US emissaries Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner spent five hours on Monday trying to negotiate a peace deal with Vladimir Putin on Ukraine. But according to Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov, there was agreement only on ‘some points’ and ‘a lot of work lies ahead’ for Washington and Moscow. US President Donald Trump said his delegation had been left with the impression that Putin was interested in peace. Commentators examine what this might mean for Europe?
Open/close all quotes
Don’t let Russia claim victory
Moscow must not get away with this, demands Ilta-Sanomat:
“If Trump and Putin are able to push through their deal on Ukraine, Europe would face hard times. And Russia will see itself as the big winner. The Kremlin will feel entitled to demand humility and concessions from all countries that have supported Ukraine militarily and verbally. Russia has a long memory and boundless pride. If Russia can end its war of aggression without having to admit its own mistakes, it will probably make Finland pay next for those measures that Putin considers to be our mistakes.”
No strategy for either peace or war
Europe is trying to cling to its diminishing influence, writes economics professor Jože P. Damijan on his blog:
“I have come to the conclusion that Europe’s interest in prolonging the war and stoking fears of an imagined Russian threat is driven mainly by the concern that the United States under Trump might withdraw from the continent once peace is achieved. … The European states have no strategy for peace in Ukraine – nor do they have one for the war. They merely want to keep the conflict going, so that the illusion of Europe as a global power remains intact. A peaceful end to the war in Ukraine would, in their eyes, amount to a symbolic capitulation to the reality that the global order no longer revolves around Europe.”
Backers must think things through
According to statistics from the Kiel Institute in Germany, Denmark is the country that contributes the highest percentage of its GDP to Ukraine aid – 2.9 percent. But it needs to confront some difficult questions, says Weekendavisen:
“All the questions we had assumed would not need to be answered are now on the negotiating table. Do we want Ukraine to be a member of the EU and NATO, or do we prefer a neutral Ukraine as a buffer zone between East and West? How will Russia behave once its military resources are no longer tied up in Ukraine – and what can we do to prevent them from being deployed in the Baltic Sea? Can we help the Ukrainians build a stable and less corrupt democracy after the war has ended? If we also want to take the lead in ending the war in Ukraine, we must be able to answer these questions.”
Back at square one
By comparison, the Minsk Agreement – which is no longer in effect – was a roaring diplomatic success, curses Corriere della Sera:
“We’re basically back at square one when it comes to autonomy for Donbass and Ukraine’s security. … But while we await history’s judgement, the news tells us that international law has largely been thrown out of the window by the accord between Washington and Moscow – at the expense of the Ukrainians and behind the backs of the Europeans. And in the words of Tacitus, ‘the desert they call peace’ will be the future of Ukraine, whose reconstruction will most likely be paid for by Europe. Compared to the Minsk Agreement, this is a disappointing outcome and a political and diplomatic disaster.”
Europe on the sidelines
Europe is being excluded from fateful global political issues, Jutarnji list notes:
“Europe has no cards to play. This is why Rubio did not attend yesterday’s meeting of NATO foreign ministers. … ‘I totally accept him not being able to be here tomorrow, and I would not read anything in it,’ said Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte. It is understandable that the European members of our defence alliance do not want to fall out with the US in order to maintain the security alliance. But that ship seems to have sailed long ago, and we must face reality. … Europe is not participating in negotiations that directly affect our security. … The EU is being sidelined while the US and Russia make the decisions.”
Russia won’t move a millimetre
Moscow is not only continuing to block progress, it is also becoming more aggressive towards Europe, Forum24 observes:
“An end to the Ukraine crisis? According to Putin’s adviser, there is still much work to be done – Russia and the US were neither closer to nor further away from a solution to the Ukraine crisis, he said. … Until now, Europe has saved Ukraine from capitulation. Yes, the same weak and incompetent Europe that Trump supporters like to revile in order to distract from the fact that their idol is unusually accommodating towards Russia. That’s why Russia is now putting the screws on Europe. Putin has casually threatened that he is prepared to escalate the war if peace is not achieved on Russia’s terms.”
Is a buffer state on the cards?
We can expect Trump to deliver an obscure proposal to break the deadlock, writes political scientist Abbas Galliamov in a Facebook post:
“Given the current impasse in negotiations, Trump’s inquiring mind will inevitably come up with a surprise solution, such as creating an independent state of Eastern Ukraine in the territory of the four disputed regions. … Trump might present this plan not so much for it to be accepted, but rather to put pressure on the negotiations. … This is what happened in Gaza: his idea to expel the inhabitants and put up luxury developments did not go through, but in the Arab world, it raised fears and created greater willingness to talk – and the next, more moderate option proposed by the Americans was approved.”