It’s a good thing Trump’s security strategy scared Europe, says David Petraeus

The White House’s new national security strategy sparked fear in Europe last week, warning that the region faces “annihilation of civilization” and questioning whether it can remain a geopolitical partner of the United States.

The document, which criticized the continent’s leaders as “weak” and condemned the region’s stance on immigration, democracy and free speech, as well as adding to its decline in economic and military power, shocked the continent’s allies.

“It is far from clear that some European countries have strong enough economies and militaries to remain reliable allies,” the report said, adding that the region suffers from a lack of confidence. The document also called for the United States to re-establish “strategic stability” with Russia despite the war against Ukraine.

But former CIA director and four-star Army general David Petraeus told CNBC that there’s nothing wrong with sounding the alarm for European countries to look after their own defense and security.

He told CNBC’s Dan Murphy in Abu Dhabi on Thursday that the strategy was “in some ways aimed at the Europeans. But frankly, some of the Europeans needed to be cornered, because I’ve seen four different presidents trying to encourage the Europeans to do more to defend themselves, and that’s what’s happening now.”

Petraeus said President Donald Trump has done a “huge amount” in encouraging European countries to increase their defense spending.

“He got them to do something they should have done years ago,” Petraeus said. He noted that, following sustained pressure from the Trump administration, European NATO members agreed earlier this year to increase defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product.

Petraeus’ comments come amid ongoing diplomatic efforts to end the war in Ukraine, with U.S. officials in recent weeks discussing a peace plan with Russian and Ukrainian officials.

Russia, Ukraine and their European allies have pursued different peace plans with conflicting demands and red lines. The biggest obstacles to peace remain disagreements over Ukraine’s postwar security and Russia’s demands for Kiev to cede eastern Donbas.

The U.S. government is reportedly urging both sides to reach a deal before Christmas, but there is skepticism as to whether it is possible. Meanwhile, Russia appears to be enjoying increased pressure from Washington on Europe and Ukraine.

Petraeus said he had little faith that Russia would be able to compromise on the peace plan, when Putin has shown little sign of compromise on war goals such as territorial control, regime change or a “demilitarized” Ukraine with no prospects for NATO membership.

“I am encouraged that efforts to end the war are being facilitated by the United States, backed by President Trump personally, on many fronts, and supported by his direct negotiators. I am not encouraged by Russia’s response,” Petraeus said.

“President Vladimir Putin reiterates that his goals are the extremist ones he has always had and essentially deny Ukraine’s independence. He wants to replace President Zelensky with a pro-Russian president… He wants to demilitarize Ukraine (and)… he wants land grants in the most fortified regions of Ukraine,” he added.

Petraeus added that Putin “is not going to flinch.”

Ukraine’s European allies are considering ways to continue funding the war against Russia, as well as final postwar reconstruction and Russian reparations, which the United Nations says will cost more than $500 billion.

The EU is believed to be close to a deal to mobilize a significant portion of Russia’s sovereign debt, worth an estimated 210 billion euros (about $244 billion), currently frozen in European financial institutions.

But there are also concerns about legal repercussions and potential retaliation from Moscow. The head of Russia’s Security Council warned last week that the use of Russian assets is tantamount to justifying war.

Petraeus said it would be a “game changer” if the EU forced the use of Russia’s frozen stockpiles.

“We have heard a lot of talk about game changers. I have never bought into them, but… $200 billion or even 100 billion euros would be a game changer for Ukraine. It would solve several years of financial and economic problems,” he said.