The Trump administration's signals about a US policy toward Moscow, Ukraine, and the EU are causing concern in Russia's neighborhood, from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea.
Estonia: Fears that the US shift in politics could have catastrophic consequences (Olesia Lagashina)
For countries that were once part of the Soviet Union — whose collapse Putin called the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century — the U.S. shift and Trump’s apparent willingness to make a deal with Putin could have catastrophic consequences. If the U.S. agrees to Russia’s demand to roll back NATO’s borders to where they were in the 1990s, Estonia’s defense would suffer a severe blow. In the worst-case scenario, this could lead to a military conflict with Russia and the loss of national independence.
Both the political establishment and part of the population are aware of this risk. The country is actively arming itself, but the more the U.S. twists Ukraine’s arm now, the less time the Baltic States have to prepare for a potential attack. Meanwhile, some segments of the population — those radically opposed to the ruling coalition, including supporters of the far-right EKRE, parts of the Centre Party, and the marginal Koos — welcome the change in U.S. policy, hoping for a right-wing revanche.
Latvia: “Never stop panicking” (Kaspars Germanis)
Given the fundamental role of the US in defending Latvia's independence, politicians have always been reluctant to speak out on issues that are uncomfortable for the US. Thus Trump's statements about Canada, Greenland, Panama, and Gaza went unheeded. However, patience ran out when Trump accused Ukraine of starting a war with Russia. The Latvian president Edgars Rinkēvičs was forced to remind that Russia had started the war, just two days after his famous “Never stop panicking” tweet following the Munich conference. Moreover, the government had decided that the defense budget must be improved by 4% from GDP next year and in upcoming years - by 5%. Meanwhile, society is uncertain about what to prepare for: could the US respond to Russia’s potential demand to withdraw US/NATO forces, and would other NATO countries respond to it? The politicians are telling the people that there are no threats of the Russian invasion but it does not reduce the concerns. On the other hand, some experts think an alliance should be created consisting of the Baltic States, Northern Countries, Poland, the UK, probably, Romania, the Czech Republic, Germany, and France.
The Republic of Moldova: the Kremlin's next target (Mariana Vasilache)
When the war in Ukraine broke out, the media reported that the Russian army could also be targeting the Republic of Moldova, as suggested from a military map of the Belarusian leader, Alexander Lukashenko or the statements of certain Russian officials. Therefore, pro-Europeans in Chișinău and beyond fear that the Republic of Moldova could be the Kremlin's next target. If Ukraine holds out, the Republic of Moldova will also be able to preserve its sovereignty, territorial integrity and its European trajectory. This is why the statements and position of the Trump administration towards Ukraine have sparked major concerns in the Republic of Moldova, a country that does not have a defense system capable of fending off a Russian military attack and is not part of any military alliance.
For several years, the pro-European administration in Chișinău has already been facing a hybrid war waged by the Russian Federation by means of energy blackmail, interference in the elections, attempts to destabilize the domestic context, disinformation campaigns, etc. The Republic of Moldova risks returning to Russia’s sphere of influence after the parliamentary election due this fall, which is vital for the country's European aspirations. In this context, pro-Russian parties in Chișinău rejoice at the news of Putin and Trump coming to an understanding. Socialist Igor Dodon expects “an agreement between Putin and Trump in the shortest time possible”, claiming that, “because of Maia Sandu, Moldova was included on the military agenda of this region, part of this conflict. But the old agenda is coming apart”, Dodon threatens. Similar to other representatives of the pro-Russian opposition, the leader of the Party of Socialists hailed the suspension of aid via the American agency USAID. Dodon announced that he had sent “an official letter to the U.S. Embassy, in order to understand the extent to which Soros and USAID structures had supported the pro-PAS network in the Republic of Moldova”.
The interruption of USAID funding impacts several projects linked to the development of the Republic of Moldova, especially major energy infrastructure projects, aimed at consolidating the country's energy independence from Russia, including the construction of an electricity interconnection line with Romania, but also the fields of information technologies, agriculture, education, tourism, community development as well as the reform of the judiciary.
The United States is also the most important partner for the modernization of Moldova’s defense and security system, a sector neglected for thirty years. The Republic of Moldova needs air defense systems - Russian drones and missiles have violated the national airspace on multiple occasions. At present, the Republic of Moldova is defended by Ukraine’s anti-aircraft systems. U.S. aid for the modernization of the National Army is vital for the Republic of Moldova, which is located in a risk zone, where Moscow's primary geopolitical interest is the restoration of the Russian World.
The Transnistrian conflict was also excluded from the list of priorities of the new Trump administration. The Transnistrian package, which included the withdrawal of Russian troops and ammunition from the eastern districts of the Republic of Moldova, was supposed to be part of the Ukrainian peace process. However, Transnistria is not on Washington's agenda. Thus, the way forward is side by side with the EU, and Chișinău must clearly voice its position on the evacuation of Russian troops and weapons from the separatist region.
Poland: “Enough talk, we need action” (Michal Kukawski)
Following the latest meetings in Munich and Riyadh, tensions are mounting in Poland. Lawmakers within the ruling camp are increasingly uneasy, questioning whether a potential U.S.-Russia reset is being negotiated at the expense of Europe and Ukraine. Meanwhile, President Andrzej Duda, a key figure in the right-wing Law and Justice party (PiS), sought to quell concerns after his discussions with U.S. special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Gen. Keith Kellogg, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. He reassured the public that Washington’s “radical” approach to the war in Ukraine would ultimately bring stability to the region — “peace to our part of Europe and, above all, peace in Polish homes”. Shortly thereafter, he boarded a flight to the United States for an urgent meeting with President Donald Trump.
