US Vice President JD Vance denies criticizing UK and French militaries after backlash over his remarks on Ukraine. Facing criticism from British and French officials, he clarified that his comments were misinterpreted and reaffirmed Trump’s leadership on Ukraine.
On Tuesday, US Vice President JD Vance clarified earlier comments about “random” armed forces being used in Ukraine. He particularly rejected any suggestion that he had meant either the British or French armed forces. The comments came as he rejected vague proposals from a European conference last weekend. Indeed, Vice President Vance, in an X post, warned that President Trump was the only one who could solve the war in Ukraine. “Hope is not a strategy to bring peace to Ukraine. The only person in town who seems to have a strategy is President Donald J. Trump,” the Vice President declared. Vance has been widely criticized for his attacks on Ukrainian President Zelenskyy in the Oval Office last Friday. However, the American Vice President and his boss, President Trump, remain defiant and determinedly wedded to their position.
Vice President JD Vance is less known to Thai nationals in contrast to his boss, President Trump. However, in Europe and the United Kingdom, he has become a bit of a bete noire. At length, this is due to his famous speech at the Munich Security Conference on Valentine’s Day, February 14th, 2025.
In it, he linked American support with democratic rights such as freedom of speech and border security for European nationals. His speech caused outrage among the elite of Europe and Britain.
Vance’s comments about a proposed European peace force for Ukraine further inflamed tensions earlier this week. Speaking on Fox News, he dismissed the idea of a European-led stabilization force.
Vance’s remarks on European-led force provoke backlash from British and French officials over security doubts
He said security in Ukraine could not be ensured by “some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years.” Certainly, his remarks were widely seen as a swipe at Britain and France. Both countries had previously led efforts for a European military presence in Ukraine.
Undeniably, his comments provoked a sharp reaction in London and Paris. Many officials and veterans criticized him.
In turn, they argued that he disregarded the sacrifices made by British and French troops in past conflicts. More than 600 British service members died fighting alongside US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. France lost about 90 soldiers in Afghanistan and later joined Britain and the US in anti-ISIS operations.
British and French officials were quick to respond. Former UK armed forces minister Johnny Mercer criticized Vance. He said: “Vance needs to wind his neck in. Show a bit of respect, and stop making yourself look so unpleasant.”
Another former UK defence minister, James Heappey, expressed disappointment, saying, “Serving with the US and France were defining moments of my military career.”
Vance’s comments anger French officials as clarification attempts fail to ease military tensions
In France, former army colonel Michel Goya directed his frustration at Vance. In brief, he claimed that British and French soldiers died alongside Americans. Indeed, he warned the Vice President they “are giving you [expletive] from where they are.”
Afterwards, in response to the backlash, Vance sought to clarify his remarks. He posted on social media that it was “absurdly dishonest” to suggest he had criticized British or French troops. He insisted that he had not mentioned the UK or France specifically.
His office later stated that no European nation had the military capability to deter Russia without American assistance.
While acknowledging the past contributions of European forces, Vance’s team called for a reality check. His aides argued that these did not compare to the scale of mobilization needed for a viable European-led peacekeeping force.
Sébastien Lecornu, the French defence minister, appeared to accept Vance’s clarification. At length, he said that while respect for veterans of allied nations was essential, he was satisfied that Vance had not intended to insult British and French service members.
Vance defends the US-Ukraine minerals deal as a better security option than a European peacekeeping force
However, Vance’s assertion that a US-Ukraine minerals deal was a stronger security guarantee than a European peace force remains controversial.
He says economic ties between the US and Ukraine would provide better long-term security than any military deployment from European countries.
The UK and France continue to advocate for a European-led force with US backing. British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has called for “a coalition of the willing” to stabilize Ukraine.
The PM argues that European security depends on preventing further Russian aggression. He has also pushed back against the idea that the US could withdraw its support for Ukraine. Indeed, this is a policy that Trump suggested hours after Vance’s comments.
Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron insist that a US military “backstop” is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of a European-led peacekeeping force.
Trump administration remains sceptical of European defence efforts as allies push for US backing
Vance’s remarks underline the challenges facing European leaders as they try to secure US backing for their plans. Certainly, his statements reflect broader scepticism within the Trump administration about European military capabilities.
Meanwhile, the US remains the dominant military power within NATO. Significantly, Trump has signalled that he expects European allies to shoulder a greater share of their own defence responsibilities.
Only Britain and France have publicly committed to the European peace force. For instance, other countries such as Canada and Norway have only expressed interest. On Tuesday, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni stridently ruled out Italian troops.
While Vance has distanced himself from directly criticizing Britain and France, his broader message remains clear.
US doubts European-led force can provide security for Ukraine as transatlantic divisions widen
He does not believe that a European-led force can do the job. In effect, it cannot provide adequate security guarantees for Ukraine without significant US involvement.
The controversy surrounding Vance’s speech highlights the divisions within the transatlantic alliance over the future of European security.
Trump hits Canada and Mexico with 25% tariffs as he confirms reciprocal tariff regime from April 2nd
Historic London talks as leaders realise they still need the United States and Trump to find peace in Ukraine
While the UK and France emphasize their military readiness, Washington remains sceptical. The coming months will likely see the continued debate over the extent of US support for European defence initiatives. This will become a key focus, especially as Trump’s administration weighs its broader foreign policy priorities.
Join the Thai News forum, follow Thai Examiner on Facebook here
Receive all our stories as they come out on Telegram here
Follow Thai Examiner here
Further reading:
Trump Presidency already having a heavy impact on Thailand even before he talks trade with Bangkok
Economy sees sharp setback with lower private spending, investment and foreign tourism income
Trump’s trifecta triumph means Thailand will be more on edge as he prepares to take power in January
