When the narratives are crumbling: Disarray at this year’s Munich Security Conference

This year’s 61rst MSC conference (14.-16.2.) ended in complete disarray. What stuck out most significantly was that the European elite, in reaction to US administration and Trump’s recent phone call with President Putin, followed by a first round of high level talks in Riyadh, February 18^th  – that ended quite successfully according to statements from Lavrov and Rubio as well as Waltz – is in state of “panic”. As the well- known German General (ret.) Harald Kujat noted in an interview with Weltwoche (February 17^th ), the real  mistake which the European elites committed during the last three years of  war in Ukraine, was first that they didn’t have any strategy for diplomacy and peace,  except to encourage Ukraine to continue the war and send them more lethal weapons; second they didn’t do anything to help the Ukraine find a “diplomatic” way out of the conflict, even going back as far as the March 2022 preliminary agreement between Ukraine and Russia at the Istanbul conference, which then Ukraine on behalf of Boris Johnson and US circles repudiated; third they were from the beginning hostile to the demands by President Putin to discuss about a future “European Security Architecture”, that preceded the war. Hence – on the background of this year’s MSC – what became evident is that the European elite is not only “detached” from its population, but is running around like “headless chickens” that tries to keep control of the narratives, that “they themselves suffered from the most”, as the British strategist Alexander Crooke noted in an interview two days ago with Judge Napolitano. So unless the European elites understand what is at stake in terms of Trump’s peace initiative with Putin and make an effort to “constructively” support peace efforts with concrete diplomatic proposals, they will end up in “strategic irrelevance”.

On the background of Trump’s recent peace initiative for Ukraine, it becomes clear that all the dominant narratives that had accompanied the war in Ukraine, are beginning to break down. Some of the assembled European leaders, for example German Federal Chancellor Scholz, his Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, Polish FM Sikorski, British FM Lammy, French FM Barrot and German FM A.L. Baerbock were demonstrating an almost “hysterical reaction formation” in response to a short speech that had been given by Trump’s Vice President J.D. Vance in Munich at the opening of the conference.

The message of J.D. Vance

Vice President Vance didn’t really talk so much about the Ukraine, but stated from the beginning that “while the Trump administration is very concerned with European security and believes that we can come to a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine (!) the threat that I worry the most about vis- a- vis Europe is n o t Russia, it’s n o t China, it’s not other external actors. (!) What I worry about is the threat from w i t h i n. The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values: values shared with the United States of America.” He criticized explicitly the fact that while “everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a “defence of democracy”, the real discrepancy he sees is “when we see European courts cancelling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others.“ (On 9 January 2025, in an interview on RMC (Radio Monte Carlo), former European Commissioner Thierry Breton suggested that the European Union had played a role in the judicial process that led to the cancellation of the presidential elections in Romania. He added that the EU could consider similar action in Germany, notably if the AfD were to win the elections, owing to concerns about possible foreign interference, in particular by Elon Musk). So it happened in Romania, where the government recently annulled the elections (in which Georgescu had won the majority) The reason given for the annulment was that “Russian disinformation had infected the Romanian elections”, so that under a flimsy pretext of some outside interference, the elections were cancelled. Hence Vance warned the audience “If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you!”

Vance criticized the fact that organizers of the MSC had “banned” lawmakers representing populist parties from Germany, including the AFD (Alternative für Deutschland) and the left party BSW (Bündnis Sarah Wagenknecht) which call for more diplomatic efforts in the Russian-Ukraine war, denying them the right to participate in the MSC discussions. “I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions and the conscience that guide your very own people” (!), Vance said. He underlined that he believed that the crisis which the continent is facing is “one of our own makings, if you are running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing that America can do for you.” (…) After all: “Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for ‘firewalls’.”

