The Guardian’s view on a workable peace framework in Ukraine: With Europe’s help, Zelensky could hold better cards | Editorial

TIt was a grim familiarity after Donald Trump’s latest peace proposals for Ukraine were revealed last week. As in August, when US President Vladimir Putin was invited to a summit in Alaska, Kiev and its European allies were excluded from discussions that ended up reiterating Kremlin talking points. Once again, Mr. Trump is out in the open Scold Volodymyr Zelensky could not be more grateful for his ongoing mediation efforts. As in the summer, Zelensky and stunned European leaders sought to remain polite while scrambling to limit the damage.

It appears that the rescue operation was relatively successful, after the meeting held on Sunday in Geneva between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and a Ukrainian delegation. Reportedly, the 28-point plan drawn up by Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkov, and Kremlin advisor, Kirill Dmitriev, was actually a rehash of Putin’s extreme demands. An agreement that would hand over new territory in the Donbas region to Russia, impose restrictions on Ukraine’s sovereignty, and impose radical limits on the size of its future army could never be acceptable to Kiev. Mr. Rubio, suggestion A more precise framework is now being developed, and seems to at least acknowledge this fundamental difficulty.

Like the usual stream of self-esteem to threaten With the rhetoric coming from the White House, it is impossible to know whether the end of the negotiations is truly at hand. But some principles are worth reaffirming as a starting point for meaningful conversations. Future European security, and basic principles of international law, require that Putin’s brutal aggression not be merely automatically sanctioned and rewarded, and that Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence be the priority. What is constantly wrong with Kiev is that the Trump administration likes to position itself as a neutral mediator between the unequal warring parties. In response, European countries must insist on a proactive role in future peace negotiations and try to exert some moral influence.

This is because Europe now bears the bulk of the costs of the continuing resistance in Ukraine. It can use its influence and collective weight to provide Mr. Zelensky with the negotiating cards that Mr. Trump previously held. He confirmed Which he lacks. If the EU belatedly manages to reach an agreement on a €140 billion “compensation loan” to Kiev, guaranteed by frozen Russian assets, Putin’s apparent judgment that he can survive Ukrainian resistance may be called into question. It will take a combination of weapons and financial support, and imposing more economic pressure on Russia, in order to change the calculations in the Kremlin and force Putin to the negotiating table for real.

This, rather than trying to force Zelensky into some form of surrender, is the path to achieving a just and sustainable peace. As President of Ukraine wearily Paraphrased At the weekend: “The essence of the whole diplomatic situation is that Russia, and only Russia, started this war, and Russia, and only Russia, refused to end it.”

There are already signs that the Kremlin is preparing to reject amendments to the Putin-friendly Witkov plan. However, whether out of naivete, a crude notion of realpolitik, or a greedy desire to open up Russian markets, Trump and his aides appear to be thinking again and again of pressing for peace on Moscow’s terms. Searching for a moral compass in the White House is an exercise in futility. European leaders need to start trying to formulate some facts on the ground.

• Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to email a response of up to 300 words for consideration for publication in our letters section, please click here.