Throughout the years Munich Security Forum has been the place where European politics was shaped. Most notably, it was home to Putin’s famous speech in 2007 that marked a breaking point between Russia and the West. Munich again was at the center of events this weekend which was arguably the most consequential since the start of the war and marked another tectonic shift in the European politics. In the span of a few hours, the United States initiated negotiations with Russia – completely sidelining Ukraine and the EU, its Vice President JD Vance communicated to allies his displeasure with their electoral politics and court decisions – a rather unusual intervention from American politicians and finally, the famously frugal German Chancellor Scholz proposed funding defense spending through debt – an unthinkable idea just a few short months before. The repercussions of these developments will shape the end of the war in Ukraine and European geopolitics in the coming months and years.

When Russia started the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, it did not merely attack Kyiv’s government, but rather the Western liberal order based on international law. Today that order seems paralyzed, to say the least. NATO member Denmark’s territorial integrity is questioned by its own ally, the USA, who in turn interferes with the electoral & court decisions of European partners. Ukraine is on the path to being force-fed a ceasefire that de facto constitutes a cession of territory. In comparison, when the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait commenced, the West refused to acknowledge an illegal occupation, hence resorted to military force to defend the principle of sovereignty. Today, regardless of the situation on the battleground, Russia resembles a winner as Europe regresses from the Helsinki Accords upholding the inviolability of borders to Yalta-style conferences that carve up spheres of influence to the detriment of the local peoples.

Just as international law is compromised, so is NATO. In 2019 the French president Emmanuel Macron had warned his European partners that the alliance was becoming brain-dead, causing fury and uproar in many capitals. Yet only a few years later, it is dubious whether the USA would perform its obligations under ‘Article 5’ if Kremlin decided to enlarge its sphere of influence. The Europeans on the other hand have for decades under-invested in their militaries and consequently are not fully capable of self-defense. As the peace negotiations on Ukraine are about to commence, a much-discussed idea in policy circles is placing European peacekeepers in the country. While some, like the British prime minister, have boldly embraced the idea, others like the hawkish Poles have come out against such an option. This indicates a serious lack of will to use military forces in the EU’s very own vicinity.

The general thinking amongst Kosovar political and intellectual elites had so far been that NATO’s indefinite presence in the country would thwart whatever threat that Serbia may pose. Yet, it is time to wake up from a deep sleep and recognize the new realities of European geopolitics: a. the liberal order based on the principle of the inviolability of the borders has ceased to exist, b. NATO itself is in a questionable shape due to American hesitation on one hand and European inaptitude to send troops to defend its hinterland, let alone the Balkans c. a new administration in the US is willing to accept the realities on the ground if they are too costly to change, such as the return to 1991 borders of Ukraine. Therefore, the current geopolitical circumstances are conducive to the use of military force in dealings between states. The presence of NATO troops in Kosova is not guaranteed – especially since the Trump Administration is considering withdrawing a large number of troops from the continent. Hence, the era when we could count on others for our own security is over.

This reality imposes a set of new obligations on the political elite that came out of this election cycle. While electoral calculations are inherently part of democracies, this time around Kosova does not have the luxury of sustaining a long period without a functional & stable government. The people have not voted 40, but only 4 parties into the parliament that have largely the same agenda: increase public spending, increase wages & pensions and economic development (though they do not elaborate on how to do that). Politicians cannot hide behind numbers arguing they have not gotten enough votes to form a majority. The imperative of the era is to form a government quickly and decide on a defense policy that meets the needs of protecting the independence and territorial integrity of the country.

On that front, Munich has also had unexpected developments. After initial proposals to cut the welfare state, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz proposed funding growth in defense spending through new debt and called for the abolition of the debt brake clause. This constitutes a monumental shift in German politics that would also be unthinkable a few short months ago. The German political class is generally averse to public debt and views it as an instrument for investments that pay themselves off. That is why it instituted a very strict debt brake in 2009 and today enjoys the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio of G7 nations. However, even the third richest nation in the world is forced to find unconventional ways of funding its military.

The Kosovar government also needs to find creative ways of funding the defense needs of the country. While recently the government has met NATO’s target of dedicating 2% of the GDP to the sector, the new trend across the continent is vacillating between 3% and 5%. Considering the massive investment Serbia has made into its armament, Kosova also needs to step up its efforts and prepare for the winds ahead. But that will not be possible with a caretaker government, a weak majority or rescheduled elections. The most important duty of the political class of Kosova is to form a stable government as quickly as possible and deal with the urgencies of the era we live in. This is a good time for political parties to show political maturity set the superficial differences aside and take responsibility.