Good morning,

This is the Thursday morning edition of The Intel Brief. Let’s review major updates from this week.

Reporting Period: 10-13 March 2025

Bottom-Line Up Front:

EU Commission Reaches First 100 Days, Von Der Leyen Delivers Remarks

Summary
On 11 March, EU Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen delivered remarks on her commission’s first 100 days. In her remarks, she highlighted the future focus of Europe as it prepares to make major policy shifts in industry, security, and diplomacy — potentially without the United States’ backing.

Findings

• EU Commission’s First 100 Days: EU Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen delivered remarks ahead of her commission’s “First 100 Days” mark on 11 March. Her speech struck a somber and lucid tone when she began with remarks on shifts threatening the Western order.

  • Establishing Partnerships: Von der Leyen highlighted that her Commission — in power until 2029 — will seek to build old and new partnerships, specifically in the Mercosur countries, India, and Caricom countries.

  • Future Focus: The EU Commission is focusing on “prosperity, security and democracy,” which includes the first ever appointment of a Commissioner of Defence, new energy initiatives, and plans for industrial growth. A part of the EU’s approach on security includes the new Security College, a way of bringing together defense, energy, and industrial stakeholders for regular and relevant updates on security.

  • REARM Europe: Von der Leyen also highlighted her “REARM Europe” plan, which proposes an €800 billion investment to support a “European defence union.” Von der Leyen highlighted her intent to integrate non-EU members — such as the UK, Norway, and Canada — into that fighting force, a proposition that if fulfilled would make NATO’s relevance questionable.
    Von der Leyen highlighted how the REARM Europe plan will eventually lead to a surge in European industry and innovation, as investments in the “next generation of military equipment” will boost the development of emerging technologies and industries, such as AI, quantum computing, communications, satellites, and robotics.

• Euro-American Partnership: Despite Von der Leyen’s supranationalist speech and continental ambitions for EU oversight, she stated the United States remains an ally of Europe. However, she also noted that the EU’s relationship with the United States under Trump’s leadership has taken on a more “transactional” feel and needs “de-risking.”
  While Von der Leyen did not name the United States or President Trump in her speech, she alluded to the fact that the EU does not currently consider the U.S. reliable or predictable.
  In von der Leyen’s native Germany, the president of the BND intelligence service said he hopes the U.S. “will soon be at our side again.”

Why This Matters
I think the EU Commission and EU member states have been making some powerful statements alongside its long overdue strategic shifts. However, I think these events are being covered with extreme bias and a media spin that is intended to smear the current U.S. administration while praising a victimized Europe rising to the occasion.

The truth is, European leaders still rely on American support in trade, security, research, industry, intelligence, diplomacy, and economics. Not only is this true, but a wide range of politicians and officials have openly expressed that reality, with many — such as Germany’s intelligence chief, the UN, or NATO Secretary General Rutte — simply calling for a return to normalcy.

What we are seeing in mainstream media is partial coverage of these events. We see praise for Europe finally taking charge of its own interests while portraying the Trump admin as unchecked and immature; erasing decades of Western progress in alliance building, strategic partnerships, and diplomatic unity. This is somewhat blown out of proportion.

For example, in addition to the statements by European officials, U.S. Army Colonel Martin O’Donnell, a spokesperson for the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, stated that the plan in NATO is for the U.S. to “plan and execute exercises” with all 32 member states, with no reductions in U.S. force posture, readiness, or deployments to Europe.

I want to reiterate a simple bottom-line: Europe’s new-found onus is long overdue. It is a good change. It is a sign that Europe is in a position to rejuvenate itself as a competitive people while it rebuilds old partnerships and establishes new ones. The only way the tensions between the U.S. and Europe develop into the imminent collapse of Western alliances is if European leaders continue to refuse Trump’s realist, bilateral approach to foreign policy and instead opt for the supranationalist, “with us or against us” approach to cooperation.

Sources: EU Commission, POLITICO, DW, Stars and Stripes, POLITICO, NATO

France Pursues Larger Strategic Role In Europe, Rebuffs America’s Role

Summary
On 11 March, French President Macron hosted the chiefs of staff of 34 nations at the Paris Defence and Strategy Forum. The United States was not invited. The forum emphasized the war in Ukraine and the future of European security.

Findings

• Paris Defence and Strategy Forum: On 11 March, President Macron hosted the chiefs of staff of 34 nations, including the UK, Australia, and Canada, in Paris. Reportedly, the United States was not invited.
  The meeting is intended to establish what security guarantees can be feasibly provided to Ukraine should U.S., Russian, and Ukrainian negotiators reach a ceasefire or peace agreement.

