Europe is holding the line against Trump’s and Putin’s plans for Ukraine. But it won’t be able to for ever | Martin Kettle
In a recent analysis, Martin Kettle of The Guardian highlights the ongoing diplomatic stalemate surrounding the Ukraine conflict, particularly in light of the recent peace talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff. These negotiations, emblematic of the broader geopolitical tensions between Russia and the West, reflect a persistent pattern of failed resolutions during Donald Trump’s second term. The lack of significant progress in these discussions underscores a troubling reality: Europe and NATO currently lack the military and economic leverage necessary to compel either Russia or the United States to genuinely engage in a peace settlement that favors Ukraine. As the conflict escalates on the ground, the prospects for a meaningful resolution appear increasingly dim.
Kettle points out that the dynamics driving these negotiations have remained largely unchanged since Trump’s re-election campaign, during which he boasted of his ability to resolve the war swiftly. Since February, when Trump first spoke directly with Putin about Ukraine, the dialogue has been characterized by an unyielding adherence to the same strategies and interests that have historically favored Russian positioning. The recent impasse in talks may not signify a dead end but rather a catalyst for renewed efforts to broker a deal that ultimately aligns with Russian objectives. This suggests a troubling trend in international diplomacy, where the ambitions of powerful nations overshadow the plight of those caught in conflict, such as Ukraine.
As the situation evolves, it becomes increasingly clear that the geopolitical landscape is marked by an imbalance of power that complicates any potential for a balanced peace agreement. Kettle’s commentary serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in international negotiations, where the interests of major powers often dictate the terms of engagement, leaving smaller nations vulnerable and without a strong voice in the resolution of their own conflicts. The implications of this dynamic are profound, as they not only affect the immediate situation in Ukraine but also set a precedent for how future conflicts may be navigated in an increasingly multipolar world.
In the 21st-century imbalance of power, Europe and Nato have neither the arms nor the wealth to impel Russia or the US to take its peace settlement seriously
The failure of
this week’s peace talks
between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff fits into a now well-established pattern of standoffs on Ukraine during Trump’s second term. But the dynamic that produced these talks may be becoming more entrenched. The US and
Russian interests
driving the process have not changed, while the conflict on the ground is intensifying. The lack of progress this week means there will be another attempt to end the war soon, and perhaps another after that, until, one day, there is some kind of US-backed deal to halt the conflict on
terms broadly favouring Russia
.
The geopolitical algorithm driving this effort is too consistent to ignore. It has been repeated ever since Trump re-entered the White House in January. On the campaign trail, Trump had claimed he could
stop the war in a day
. That was never going to happen. But from 12 February onwards, when
Trump first talked directly to Putin
about Ukraine, the intention and approach have not altered. There is no reason to suppose they will do so now. Indeed, Tuesday’s impasse may spur them on again.
Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist
Continue reading…
