now more than willing to engage in deploying “troops and planes” to attack Russia in what they call Ukraine’s defence. This would come with its own set of challenges and implications given the Trump administration, unlike its predecessor, is not very keen on backing Ukraine in the war against Russia and prolonging tensions with the Kremlin.

Implications for the US and NATO if the UK-EU get directly involved in the Ukraine-Russia war

As evident from Keir Starmer’s Sunday statement, the United Kingdom and European Union have consistently been emphasising the necessity of US involvement as a backstop for any Ukraine peace deal given America’s military heft and deterrence against the Kremlin. However, the situation has become complicated since Donald Trump has been pushing for Europe to take more responsibility, evidenced by the US’s reluctance to commit security guarantees and calls for Europe to handle Ukraine’s defences. It is pertinent to note that the USA has been the highest contributing nation to Ukraine and has given around $119 billion while the European Union has given $138 billion in financial, military and humanitarian aid, as per Ukraine Support Tracker.

Meanwhile, the US official data shows that it has contributed over $65 billion to Ukraine since 2022, dwarfing Europe’s contributions. Besides, according to Ukraine, 20% of the military hardware being used in its war against Russia comes from the US and it is the most capable and hardest to replace by Europe.

However, the Trump administration now has made it clear that it would reduce aid to Ukraine with flow of weapons to the warring nation already nearly stopped, shifting the burden onto NATO allies, including the UK and EU nations. The recent showdown between Trump and Zelensky at the Oval Office has further infuriated the Trump administration with the US calling on Zelensky to apologise or for Ukraine to bring up someone else to lead their country.

On one hand, Ukraine-US tensions are mounting, on the other, Ukraine is garnering financial and military support from the European Union so much so that the latter is willing to get involved in active combat against Russia while desperately trying to bring the US on board.

If European forces, say a coalition led by the UK and major EU nations including France, Germany among others enter the Russia-Ukraine war directly to ‘defend’ Ukraine, and Russia retaliates by attacking a NATO member, NATO can invoke Article 5 which necessitates collective defence by all NATO members in the event of any of its member state being attacked.

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security,” Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty reads.

However, Article 5 only applies to attacks that occur ‘within a member state’s territory’. Since Ukraine has not been admitted to NATO yet, United States won’t be under any obligation to compulsorily join the war in Ukraine. Further, Article 5 doesn’t mandate members to commit Militarily even in case of an attack within a NATO country. They can choose their method of response, which may include financial or military measures.

Notably, while not honouring Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty does not result in an automatic expulsion from the grouping, the US would want to withdraw from NATO. Although it seems an unlikely step, however, Trump 2.0 has been all about unlikely and unconventional decision-making thus the possibility of the US reconsidering its presence in NATO cannot be ruled out. Also, the US’s refusal to fight alongside NATO allies would obviously undermine NATO’s credibility besides, if the US leaves NATO, it would be a massive challenge for the grouping to manage its expenses since the US has been a major contributor to the grouping.

A direct entry of European Union and NATO allies sans the US would possibly start a major war in Europe which can escalate to other territories. It can trigger a fresh wave of sanctions and economic turbulence, redrawing of boundaries, and new alliances would form and NATO might dissolve.

However, despite the Trump-Zelensky fiasco, the US and Ukraine are still trying to work out the coveted minerals deal. The efforts to secure the US-Ukraine minerals deal, focused on Ukraine’s rare earth deposits of Titanium, Lithium, Graphite, Nickel and Cobalt, continue as a strategic lever.

Ukraine has vast deposits of minerals, including oil and gas. These minerals and elements are essential for modern industries. US President Trump claimed that the deal would allow the US to recover more than what it has spent on Ukraine. Reportedly, the agreement includes a jointly owned fund, allowing revenue from Ukraine’s state-owned mineral resources to be used to rebuild the war-torn nation. As per the terms of the deal, Ukraine would contribute 50% of its future proceeds from oil, gas, and mineral deposits to the fund. These funds would then be invested in infrastructure and economic projects within the country.

After the London summit, Zelensky insisted the minerals deal would be ready if the parties agreed. This suggests that despite what happened between him and Trump at the Oval Office recently, the deal remains a bargaining chip to retain US support. If tied to a ceasefire, it could incentivise Donald Trump to stay engaged, countering his push for Europe to lead, but it doesn’t inherently avert escalation unless tied with robust security guarantees Putin would be willing to accept. If the minerals deal works out between Ukraine and the US without upsetting the Kremlin, likely, the Ukraine-Russia war may not snowball into a world war.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here