Expectations were high for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to the White House on February 28.

The meeting could potentially have resulted in a mineral deal that would have more closely connected Ukraine and the U.S., at least theoretically, and provided American President Donald Trump with greater incentive to support Kyiv. The visit was expected to clarify whether Washington would offer security guarantees following a ceasefire or peace agreement with Russia.

However, the meeting instead left a shocked international community with new questions about Ukraine’s future and the United States’ involvement in the conflict. In unprecedented recriminations and attacks in the oval office in front of the press, Trump and Vice President JD Vance scolded Zelensky for his “lack of respect” and failure to sufficiently thank the U.S. for its support. Trump concluded the meeting soon after and Zelensky was asked to leave the White House without signing the agreement. Trump’s comments on Zelensky were harsh: “He disrespected the U.S. of America in its cherished oval office. He can return when he is ready for peace.”

Despite the unprecedented candor on display in the meeting, it is not the failure of the visit or the sight of the two leaders quarrelling that should draw special attention; rather, the remarks made by European leaders after the meeting warrant specific focus. Almost all leaders, apart from Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who sided with the U.S., strongly supported Zelensky and effectively turned away from Washington.

One of the first to react to the failure of the negotiations was Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk. “President Zelensky, Ukraine, you are not alone,” he posted on his Facebook account. “We were right to assist Ukraine and impose sanctions on Russia all this time, and we shall continue to do so,” the AFP quotes French President Emmanuel Macron as saying to reporters in Portugal. “Ukraine, Spain stands with you,” Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez wrote on X.

The European leaders’ near-unanimous backing of Zelensky raises questions. Why the lack of a neutral or diplomatic stance? Why the swift unity in support of Ukraine? Zelensky’s perceived disrespect in the face of the U.S. president hints at a more profound underlying dynamic. This shift in alliances could reshape the global order with far-reaching implications.

The recent episode may become historic not only because of the quarrel between two presidents or the escalating conflict in Ukraine but also due to the potential serious undermining of the strategic alliance between the U.S. and Europe. In this scenario, we could witness a global reconfiguration of the world order.

One plausible scenario involves a potential strain on NATO funding by the U.S., prompting European nations to bolster defense spending at the expense of social programs. It could trigger a decline in living standards, paving the way for Eurosceptic victories in elections and potential shifts in the EU’s status quo.

U.S.-European relations are set to become even tenser as, on March 1, Kaja Kallas, High Representative of the European Union (EU) for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, stated on social media: “Today it has become clear that the free world needs a new leader. We, Europeans, must take up this challenge.” This statement appears to imply that Europeans no longer recognize the previous leader of the free world.

It is no secret that the American president was regarded a priori as the leader following World War II. Does the statement from the chief European diplomat imply that Europeans no longer acknowledge Trump as the leader of the free world or that they no longer view the U.S. as part of this world?

If so, are we witnessing the dissolution of the strategic alliance between Europe and America? We might find answers to these vital questions during the European summits on March 2 and 6 in London and Brussels.

On February 26, Trump announced that Washington would impose 25-percent tariffs on goods imported from the EU “very soon.” “We have made a decision and will announce it very soon,” he said. The European Commission press service responded that the EU intends to react decisively to the tariff changes promised by Trump soon. Consequently, economic relations between the U.S. and the EU are becoming progressively tense.

The likely deterioration of relations between the U.S. and Europe, the two centers of global economic power, will have significant political and economic implications for China. Growing tensions between the U.S. and Europe may lead to a change in the configuration of the China-U.S.-Europe triangle. For example, access to the European market is still necessary for both China and the U.S. If transatlantic relations worsen, the Europeans may start using the Chinese factor to pressure the U.S. by opening their market to Chinese goods. A tariff war with the U.S. could significantly undermine the already fragile European economy and make Europe more dependent on other trading partners, including China.

Europe has a chance to finally understand how vulnerable it is, having become almost entirely dependent on external factors for its security and new unconventional challenges, such as hi-tech. These are dependencies already becoming weaknesses. By turning to Chinese alternatives to reduce risks in the event of the deterioration of U.S.-China relations, Europe will be able to improve its political and economic status, and decrease its overreliance on just one strategic partner.

As tensions escalate, ending the conflict and protecting Ukrainian lives must be a priority. The current trajectory hints at a long struggle, highlighting the need for a unified position among the main parties to the conflict that goes beyond the personalities of individual leaders.

The author is former prime minister of Kyrgyzstan, a distinguished professor of the Belt and Road School at Beijing Normal University and author of the book Central Asia’s Economic Rebirth in the Shadow of the New Great Game.