Ukraine: Europe and the US on the same team again?
In the wake of the Alaska summit, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the leaders of five European states, the EU and Nato convened with Donald Trump at the White House on Monday to seek a solution to the war in Ukraine. According to Trump, following a phone call with Putin preparations for a meeting between the Russian leader and Zelensky are under way. The press response is mixed.
Breakthrough on security guarantees
Ukraine has reason to hope that the meeting in the White House will produce positive results, says The Daily Telegraph:
“By comparison to the bewildering Alaska summit, the European alliance made important strategic gains. Crucially, Zelensky seemed to persuade the president that he is genuinely interested in peace, not the blocker for which Trump unfairly took him last time. This paved the way to perhaps the most significant breakthrough yet: Trump's refusal to rule out putting American boots on the ground as part of a security guarantee. ... If Alaska was a shameful display of friendliness towards the blood-soaked tyrant of the Kremlin, Monday could be chalked up as a quiet diplomatic win for Ukraine.”
Ending the war could come at a high price
El Mundo warns:
“The Ukrainian president apparently faces a highly complex decision: either he maintains his country's territorial integrity or he ensures the survival of the Ukrainian state by agreeing to cede land in exchange for a certain degree of protection from the EU and US. Washington's willingness to talk to Ukraine about 'guarantees' has brought relief, but it cannot hide the high price that Europe would have to pay for peace according to Kremlin's ideas: the consolidation of an illegal annexation that undermines the principle of the inviolability of borders and legitimises Putin's crusade. ... Any step towards peace is welcome. But Russia's power to dictate its conditions obliges Europe to back Ukraine and protect its own security with increased military spending now more than ever.”
Peace processes are never jubilant
Delfi columnist Andrius Užkalnis dampens expectations that further peace talks will be successful:
“In the larger global context, the aggression against Ukraine is not really a big deal. And incidentally, Lithuania's security is an even lower priority. ... The atmosphere in all peace processes that have taken place in the past century and a half - ever since such a thing as mass information has existed - has without exception been marked by fatigue, disappointment, disgust and accusations of betrayal and weakness levelled at allies. There has never been an ecstatic and jubilant peace process. If you want to avoid disappointment, you should radically lower your expectations.”
Trump and Europe not fighting for the same cause
The US president is letting his allies know that this is not America's war, De Standaard concludes:
“When Putin spoke in Alaska about the causes of the war, he was undoubtedly making reference to his aversion to 'decadent' Western and European culture. Trump doesn't feel targeted by such a declaration of war. His America is no longer part of this West that must be defended. That rift also hung like a dark shadow over the negotiating table yesterday, with no praise for Nato. The US and Europe now have little in common to defend. In such a context, how can Trump offer any 'security guarantees' that are credible, unshakeable and lasting?”
A Trojan horse from Moscow
The Moscow Times sees Putin's peace proposals as an attempt to blackmail the Western world:
“Putin's proposal is nothing more than a Trojan horse. Under the guise of peace, Ukraine and the West are supposed to give up their strategic positions, allowing the Kremlin to interfere in their internal affairs and giving Russia time to prepare for the next stage of the war. Once the West has embarked on the path of yielding it will be drawn into a vortex of endless blackmail. As in ancient times, when the Greeks resorted to deceit after ten years of gruelling siege, Moscow is now trying to disguise its aggression as 'peace initiatives'.”
Military intervention almost inevitable
The deployment of European soldiers to Ukraine is becoming ever more likely, says La Stampa:
“Because if Donald Trump concludes a peace agreement with Putin, the West will have to provide Ukraine with security guarantees that prevent the Russians from launching a new offensive against all Ukraine in the near or distant future. In that case, beyond any potential military support from the US it will primarily be the European countries that will have to send in soldiers to support and protect their allies in Ukraine. If, on the other hand, the agreement with Putin were to fail, the danger of a partial or complete US withdrawal would materialise. In this second scenario, the Europeans would have to be consistent and significantly boost their military involvement in Ukraine.”