Identical scenario: the oval studio in the White House, the journalists, the spotlights of the world, the US president and the Ukrainian president sitting next to each other. But this time the atmosphere was very different from the one that dominated the disastrous meeting of 28 February last, When Volodymyr Zelensky, head of state of a country attacked and in war for over three years, was blatantly humiliated by the Trump-Vance couple. This time, cordiality and smiles between the two presidents, some jokes, no bullying by the US President against the Ukrainian homologous who, mindful of the previous flask, was well looked at by Irritare Trump and showed gratitude and deference towards the tenant of the White House.
In short, the world shock (and primarily Ukrainian) of 28 February was avoided. And this is good news. But how much does it remain really good – in practical terms – of the summit summoned to Washington by Donald Trump with the Ukrainian president and the leaders of Europe (the coalition of the willing), European Union and NATO? Three days after the historic mid -August meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska – which ended with an alignment between the leaders of the two world superpowers and a moral victory for the leader of the Kremlin – in Washington sat at the table, together with Trump and Zelensky, the French president Emmanuel Macron, the British Premier Keir Stamer, the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, the Italian premier Giorgia Meloni, the Finnish president Alexander Stubc, the president of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen, the secretary of NATO Mark Rutte. Europe presented itself to the White House Recumulated to bring the requests to the American president who has moved on to the ally of Europe to take on the role of negotiator (At the end of the meeting he absent from the work table for a long phone call with Putin).
In Anchorage, the Russian president put his requests on the table: nOn the cease the fire but a global agreement to end the war; Russian control over all Donbas (Luhansk and Donetsk) with the withdrawal of the Ukrainians from the side of the Donetsk not occupied by Moscow; the freezing of the front line at the current state in the regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzia, partially occupied; the recognition of the Russian language as an official language in Ukraine; Guarantees for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church linked to the Moscow patriarchate (which Kyiv’s parliament declared outlaw and ban on August 2024); The renunciation of Ukraine to enter NATO.
The Europeans insist on the ceasefire by Moscow and on the need to fix solid security guarantees for Kyiv, who protect Ukraine – but also Europe – from possible future threats from Russia. As a guarantee, a mechanism similar to article 5 of the NATO Treaty is evoked, according to which in the event that a born country is attacked, the other members undertake to intervene militarily in his defense.
Beyond the certainly good intentions, the path of negotiations remains uphill. THEIn question of the sale of Ukrainian territories to Russia is a point of clear division between Kyiv and Europeans from one high and fly on the other: Putin does not want to give up the reconquest of the Donbas (where the conflict began in 2014) that he serves him for economic, strategic-military, symbolic reasons. The European Championships and Zelensky do not agree to sell parts of Ukrainian territory – moreover not even the Ukrainian Constitution allows it – and invoke respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country.
There are many questions. One above all: How much can you really trust Putin and Moscow? Ukrainians have well impressed in their memory the betrayal of the Memorandum of Budapest from 1994, Signs from Russia, Ukraine, the United States and the United Kingdom: Kyiv undertook to give up the nuclear weapons present in its territory after the fall of the USSR and obtained the guarantee from Moscow and the other signatories of their independence, territorial integrity and safety in return. In 2014 the Memorandum was openly violated by the invasion and annexation of Crimea by Russia. After the vast invasion of 2022, that Memorandum became stroke paper.
Another question: how much should Moscow end the war right now and freeze its conquests at present? A sign of real disposition to peace by Putin would be the cessation of hostilities in the Ukrainian territory. Instead, even in these days of historical meetings and openings to dialogue, Russian attacks continue constant, massive. On the eve of the Washington summit, Russia launched a new wave of raids that caused deaths and injured, including children. The most serious attack hit Kharkiv, in the country’s Northeast. Even last night it was marked by heavy bombings with missiles and drones of various types, in the Poltava region, electrical infrastructures were affected and hundreds of inhabitants remained without light.
Ukrainians are exhausted. They ask for peace. But, after three and a half years of war in their home, they are not willing to yield on everything. They know they will have to make painful renunciations, but they do not intend to accept any condition It is requested by Russia. Now we look to the future bilateral meeting between Zelensky and Putin: The times are still to be defined, but both leaders have been available. One thing is certain and clear to everyone: agreements cannot be made on the skin of the Ukrainians and on the fate of their land without Kyiv.
(Photo Ansa: the summit in Washington)
