I am trying to remember the last time Europe faced a situation as difficult as the one confronting it today. While it has dealt with a salvo of major crises in recent years—the euro crisis, the migration crisis, and the pandemic—none of those compares with the existential crisis facing Europe today. With two wars in its backyard (the fighting continues in Ukraine, as does the bombing in Gaza despite the ceasefire); with a revisionist Russia which its NATO neighbours at least regard as a direct and immediate threat they are preparing to fight against; with an utterly unpredictable American president who keeps upping the price for any protection he (may or may not) provide; with international rules losing ground to the right of the strongest; and with a European economy that is losing the technological race and the bare essentials of its earlier success, Europe seems at a loss and scared, without the means to defend itself and, above all, without a plan.

Europe is obviously unprepared for the world it finds itself in, despite the ever-clearer signs in recent years of what was coming. Political leaders in Europe, especially those living in the Brussels bubble, were sleeping the sleep of the just, dreaming of another world as an EU-lite model: a world with open borders (globalization, of course), common institutions and rules. And so that their sleep might never be disturbed, they had transferred responsibility for their protection to the other side of the Atlantic. Meaning that Europe’s so-called soft power presupposed the hard power of the United States, the benevolence of the hegemon, and the continued domination of the West.

Even now, as their dreams turn into nightmares, Europeans remain caught between sleep and wakefulness. At least some had tried to avoid the war in Ukraine, though, sadly, their efforts came to naught. The game (what a game!) continues to be played between the United States and Russia. As for Europeans, they don’t even have a seat at the table. But while they have been relegated to the corridor, they continue to put their hands in their pockets, and Europe will continue to foot the lion’s share of the bill.

The sanctions on Russia are certainly hurting, but they have not (yet?) brought the Russian economy to its knees, despite early predictions. Now Europeans are thinking of taking the next step and leveraging Russian assets frozen after the invasion in order to lend to Ukraine. The loans are supposed to be repaid through reparations to be imposed on Russia after the war. But reparations are paid (when they are at all) by those who lose the war. So, does that mean we expect Russia to lose? And have we considered what defeat might actually mean for a country with a huge nuclear arsenal? Because Ukraine is certainly no Afghanistan, which both the former Soviet Union and the United States quit in defeat. In Ukraine, the stakes are much higher.

Putin’s Russia is viewed as a strategic threat and NATO’s European member countries have pledged to double their defence spending to counter it. In fact, the Poles and the Balts view war with Russia as virtually inevitable and are preparing themselves accordingly. Deterrence is certainly better than war, as long as it does not lead to a vicious circle of armament on both sides that could ultimately bring war closer. We should not lose sight of numbers, either: Russia’s GDP is only a little more than one tenth the GDP of the European Union of 27 member states. If only Europeans were to use those resources they set aside for defence properly and in close cooperation with each other, any threat from Russia should not be that difficult to handle. In other words, where and how may well matter more than how much Europeans spend on their defence.

One day—let us hope it’s not long in coming—Europeans will speak directly with the Russians once again, not just via a guardian. The regime in Moscow is terrible and the war in Ukraine still more so. But when it comes to relations between states, you do not have the luxury of choosing either your interlocutors or your neighbours. Dialogue does not mean appeasement. Russia will always be our neighbour; it’s not going to up sticks and move elsewhere. So, it’s worth seeking ways to coexist peacefully, and to put ourselves in the other’s shoes every once in a while, just to better understand each other’s sensitivities and insecurities. Pie-in-the-sky thinking, you may well say, when many are now preparing for war. But if war is indeed the only option, then the future looks bleak for the whole of Europe, including Russia.

We have always believed that Europe’s bargaining power is directly linked to the size of the single market and the existence of a common trade policy. Which is to say, Europe as a commercial (more than an economic) giant. But President Trump has revealed this to be yet one more illusion. The conclusion to be drawn is that all you need to do to topple the European giant is to intimidate the one you are negotiating with—it helps if they are of a phobic disposition—and link trade to security. And when this happens, the green transition in which Europeans have invested so much collapses with it.

Europe is poor in energy and raw materials in general. The same applies to the so-called rare earths, which are vital to today’s advanced economies. This has always been a crucial factor explaining why Europeans have open economies—and, of course, helps to explain why they were imperialists in the past! In other words, Europeans are far more dependent on international trade than Americans, whom Nature has endowed more generously. Hence, Europeans have no interest in following President Trump in his tariff wars, nor in adopting an aggressive policy towards the rapidly rising power called China. The Europe-China economic relationship has been mutually beneficial to date, though not equally so. As a European, you therefore need to try and bring more balance to your bilateral relationship with China while also linking it to security, but not to break it. Will we be permitted to do so?

President Trump and President Putin, assisted by their Chinese counterpart, are doing everything they can to help Europe come of age politically. Using shock treatment, and—needless to say—without espousing the end goal. They just want to cut Europe down to size and Europe is finding it hard to respond. With weak governments, weak leadership and a crisis of democracy at home, it is waiting for better days to miraculously arrive. But miracles are thin on the ground in our modern age. Our wise Greek ancestors used to say, “Goddess Athena helps those who help themselves”. The world has been turned upside down and the threat facing Europe today is existential. The more people realize that—and the faster they do so—the better. Because Europe has to wake up—and respond accordingly.

Loukas Tsoukalis is a professor at the Paris School of International Affairs at Sciences Po in Paris, professor emeritus at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, and Chair of the Board of Directors of ELIAMEP.