The future of Europe depends on whether a newfound Western unity can withstand Putin's threats to Ukraine.

The Munich Security Conference is filled with a sense of helplessness and dread among Western leaders as they anticipate a possible military attack by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Ukraine.

Since the end of the Cold War, NATO allies and their partners have not engaged in as much military planning, sanctions design, political consultation, and intelligence sharing as they have now.

The uncertainty lies in whether Putin's efforts to reestablish a Russian sphere of influence through force or the temporary return to a Western common cause will have a more significant impact on Europe's future. Every crisis presents an opportunity, but it is unclear how deep the crisis Putin will create or how long the Western response will last.

Leaders from both the U.S. and Europe have struggled to convince their citizens of the threats Putin poses to post-Cold War principles, including the idea that borders cannot be eliminated through force, great powers should not be permitted to dominate their neighbors, and sovereign countries should have the freedom to make their own decisions about alliances and affiliations.

Since the three days, the mood regarding Putin's intentions has shifted to greater alarm due to a growing body of evidence indicating that Putin is preparing to launch the largest military action the world has seen since 1945.

A U.S. official with access to real-time intelligence stated, "Given the mounting evidence, it is clear that Putin's actions were not just a show of force, but a serious attempt to achieve a specific goal."

It is hard to believe that such a conflict can occur in modern Europe, given the focus on less kinetic issues such as climate change and pandemic response in recent years.

Despite the West's threats of political and economic sanctions and the commitment to move NATO forces forward to allied countries on the eastern front, Putin remains unwavering in his decision to attack Ukraine, as he believes it is his historic imperative.

Putin's decision to roll the dice in Ukraine has left many armchair psychologists in Munich baffled. Despite his reputation for being calculating, Putin has told Russian colleagues that he is entering uncharted territory. European officials who know him best believe that controlling Ukraine has become an obsession for him, 22 years into power and just before turning 70. In his essay on Ukraine last summer, Putin called for the restoration of "ancien Rus," which he believes is non-negotiable in order to cement his place in Russian history.

U.S. President Joe Biden's administration has been praised by European officials for countering Putin's narrative control by releasing intelligence, both open source and classified, about Russia's troop buildup and false flag plans. In response, U.S. officials quickly refuted Putin's claims that Russian troops were withdrawing.

Michael Carpenter, the U.S. Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, stated that Russia has deployed between 169,000 and 190,000 military personnel near Ukraine and in Crimea, which is significantly more than U.S. allies had previously known. This represents a concerning increase from the initial force of 100,000 on January 30.

Putin's use of troops in this military mobilization is uncertain, but only a small number of experts believe he won't use them at all.

General David Petraeus, a former U.S. army commander and CIA director, stated during a lunch here on the Ukraine issue that the significant presence of "enablers" for combat, which are not typically present during military maneuvers, is what is most revealing. He added, "You don't need field hospitals for exercises; you need them for invasion."

It is unsettling to realize that the West could have stopped Putin's aggression 15 years ago when he announced his intentions in a speech at the Bayerischer Hof hotel, which caused a shock among the attendees.

In April 2007, Russia launched cyberattacks on Estonia, invaded Georgia in 2008, annexed Crimea in 2014, and backed Russian-separatists in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine. Putin brutally repressed opposition at home and was connected abroad to assassinations, poisoning, cyberattacks, election meddling, and disinformation campaigns.

In February 2007, Putin addressed his Munich audience with a smile and stated that the conference format would allow him to express his true thoughts on international security issues. If his comments were perceived as overly confrontational, he requested that the audience not take offense, explaining that it was merely a conference.

In every way, the United States has overstepped its national borders, imposing its economic, political, cultural, and educational policies on other nations. Who is happy about this?

Putin quoted FDR to argue that the post-Cold War security order could not stand, stating, "When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries is in danger."

Now, it is Putin who is breaking the peace.

The Munich Agreement of Sept. 30, 1938, saw Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and Italy relinquish control over the German-speaking Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to Hitler, with Europe hailing it as a peace measure to avert a major war.

The lesson of Munich, both 15 years ago and today, is that appeasement does not decrease dangers but rather increases them. Putin is unlikely to abandon his plans for Ukraine, but the US and its allies can use this threat to their advantage by maintaining their newfound unity in the face of the most audacious attack yet on the post-World War II international order.

—Frederick Kempe is the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Atlantic Council.