Europe Must Surrender

The End of the Long Peace: Why Europe Must Rethink Its Security Architecture

For decades, the post-WWII international order and the relative stability following the collapse of the Soviet Union created a comfortable illusion: that large-scale conflict in Europe was a relic of history. Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Ukraine’s former commander-in-chief and current ambassador to the UK, argues that this era is definitively over.

Zaluzhnyi’s warning is clear: the West is operating under a dangerous complacency. As global systems face unprecedented strain, the transition from peace to a volatile new reality is not just a military challenge—it is a societal one.

The Three Stages of Denial

Zaluzhnyi outlines a psychological framework that many Western governments currently inhabit. First, nations assume that security threats are transient or “someone else’s problem.” Second, when the threat becomes undeniable, they delegate the burden entirely to the military, often through reactive procurement cycles.

The third stage—the one the West is currently approaching—is the “rude awakening.” This is the point where military capacity is stretched to its limit, and the state realizes that national survival requires the mobilization of every institution, not just the armed forces. In this phase, there is no room for half-measures or political compromise.

The Collapse of Traditional International Order

The post-1945 institutions that were designed to prevent global catastrophe are showing signs of systemic fatigue. From the paralysis of international law in the Middle East to the shifting dynamics in Eastern Europe, the “rules-based order” is being challenged by actors who prioritize power over diplomacy.

Zaluzhnyi notes that attempts to treat regional conflicts as “bargaining chips” for global powers have largely failed. This failure signals a transition to a multipolar world where security guarantees must be earned through technical superiority and political resolve, rather than assumed through treaties alone.

Is NATO Prepared for Modern Warfare?

Perhaps the most provocative aspect of Zaluzhnyi’s analysis is his critique of existing alliances. He suggests that even pillars like NATO must evolve. The challenge is twofold:

• Technical Adaptation: The integration of AI, drone swarms, and high-speed electronic warfare is moving faster than bureaucratic procurement cycles.
• Political Will: The ability to make unpopular, long-term decisions—such as increasing defense spending or re-industrializing the defense base—is the true test of democratic resilience.

FAQ: Navigating the New Geopolitical Reality

What is meant by the “collapse of the world order”?

It refers to the decreasing effectiveness of international institutions and treaties established after 1945 to maintain peace, as major powers increasingly disregard these frameworks.

Why does Zaluzhnyi argue that war is a societal issue?

He argues that in modern, high-stakes conflicts, the endurance of the entire state—including its economy, information space, and civil society—is just as vital as the performance of the military on the front lines.

Can international alliances still guarantee safety?

Alliances remain critical, but their effectiveness depends on their ability to modernize technologically and maintain the political courage to act decisively in a rapidly changing threat environment.

What are your thoughts on the future of European security? Are we doing enough to prepare for the challenges ahead? Join the conversation in the comments below or subscribe to our weekly intelligence brief for deeper analysis on global geopolitical trends.