Nothing good expected from Alaska summit

Nothing good can be expected from the August summit in Alaska between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin for Ukraine, Europe, or a stop to the invasion of Gaza. 

This first meeting (in this second US term) between the two presidents of the US and Russia follows months of phone calls, declarations, and decisions that have only gone in one direction: Washington does not intend to disturb Moscow in its war of invasion, and on the contrary, as far as possible weakens the Ukrainian possibility of defending itself, by cutting back aid, charging dearly for the weapons it agrees to send (which, by the way, according to recent reports also tend to be old and somewhat out of date). 

Not a gesture has ever come from Trump that would suggest he wants to stop Putin. He has never referred to the occupied territories as a part of Ukraine, he has never decided on sanctions, and, in fact, he has done everything he could to put President Volodymyr Zelensky on the spot. Sometimes he has threatened to impose sanctions, warning Putin that he is exaggerating. However, no concrete steps have ever been taken to initiate a peace process, which includes the minimum condition that the Europeans also insist on: that Zelensky participate in the peace talks.

 On the other hand, people close to Putin explain to newspapers halfway around the world that Ukraine is not the only topic on the table of the two leaders. There will also be trade (no tariffs have been imposed on Russia by Trump), nuclear security, energy supply, and relations with China. There’s much more on the table, which Putin wants to set up as a meeting between two powers that decide, on their own, the fate of the world. Ukraine is probably not even among the issues the two intend to prioritize.

Then there is a Putin who is a great negotiator, who wants to disarm Ukraine, who has an idea and sticks to it, who is surrounded by diplomats of great solidity and experience. On the other side of the table, there is a temperamental US president who constantly changes his mind and tends to be very close to Moscow. He does not want to disturb Russia and shares particular interests with it, such as weakening the European Union.

A Union that, concerning the search for peace in Ukraine, reiterates obvious concepts (but not useless!), which are the least required for a negotiation: that Kyiv participate at the negotiating table concerning its future and that the Russian annexation of large parts of Ukrainian territory is illegal. Unquestionable points in a framework of “normal” international relations, which are no longer so when the only element put on the table is the arrogance of force, whether military or commercial.

A Union that is not solid and united in its positions, whether Ukraine or trade (meaning tariffs). It won’t be easy, under these conditions, to even set foot in the room in Alaska, beyond insisting with Trump that Ukraine is not only a country that has the right to defend itself, but that it is also a territory that marks a defensive line for all of Western Europe. The risk is that we will be increasingly at the mercy of two powers, which are not friends of the EU, but which are perhaps friendlier to each other than we see from the outside.