The verdict on Donald Trump’s meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders on Monday depends entirely upon the metric used. The great fear was that this might prove a disaster along the lines of the US president’s dressing down of the Ukrainian leader in February – a scenario so plausible that Sir Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron, Friedrich Merz and other key European leaders dropped everything to dash to the White House themselves in support.
Following his red carpet welcome for Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, Mr Trump reportedly backed the idea that Ukraine should hand over the Donbas to achieve a peace deal. Even if one were naive enough to think that the Kremlin would see that as an end to conflict, rather than a staging post for a later offensive, it would not be a “land swap” but a land grab that Ukraine – for good reason – could not stomach. Kyiv would be handing over territory that Moscow has spent years attempting but failing to seize.
On the basis of those meetings’ precedents, there was cause for some relief after the Washington talks: it could have been much worse. Yet judged by the standards of conventional diplomacy, let alone Ukraine’s needs, it was alarming. Last month, Mr Trump threatened tough sanctions against Russia. En route to Alaska, he warned that there would be “very severe consequences” if there wasn’t a ceasefire that day. Yet on Monday, with Ukrainian civilians under intense Russian attack, he said there was no need to stop the fighting while a deal is agreed.
Never mind the administration’s weak grasp of detail, lack of competence and general inconsistency. Never mind the failure to apply itself to the kind of committed, diligent diplomacy required for peace. The record shows that Ukraine and its European allies repeatedly exert every effort – from a new suit to arms purchases – to draw Mr Trump towards their position. Yet his compass needle always seems to swing back towards Mr Putin. Mr Trump should be standing with a democracy, alongside traditional allies, against a war criminal. But at best, he wants to be a mediator.
The Kremlin has yet to confirm that the Russian leader will meet Mr Zelenskyy, as Mr Trump said he would. Mr Trump has said that the US will “help out” Europe with security guarantees and “coordinate” any such effort. But there is still no sign that this administration will provide the kind of backing that might make allies willing to put boots on the ground, or to persist with them if tested by Russia. Arguably the most important takeaway from Monday was the ability of European leaders of very different political persuasions – including Italy’s Giorgia Meloni – to coordinate effectively. That’s good news, but there’s a difference between fending off the worst case scenario and being able to establish a concrete plan for the future.
Despite Russian advances in recent weeks – spurred by the prospect of talks – this war is costing Moscow dearly too. Mr Putin could yet conclude that it is not in his interests to continue. But even if Mr Trump can be held to his latest position, it remains far short of what is necessary. Ukraine urgently needs action to secure the future of thousands of children kidnapped by Russia, the promise of justice in the future, and above all, a ceasefire, before more lives are lost.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
