In recent weeks, as Russia continued its assault on Ukraine in frank disregard of White House deadlines and demands, there was hope in Kyiv and European capitals that the scales might finally be falling from Donald Trump’s eyes. Last month, Mr Trump noted that although his conversations with Vladimir Putin repeatedly led him to believe that a ceasefire deal was in reach, the Russian president then routinely went on to “knock down a building in Kyiv”. More bluntly, he has accused Mr Putin of stringing him along with “bullshit”.
It was ostensibly on those grounds that the US president set an 8 August deadline for Mr Putin to agree to a peace deal with Ukraine, on pain of “significant” sanctions. Yet instead of being punished for ignoring this injunction too, Mr Putin has been rewarded with a summit with Mr Trump in the United States, and apparently allowed to veto any suggestion that Volodymyr Zelenskyy should also attend.
Suddenly, and alarmingly, it feels a little like February again, when Mr Trump and his vice-president, JD Vance, treated Mr Zelenskyy with outrageous disrespect in the White House, and appeared disposed to pursuing a peace agreement on Mr Putin’s terms. There are conflicting accounts of discussions between Mr Putin and the US presidential envoy, Steve Witkoff, last week. But there is no evidence that Mr Putin has any intention of compromising on his maximalist goals in Ukraine, including the annexation of eastern regions, demilitarisation and the abandoning of Ukraine’s aspiration to Nato membership.
Morally and practically speaking, the Ukrainian president’s absence on Friday will mean that any “deal” struck by Mr Trump and Mr Putin in Alaska lacks all legitimacy. But Kyiv understandably fears a carve-up in which Ukraine is pressured by Washington and Moscow to unilaterally surrender land in its east, and make other concessions, in exchange for a pause in the fighting.
This would be, of course, to reward Mr Putin’s illegal invasion and betray a nation whose fate is tied up with Europe’s security as a whole. The very fact of Friday’s summit, from which European leaders are also excluded, is already a wholly unearned diplomatic win for Mr Putin. Mr Trump is driven by mercantilism and ego: he may be persuaded that if Ukraine could be bullied into accepting the unacceptable, opportunities relating to Russian oil and gas could be unleashed, and the Nobel peace prize he covets become a genuine possibility.
After frantic mediation, it emerged on Monday that Mr Zelenskyy and European leaders may take part in a joint call with Mr Trump on Wednesday. The Ukrainian president has already made it clear that there will be no concession of further territory to Russia’s occupying forces. In the lead-up to Alaska, and afterwards, Europe must ensure that his words are lent weight by a unified and robust stance on what would constitute a just peace, as opposed to one imposed against Ukraine’s will.
Ultimately, that will need to include credible security guarantees for Kyiv from Europe and the US, and an agreed sanctions regime to be enacted should Russia renege on its commitments. But the first priority must be pressuring Mr Putin to agree to a ceasefire immediately in order that meaningful negotiations can begin. Until last week, that appeared to be the approach Mr Trump had decided to adopt. It was the right one.
-
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.