• France’s Growing Role: France, playing into the retreat of American support and influence in Europe, is attempting to establish itself as the military and defense industrial powerhouse of the European Union.
  In addition to the 11 March forum in Paris, Macron has recently expressed his desire to use France’s nuclear arsenal as a deterrent for Europe. So far, Germany and Poland have supported the idea of French nuclear weapons being forward-deployed to their territories.

• France’s Defense Industry: France has Europe’s largest defense industry. Data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute shows that in 2024, France became the world’s second largest defense exporter with 9.6% of global arms sales, behind the United States (43%) but ahead of Russia (7.8%).

Why This Matters
France’s strategic position is being reinvigorated under President Macron, who sees an exploitable gap opening due to the EU and Ukraine’s rift with the Trump administration.

It appears that France intends to use the conflict in Ukraine, and tensions with Washington, to rally European support for EU security and industrial policies that will ultimately see billions pushed into France’s defense industry. Additionally, France is seeing increased support for French soldiers being forward deployed to support a potential ceasefire in Ukraine and, if necessary, to deter Russia from attacking NATO nations. This is being used to push a resurgence in France’s military and, to some extent, an eventual European army.

Finally, Macron seems eager to posture France’s nuclear status as a means of enforcing EU interests during Ukraine negotiations and to deter future Russian aggression. This is very likely to aggravate Moscow and could lead to increased hybrid warfare activities in the European Union.

All these things signal France’s desire to take a leading role in the EU’s security rebirth. Additionally, France seems willing to work closely with the United Kingdom which, while no longer an EU member, plans to be a leading nation in the “Coalition of the Willing.”

Sources: POLITICO, Le Monde, The Guardian, AP News

Following Saudi Arabia Meeting, Ukraine Endorses U.S. Ceasefire Plan

Summary
On 11 March, a U.S. delegation met with Ukrainian officials in Saudi Arabia to establish ceasefire terms. The talks also included how the U.S. intends to aid Ukraine after peace is established. The U.S. resumed its military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine following the meeting.

Findings

• Bilateral Meeting: On 11 March, American delegates led by Secretary of State Rubio and National Security Advisor Waltz met with Ukrainian counterparts in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia to discuss steps for bringing peace to Ukraine.

• Proposed Ceasefire: Following the meeting, the U.S. Department of State and Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy announced that Ukraine had agreed to initial terms establishing a 30-day ceasefire. The ceasefire is subject to Russia’s acceptance and implementation.

• Ukraine Aid and Intelligence Sharing: In the joint statement, the U.S. announced it is resuming military aid and intelligence sharing with Kyiv. Previously, the Trump administration paused American military aid and intelligence with Ukraine to pressure Zelenskyy’s return to the White House, the signing of a rare earth minerals deal, and Ukrainian willingness to begin peace negotiations.

• Ancillary Details: Both parties discussed efforts that will coincide with a ceasefire, including humanitarian relief, prisoner transfers, and the return of detained, transferred, or displaced citizens.
  The U.S. delegation also agreed to pursue peace conditions that “provides for Ukraine’s long-term security,” a development Ukraine and Europe have pressured Washington to address.
  The U.S. and Ukrainian presidents will sign “as soon as possible a comprehensive agreement for developing Ukraine’s critical mineral resources.”

Why This Matters
Keep in mind that Russia still needs to review the 30-day ceasefire proposal and decide to accept or reject its terms and conditions. So while the initial agreement between U.S. and Ukrainian officials is a sign of strengthened diplomacy and cooperation, a few details complicate Russia’s likelihood of accepting the 30-day ceasefire. Those details are:

1. The U.S. resuming military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

2. Ukraine having recently launched more than 343 drones into Russia, some of which hit Moscow.

3. President Zelenskyy stating that Ukraine will not recognize any territory occupied by Russia.

It is uncertain if Zelenskyy’s remarks are directed as an official position of Ukraine (which would make negotiations impossible) or if he simply means Ukrainians will never forget the war. Zelenskyy characterized this mindset as “red lines,” implying the reclamation of Ukrainian territory could become a core tenet of Ukrainian policy and political motivation after the war.

I would also add that the mere nature of a ceasefire — which is traditionally a pause of kinetic ground, aerial, and naval operations — is not in Russia’s interest as Moscow has been attempting to reseize Kursk and gain as much ground as possible in eastern Ukraine. The longer the war goes on, the more likely Russia is to seize Ukrainian territory and make Kyiv’s negotiating position irrelevant.

