Berlin, Germany (Weltexpress). Two internationally renowned experts with extensive experience in diplomacy and the military provide nuanced and critical insights into Trump’s intentions, the feasibility of his plans and the far-reaching consequences for European security and NATO.
In a discussion on “Dialogue Works” on March 7, 2025, moderated by Nima Alkhorshid, Colonel Larry Wilkerson was cautiously supportive of Trump’s stated intention to end the Ukraine war and emphasized the urgent need to stop the escalating loss of life. He stated, “Trump was determined and obviously focused on ending this war, and that’s a positive in my view … we have way too many casualties.”
Wilkerson estimated the losses at around one million on the Ukrainian side and 300,000 to 350,000 on the Russian side and described the situation as “absurd”.
However, the retired colonel also pointed out the complexity of achieving peace and noted that a simple ceasefire might not be enough. He drew parallels with the Korean War in the 1950s, where fighting continued during negotiations, and emphasized the need for peace as part of a comprehensive European security concept. Which – as a reminder – the Russians have repeatedly called for since the end of the Cold War and which NATO has consistently refused to do.
Former ambassador Chas Freeman was more skeptical of Trump’s approach and questioned the diplomatic sophistication required to effectively end the conflict. While he acknowledged Trump’s “healthy instincts” to want to stop the war, he argued: “That requires a level of diplomatic sophistication that is barely evident in this administration so far.”
Freeman argued for a political framework similar to the Austrian State Treaty of 1955, which guaranteed neutrality to address both Russian and Western security concerns. He also rejected the idea of a military solution and criticized European politicians such as Polish Prime Minister Tusk, who is calling for an arms race with Russia, as “misguided”.
Both experts agreed that ending the war in Ukraine was a crucial step, but differed in their assessment of the chances of success under Trump’s leadership. Wilkerson sees a moral obligation to stop the bloodshed, while Freeman emphasizes the need for a more inclusive and diplomatically sound strategy.
The future of NATO and European security
Regarding the future of NATO, both Wilkerson and Freeman expressed concerns about the Alliance’s direction and the broader European security architecture. Wilkerson criticized NATO expansion under previous US administrations, particularly Bill Clinton, arguing that it was driven by domestic political and economic interests rather than strategic necessity. He said: “It all went down the drain with Bill Clinton … because Bill Clinton wanted to expand NATO to channel money into the defense industry.”
This expansion had alienated Russia and contributed to the current crisis, as Russia had historically sought integration into Europe, but had been repeatedly rejected.
Freeman agreed with this point of view and regretted the collapse of initiatives such as the Russia-NATO Council, which he described as a “tragedy”. He called for a more inclusive European security framework and explained: “The only way Europe can enjoy peace and stability is through an inclusive, not exclusive, order.”
In other words, through a security order with and not against Russia.
Freeman also criticized the growing hostility of some European nations toward the Russian Federation, noting that “now it’s the neighbors in Europe that are acting more belligerent than we [the U.S.] are,” even though the United States has historically driven anti-Russian sentiment in the region.
Both experts saw potential in Trump’s apparent shift in focus from the transatlantic to the Pacific, with Wilkerson noting, “We (the US) have finally resolved a long-standing, internal conflict … we are now clearly focused on the Pacific.”
However, Freeman warned that this change may not be implemented effectively and described US policy in the Pacific as “indecisive”. Both experts agreed that the future of NATO depends on Europe taking more responsibility for its own security – a trend they see as long overdue. However, Wilkerson and Freeman warned against militarization at the expense of social programs and diplomatic efforts with Russia.
Conclusion
Retired Colonel Larry Wilkerson and former Ambassador Chas Freeman offer a sobering assessment of Trump’s plans for Ukraine and the future of NATO. While Wilkerson sees the value in Trump’s intention to end the Ukraine war, both experts emphasize the need for a comprehensive, inclusive approach that addresses Russian and European security concerns – a goal they say requires more diplomatic skill than the current administration has shown so far.
With regard to NATO, they argue for a rethought European security architecture that includes Russia and reduces Europe’s dependence on US leadership. At the same time, both urgently warn against further escalation and militarization in Europe at the expense of social stability.
The following should be noted about the two discussants:
Ambassador Chas W. Freeman Jr. is a former U.S. diplomat and author with over 30 years of experience in the Foreign Service. He served as U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs from 1993 to 1994 and played a key role in shaping the post-Cold War NATO-centric security order and reestablishing military relations with China. He previously served as US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia (1989-1992). Freeman was also the principal translator for President Nixon during his historic visit to China in 1972 and is fluent in Chinese, French, Spanish and Arabic.
US Army Colonel (ret.) Lawrence B. “Larry” Wilkerson is considered a skillful expert on foreign policy and national security. He was born on June 15, 1945 and served in the military for over 30 years, including in the Vietnam War. After his military career, he was Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell at the US State Department from 2002 to 2005, where he was involved in key decisions on US foreign policy. Wilkerson is known for his critical views on US foreign policy, particularly on the role of neoconservatives and the militarization of international relations. After retiring from government service, he became a sought-after speaker and lecturer and is a regular commentator on geopolitical issues in the media.
Larry Wilkerson will participate via Zoom in the conference “Peace with Russia” (The most important task of our time) in Berlin-Neuenhagen on March 24. His friend, colleague and fellow fighter against the dangers of nuclear war, world-renowned missile and nuclear war expert MIT Professor Ted Postol, will personally attend the conference in Berlin on March 24, which will bring together well-known representatives from East and West from the military, science, culture and society from the cross-party political spectrum from left to national-conservative.
Details about the “Peace with Russia” conference and registration can be found at via this link. Anyone who would like to support this cross-party movement for “Peace with Russia”, which is particularly important in these times, can do so by making a donation to the account of the “German Peace Council” as co-sponsor of the conference:
Deutscher Friedensrat e. V., Weydingerstr. 14-16, 10178 Berlin, account details and donations: Deutsche Bank; DE75 1007 0848 0629 0779 00; payment reference: “Conference 25”
If you want to watch the above summarized discussion between Col. Larry Wilkerson and Amb. Chas Friedman (one hour, in English), you can do so on YouTube via this link.
