On February 16, the 61st Munich Security Conference (MSC) concluded in Munich, Germany, following three days of discussions on global governance, climate security, the international order, and regional crises. However, the stark divisions between the United States and Europe—particularly on European security and the Russia-Ukraine conflict—drew significant attention. Many participants noted that uncertainty surrounding the Trump administration’s policies is further straining transatlantic relations, putting the U.S.-E.U. alliance to the test.

Established in 1963 as a forum for transatlantic defense cooperation, the MSC has evolved into a major platform for global security dialogue. Unlike in previous years, where discussions primarily centered on security, this year’s conference was dominated by concerns over the U.S. government’s evolving trade policies and their security implications for key allies. The conference theme, “Multipolarity,” reflected growing anxiety over the shifting global order. The MSC’s annual report underscored the challenges posed by multipolarity, expressing concerns about increasing global instability and the need for new security frameworks.

Two major issues defined this year’s conference. The first was the “repositioning” of transatlantic relations, on which U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance delivered a sharp critique of European policies on democracy, immigration, and defense spending, arguing that Europe must strengthen its own defense capabilities, so the U.S. can focus on threats elsewhere. At that time, the atmosphere was solemn and depressing, no one applauded when his speech ended. In response, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas accused Vance of “deliberately provoking tensions between the U.S. and Europe.” German media outlet Deutsche Welle noted that the U.S. openly questioned the “common values” that Europe often emphasizes consistently, raising doubts about whether the two sides still share a unified vision. The Guardian commented that “a transatlantic rift is widening, with the U.S. and Europe not only diverging on Russia but also on democracy and core values.” After the conference, Vance also met with the leader of the European far-right party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). European leaders fear that a potential second Trump administration could drastically reduce security support on allies, causing a deep rim between the U.S.-Europe alliance.

The second major issue was the sharp disagreement on resolving the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. Before the conference, U.S. President Donald Trump held a call directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin, signaling a sudden thaw in U.S.-Russia relations—much to the concern of European nations. The U.S. appeared to engage directly with Russia to negotiate a ceasefire without the involvement of Ukraine and Europe. Washington’s proposed settlement, which included territorial and resource concessions from Ukraine, also caused strong European opposition. The level of European unease was evident in French President Emmanuel Macron’s immediate call for an emergency EU leaders’ meeting on Feb 17th.

Despite the tensions, the U.S. is unlikely to entirely abandon Europe. Instead, it appears to be leveraging the situation to pressure European nations into greater financial and military commitments, while consolidating its own strategic influence. However, J.D. Vance’s harsh rhetoric has caused many European leaders to perceive U.S. actions as a betrayal of transatlantic common values. Additionally, Washington’s overtures to Russia and its confrontational stance toward Europe present a security paradox: on one hand, the U.S. demands European allies to increase military spending, which could trigger an arms race; on the other, rising calls for European strategic independence could ultimately reduce Europe’s reliance on the U.S., undermining American influence in the region.

After three years of war in Ukraine, any effort to secure a ceasefire is welcome. However, a U.S.-led peace deal without Ukraine and E.U.’s involvement is unlikely to gain traction and credibility of any sort. The conflict may not only persist but also escalate into a broader confrontation between Europe and Russia.

Further complicating matters is Washington’s recent behavior, with Trump’s administration making controversial territorial claims on Canada, Greenland, and Panama in the past month. As a result, European allies now view the U.S. as an unpredictable actor. The American plan for Ukraine—seemingly indifferent to Kyiv’s sovereignty—could set a dangerous precedent. If Ukraine is forced into an unfavorable ceasefire, nations previously threatened by Russian expansionism and U.S. Isolationism may fear a Darwinist world order dictated by power politics.

At the conference’s closing session, MSC Chairman Wolfgang Ischinger emphasized that a multipolar world must be governed by norms and principles rooted in the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet, as transatlantic fractures deepen, achieving such a framework remains an increasingly complex challenge.