Sources: U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, BBC, CBS News, NBC News, ABC News

UN Security Council Set To Convene, Discuss Iranian Nuclear Development

Summary
On 12 March, the United Nations Security Council convened to discuss Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. Iran has continued to grow its enriched uranium stockpile, a violation of the Iran Nuclear Deal. President Trump reportedly sent a letter to Iran’s supreme leader, asking to discuss establishing a new deal.

Findings

• UN Security Council: On 12 March, the UN Security Council convened to discuss Iran’s growing production of highly enriched uranium, presumably for the development of nuclear weapons.
  At the same time, Security Council Report reports that Germany will meet with Iranian officials under Rule 37 of the UNSC’s provisional rules.

• Diplomatic Channels: AP News reported that on 10 March, the Iranian government expressed its desire to negotiate denuclearization with the United States. The day before, Supreme Leader Khamenei rejected the idea of talks with the United States.
  Last week, President Trump sent Khamenei a letter expressing a desire to reach a new nuclear deal.

• IAEA Report: Recently, a report by the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency claims Iran is rapidly enriching uranium for the purpose of constructing nuclear weapons. Iran has over 8,000 kgs of uranium enriched at 60%, with 90% enrichment being sufficient for weapons use.

• Iranian Aggression: In February, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) commander stated an attack on Israel was being planned and that the attack, dubbed “Operation True Promise 3,” would happen soon. The IRGC has continued to fund, support, and coordinate its terrorist proxies in the region, such as Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas.

Why This Matters
The UN Security Council meeting is not significant in itself due to the UN’s limited ability to enforce its authority, but the fact that the meeting took place highlights the urgency regarding Iran’s nuclearization.

This is significant for two large reasons:

1. Israel and the U.S. have vowed to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, and have not taken the use of force “off the table.” This means if diplomacy fails (if it even happens), there could be a large-scale military campaign against Iran. This could throw the Middle East into a conventional war.

2. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly referred to as the Iran Nuclear Deal, expires in October 2025. President Trump has already withdrawn the U.S. from the deal due to Iran violating the terms, which stated Tehran must limit nuclear activities.

What we are looking at now is Iran rushing to develop nuclear weapons as it evades renewing a nuclear deal. If the Western world cannot reach a diplomatic solution, there could be conflict before October 2025.

Sources: Reuters, AP News, The Intel Brief, Security Council Report

Greenland’s Leading Parties Seek Coalition Government, Independence From Denmark

Summary
Greenland's centre-right Democrats secured a surprise victory in the recent elections, tripling their vote share to 29.9%. They are now negotiating a coalition government that could shape the island’s path to independence. The nationalist Naleraq party advocates for a swift break from Denmark while the Democrats prefer a gradual approach, prioritizing having an economic plan first.

Findings

• Election Outcome: Democrats won 29.9% of the vote, while Naleraq secured 24.5%. The outgoing coalition parties, Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA) and Siumut, suffered major losses.

• Coalition Talks: Democrats are open to discussions with all parties but face a choice—aligning with Naleraq would mean accelerating independence plans, while a coalition with IA would allow a focus on economic growth first.

• US and Geopolitical Factors: Concerns remain that a rushed departure from Denmark could expose Greenland to U.S. strategic ambitions, particularly given President Trump’s past interest in acquiring the territory.

• Economic Considerations: Greenland remains heavily dependent on fisheries and Danish subsidies, which make up 20% of its GDP. The Democrats aim to first establish a strong economic base before full sovereignty.

• Legal Framework: The 2009 Act on Greenland Self-Government allows Greenland to initiate independence unilaterally, but the process requires negotiations with Denmark, parliamentary approval, and a referendum.

Why This Matters
Greenland’s political shift has implications for Arctic geopolitics and U.S. national security. As China and Russia increase their Arctic presence, U.S. interest in Greenland’s strategic location and resources remains high. A hasty independence push could weaken Greenland’s domestic stability, making it vulnerable to external influence.

However, a rapid and successful independence movement could allow the new government in Greenland to adopt a strategic partnership with the Trump administration — one that would likely include an expanded security partnership and economic investment.

Sources: New York Times, Insider Paper

End Brief

That concludes this brief. Thank you for subscribing!

If you care to leave any feedback or ask me a question, email me @ [email protected]

Thanks,

Nick