The man who said no

Now, after perhaps the most dramatic reversal in the history of US foreign policy, Zelensky has again said no, refusing to acknowledge any talks without Ukraine’s involvement as peace negotiations, and rejecting the Trump administration’s attempt to blackmail Ukraine into handing over its mineral wealth, and by doing so, infuriating Trump.

The meeting of high-level US and Russian delegations in Riyadh on Tuesday resulted in an agreement to return staffing levels at their respective embassies to pre-2022 levels — something that’s first and foremost a gesture, but one that will also facilitate further negotiations.

However, this must be the first case in US history of the country abandoning one of its allies during a military invasion, and re-establishing relations with the aggressor, all within a matter of days. But this is what the golden age Trump announced in his inaugural address to the American people looks like for Europe.

Trump’s motives for such radical actions are unclear. Yes, he wants to go down in history as a great peacemaker, and his messianic ardour has only increased since he narrowly survived an assassination attempt during the election campaign last year. 

His administration also believes that there is a global conspiracy by the liberal establishment against true democracy and freedom, which is why it supports far-right populists in European elections, most actively in Germany, who, like Trump, have built their careers on fighting such fabled elites. 

His view of foreign policy as a real estate fire sale is the consistent thread that connects Greenland to the Gaza Riviera and to Ukrainian mineral wealth: pay now whatever bills we come up with, or it will only get worse.

One school of thought says that the Trump-Putin bromance is really a strategic attempt to outmanoeuvre China, which effectively already controls the Russian economy, and to diminish its influence. One could argue that in the long term, good relations between Washington and Moscow weaken China’s position and reduce the chances of Beijing becoming the global leader. 

However, this doesn’t tally with the Trump administration’s apparent desire to dump Europe. If he loses Europe, allowing it to be ideologically and even militarily or politically dismembered by Putin, the US also loses its status as a superpower.

Trump’s first-term foreign policy initiatives failed. One particularly spectacular flop was the campaign to establish ties with Kim Jong Un, which resulted in nothing more than an exchange of love letters with the North Korean dictator. In view of Trump’s failure as a diplomat between 2016 and 2020, his current attempts to reshape the global order in favour of authoritarian leaders against the backdrop of a US-Russia alliance could also come to nothing.

Trump’s failure as a diplomat during his first term in office may reflect the fact that his management style and lack of international experience prevented him from acting rationally and consistently. Trump may not realise the long-term consequences of his actions. To him, getting payback from Ukraine or Europe while reaping the economic benefits of restarting trading with Russia may look like righting the wrongs of the Democrats, but Trump’s leadership style and plans for both domestic and foreign policy revolution are overwhelming even his own team. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio understood all too clearly back in March 2022 that the sole objective of Putin’s attempts to negotiate an end to the war was to secure the whole of Ukraine by political, rather than military, means. Three years later and now Rubio can be seen laughing with his Russian counterparts, telling the same lies as Putin did, at a stage in the war when both the Ukrainian and Russian armies are exhausted and neither side is in a position to secure victory on the battlefield alone.

German MEP Sergey Lagodinsky said on Tuesday that the Trump administration’s roadmap for Ukraine consisted of three points: a ceasefire, a presidential election in Ukraine and the signing of a permanent peace agreement. This was confirmed by Fox News, with Trump himself then commenting about the need for early elections in Ukraine. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov denied that any such roadmap existed, but this was the man who denied that Russia intended to attack Ukraine a week before the Russians invaded, so no statement he makes should be taken seriously.

The plan, which was likely discussed in Riyadh, is a trap for Ukraine. No one can rightfully refuse a ceasefire, because the human cost of Putin’s war is catastrophic. But, as Lagodinsky argued, any just peace plan for Ukraine, would switch the second and third points in the roadmap. A peace agreement should be signed after a ceasefire, with clear security guarantees for Ukraine ruling out all further attacks by Putin. At that point, Zelensky could forgo his emergency powers and hold democratic elections.

Any resolution to the war that does result from the new US-Russian entente if the US really has no interest in pursuing a just peace will be another weapon for Putin to use against Ukraine. Trump has already begun to sound like a pro-Kremlin propagandist, having accused Ukraine of starting the war, of refusing to negotiate, of being unwilling to pay for its own defence or to hand over the country’s mineral wealth, not to mention calling Zelensky a dictator with an approval rating of just 4%, a baseless accusation that parrots the lies of Russian state media.

It is now up to Europe whether the man who has twice stood up to those wanting to destroy his country will simply be abandoned. The military umbrella that shielded Europe has now blown away from the beach. This is the most serious crisis in the history of the European Union, and it happens to coincide with critical elections in Germany on Sunday, where Eurosceptics, Putinverstehers and the far-right are hoping to achieve their best ever result.