The encounter, held on the sidelines of the CPAC conservative conference, was strikingly brief. Initially scheduled to last over an hour, it concluded in less than ten minutes, fueling speculation that it had been arranged in haste. The head of Duda’s presidential chancellery downplayed concerns, insisting that “friends don’t need long talks — they speak directly and to the point”. The Polish president himself projected confidence, emphasizing that American troops in Poland were not at risk of withdrawal. “On the contrary,” he assured, “it’s possible their presence will even increase.”
Yet not all Polish officials share Duda’s optimism. Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski, after his own meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, struck a more reserved tone. His remarks afterwards were notably measured, offering little detail about the substance of their discussions. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Donald Tusk has signaled a more assertive stance, declaring, “Enough talk — we need action”, as he pushes for Ukraine’s financial support to come from frozen Russian assets.
Turkey: Erdoğan has bigger worries than the US – EU/Ukraine spat (Dragoș Mateescu)
Following the flurry of public declarations coming from the White House against Ukraine and against Europeans, in general, Turkish officials refrained from reacting. Europe and the war of Putin against Ukraine do not seem to be of much interest to Turks these days and, besides, president Erdoğan takes care of all things, isn’t it!? Well, yes and no. In fact, there are more worrying things going on for Ankara in its own region than Trump’s war with logic.
Volodimyr Zelenski visited Ankara last week and, at the press conference in the aftermath, Erdoğan declared that his country is ready to host peace talks to end the war. However, he did not stop there. He also said that “Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty are indisputable in the eyes of Ankara”. That is perfectly correct when looked at from the perspective of Ankara’s general policy toward Ukraine and the war, but it is not the right thing to say when you want to be a mediator between Moscow and Kiev. Moscow wants precisely a piece of Ukraine. This is yet another episode of misjudgement regarding Ankara’s foreign posture, and more such examples may be on the way. That is because the more worrying thing for Erdoğan and his team is that, as Veridica had warned, their regime is constantly sidelined by the new White House team in its foreign policy toward the Middle East and the broader, oriental Mediterranean region.
Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, did not include Turkey on its recent tour of the Middle East. After being excluded from the East Mediterranean Gas Forum, the Turkish leader got furious for the grand India-Middle East-Europe Economic corridor (IMEC) being planned and already implemented on a route that does not go through Anatolia. Developments regarding the exploitation of huge gas reserves in the eastern Mediterranean basin also go on without Turkey making significant gains. And, moreover, appointments by Donald Trump in key positions relevant for the US policy in the Middle East do not seem to favour Ankara either.
Tom Barrak, the new US ambassador to Turkey, is a Libanese-American very close to Donald Trump but more familiar with the agendas of the powerful Arab monarchies in the region. Secretary of state Rubio and the main security advisor at the White House, Michael Waltz, have a history of public positions against the Erdoğan regime. Moreover, Trump’s envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, is a Jewish-American billionaire with no foreign policy experience. However, he is an old friend of Trump and will simply implement the president’s policy in the Middle East. And that means support for Israel, as indicated by Trump himself on numerous occasions, even at the expense of Turkish interests. Witkoff’s deputy, Morgan Ortagus, is a woman with great experience in the region, having been deeply involved in the negotiations for the Abraham Accords. All these indicate that the team that President Trump assembled for implementing his policy in the region will continue to project US influence by relying on Israel and the Arab allies, through the Abraham Accords. That is while Turkey’s agenda under Erdoğan has been on collision course with the US policy on numerous dossiers and in numerous instances. This may also be why, instead of using precious energy to get somehow involved on either side in the Trump administration’s current feud with logic and European allies, Erdoğan prefers to keep silent. He has bigger worries to think about.
Ukraine: Harsh criticism of Trump against the backdrop of geopolitical confusion (Marin Gherman)
After the meeting of American and Russian officials in Saudi Arabia and the heated exchange of remarks between Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump, Ukrainian society feels confused and betrayed. An increasing number of regional councils have voted symbolic resolutions of support for president Zelenskyy, whereas a large numbers of activists, doctors, cultural figures, and politicians have stepped up to voice criticism against the USA for the first time. After three years of war, Ukrainians cannot possibly grasp how a victim of an act of aggression is suddenly considered guilty of committing it.
Waking up to a Trumpian dystopia, where predictability and rules seem to no longer apply, Ukrainians have turned their gaze to France, Great Britain, Spain and other European states, many wondering if they can still hope for a just peace. For some, out of the blue, Trump and Putin have become equally responsible for the horrors of the war. For others, the American-Ukrainian misunderstandings are pushing away hopes for peace and deepening war fatigue.
Former president and opposition leader Petro Poroshenko criticized Zelenskyy, advising him to learn to hide his emotions in order to effectively dialogue and negotiate with Trump, as he himself did in 2016-2019. The major publications in Kyiv write that the gloomiest scenarios, discussed in November-December 2024, are slowly starting to take shape. However, after the initial shock, Ukrainians are gradually regaining confidence in their ability to adapt.
