“Risk remains ELEVATED. Although the White House projects that major combat will be over in “two-to-three weeks,” simultaneous promises of “extremely hard” strikes during that same window mean the period ahead is likely to feature a short, sharp escalation before any draw-down. Fiscal moves (record defence request) and NATO frictions reinforce this assessment: Washington is gearing up to finish an intensive end-phase, not winding down immediately. Expect heavy operations followed by a rapid declaration of success, with persistent diplomatic fallout.”

“Overall posture: ELEVATED RISK, TRENDING STABLE-NEGATIVE. – Structural reality (MAP & MACHINE): Europe will remain militarily reliant on the United States through the medium term. Incremental EU defence cooperation will grow via issue-specific “coalitions of the willing”, but will not close the capability gap quickly enough to replace U.S. guarantees. – Political sentiment (MOOD): Trust in the U.S. continues to erode, yet fear of abandonment pushes most members to stay in NATO and entertain deeper integration. Friction peaks in public rhetoric but converts into pragmatic bargaining behind closed doors. – Governance gap: Recognition that EU decision-making is too slow for a 27-member security agenda creates momentum for limited treaty work-arounds rather than wholesale reform. Divergence resolution: 1. MAP internal conflict dissolves when rhetoric acknowledging U.S. indispensability is reconciled with plans for gradual capability build-up; both can coexist because timelines differ (short-term dependence vs. long-term aspiration). 2. MOOD conflicts converge as leaders channel disappointment with NATO into support for ad-hoc European defence initiatives; criticism acts as catalyst, not contradiction. Net effect: heightened but manageable uncertainty; no immediate alliance fracture, gradual evolution toward a two-tier security framework (U.S. umbrella + European task-forces).”