Hence, the reaction to Vance the “outrage” was huge, ranging from German Chancellor Scholz, who foamed that in light of Germany’s Nazi past and their concentrations camps, the phrase “never again” will always be Germany’s guideline. And because of this past, the “majority in Germany is standing up harshly against those who admire National Socialism” (an allusion to the AFD). He further stated in respect to Ukraine: “Our democracy in Germany and in Europe is based on the historical certainty that democracies can be destroyed by radical anti -democrats (…) As defenders of democracy we stand at the side of the attacked Ukraine …Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. (…) A victory of Russia or a collapse of Ukraine would not create peace. (…)  A ‘dictated peace’ will never find our support.”  Tremendous outrage came also from German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius who gasped after Vance’s speech: “This is unacceptable, unacceptable”, while German Foreign Minister A.L. Baerbock discussing on a panel with the Foreign Ministers from France, GB and Poland went out of her way to tell the audience that “Putin’s Russia is our real enemy.” Not one word about looking for peaceful solutions.

Ukrainian President Zelensky in his speech that could have been easily scripted by one of his British intelligence advisors, outlined that the time had come to “build the Armed Forces of Europe.” That there should be no acceptance of “deals” made behind our backs without our involvement, (an allusion to the negotiations in Ryadh KSA) “no decisions about Ukraine without Ukraine. No decisions about Europe without Europe. Europe must have a seat at the table when decisions about Europe are being made. Anything else is zero. If we’re left out of negotiations about our own future, then we all lose,” Zelensky said. He ended his speech reiterating that he believes that “the core of any security guarantees for Ukraine must be NATO membership.”

Chinese Foreign minister Wang Yi sees hope in multipolar world

The only politician in Munich MSC that had the stature and wisdom to lay down a comprehensible vision of the future was Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. Under the headline “A steadfast constructive force in a changing world”  he emphasized in his short speech which referred to this year’s  Munich Report with the title: “Multipolarization”, that the world is indeed headed toward this new reality. “When the United Nations was founded 80 years ago, it had only 51 member states; today, 193 countries ride in the same big boat. A multipolar world is not only a historical inevitability; it is also becoming a reality”.

Wang Yi outlined China’s answer to this emerging new reality along four aspects, upon which the new “multipolar world order should be based: “1. Equal rights, equal opportunities and equal rules should become the basic principles of a multipolar world.

2. The purposes and principle of the U.N. Charter provide fundamental guidance for handling international relations (…) The multipolar paradigm must not be a state of disarray.” He underlined that China resolutely upholds the authority of international rule of law, and actively fulfills its international responsibilities and obligation.”
3. The “we first” approach in international relations only leads to a “lose-lose result. (…) It is from this understanding that China upholds true multilateralism and advocates the vision on global governance featuring extensive consultation and joint contribution of shared benefit.” He mentioned that China had proposed and delivered on the “Global Development Initiative”, the “Global Security Initiative” and the “Civilization Initiative, providing public goods for improving global governance.”
4. It would be important to open cooperation, and support an equal and orderly multipolar world with a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization, Wang Yi said, stressing that “with a five percent GDP growth last year China contributed to nearly 30% of the world economic growth. It has served as an important engine for global economic growth, and shared with the world the benefits of his supersized market. China is willing to synergize high quality “Belt and Road” cooperation with the European Union’s Global Gateway strategy, so as to empower each other and empower the entire world. China has always seen in Europe an important role in the multipolar world…” In the discussion period with MSC chairman Heusgen, Wang Yi, when asked about Russia, China relations emphasized the excellent and close cooperation between the two countries. He also offered new cooperation with Europe and in respect to a potential Taiwan conflict said that competitiveness between China and USA does not mean that the two are “enemies.”

Equally strong was Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar’s statement during a panel “Fortifying Democratic resilience”, in which in answer to the discussion about democracy and the “backsliding” of democracy in the West, Jaishankar answered that in India democracy is very resilient but that the West has a “double standard” that includes even Western support for non- democratic forces in India. A typical example, according to the Indian commentator Ramananda Sengupta (StratNewsGlobal, Feb17, 25), is this year’s MSC Report about ‘Mulitpolarization’, in which warning is made concerning the challenges that could hinder India’s long-term ambitions: “Structural economic weaknesses, increasing political polarization, increasing political polarization and concerns over declining pluralism – could be potential risks to India’s global standing.”