lToday, followed by AST Week’s extraordinary summit meeting in Alaska Even more extraordinary international conferences in Washington. No participant knew they would be attending two days ago. Diplomacy has increasingly been conducted in temporary contact groups in recent decades – but seven countries (US, Ukraine, UK, Germany, Finland, Italy and France) and two international organizations (NATO and the EU) have never met in this way before.
Officials will prepare in the usual way, assemble briefing packages and write conversation points that are designed to please their bosses and hope that they will be able to make the most effective interventions.
They should take a deep breath and think differently. Precedents from the European Council and NATO Summits – even Donald Trump Bilateral – Misleading enough to be positively helpless. As a former colleague from Washington to Kiev, through London, Paris, Brussels, Rome, Berlin and Helsinki, I urge them to discard the traditional method.
The usual format of each leader making a statement (regardless) doesn’t cut it. There are three key groups in the conference – United States, Ukraine and Europe. There should be a spokesperson in Europe. Most European participants may be ready to accept this approach, as long as their leader is the chosen leader. But only two are indeed in the framework.
The meeting will be held entirely in English with the interpreter Volodymyr Zelenskyy. But there will be two people who speak English, Keir Starmer as the only Europeans. The other two have spoken English for so long that they count as nearly local speakers: Finnish President Alexander Stubb and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. Stubb represents the smallest participants, usually when compared to the larger beasts, while Rutte represents the military alliance in Europe. Others say it well in most meetings, but Trump’s quirkyness can make mistakes. The speeches of Emmanuel Macron, Ursula von der Leyen, Friedrich Merz and Giorgia Meloni are enough to illustrate any point they want to make, but not necessarily the best way to do it. Trump is prone to offense.
So Rutte or Starmer should speak Europe. The speakers need to make a point without notes, watch Trump, ready to be interrupted, but discipline is not enough to lose clues and resume their speech when the president calms down.
European information needs basics Alaska Summit. European public and experts declare Vladimir Putin the winner and are disdainful of Trump’s stupidity and apparent lack of success. Some politicians joined. The British may think their government is eager to see the meeting as the beginning of a promising initiative, but it is indeed the only wise diplomatic measure.
The most promising outcome of the Anchorage summit is Trump’s conclusion that targeting a ceasefire is not good enough. We need to be smart about reaching a comprehensive agreement. Europeans can show that they are willing to play a full role in implementing such a deal. Most importantly, the role will provide specific security assurances. Putin will most likely reject this.
But what if the comprehensive agreement also has something important to him? Putin’s two main territorial requirements are land bridges to Crimea and throughout Donbass. He has the first one but not the second one.
Ukraine hates giving up land Russia Never conquered. But the purpose here is peace, and peace always requires concessions. There is Of course, I was very interested in ending the fight. It wants to do this with honor and does not want to recover.
The precedent was the Winter War of 1939-40. At the beginning, Finland seemed to be completely surpassed by the Soviet Union. But, like the Ukrainians, they fought bravely. Like the Ukrainians, they performed better than any outsider would have expected. But in the end, they had more land than the Soviets occupied for peace – 11% of the land, including Karelia (in terms of inspiration for the most famous musical works of their national composers).
In 1940, Finland had reason to worry that the Soviet Union would come back more. A year later, the Soviet Union was the target of the largest land invasion in history, and Operation Barbarossa was rescued. In 2025, Ukraine needs something more direct. Member’s NATO It is the most obvious “thing”.
Zelenskyy won’t like either. He must consult his cabinet and parliament before acknowledging either. But he will be able to outline the naked bones of a deal to end the bloodiest clash in Europe since the end of World War II, an award worthy of winning.
Putin also likes it. Ukraine’s security was guaranteed by powers outside Moscow. But if Russia rejects an offer that everyone else can barely accept, Trump will see what Putin has done so far: the problem. He will have knowledge and reasons to improve the U.S. contribution to Ukrainian defense.
The meeting in Washington today is one of the strangest in modern diplomacy. But European leaders can turn strange people into opportunities.
-
Lord McDonald of Salford is the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for 2015-2020
Health & Wellness Contributor
A wellness enthusiast and certified nutrition advisor, Meera covers everything from healthy living tips to medical breakthroughs. Her articles aim to inform and inspire readers to live better every day.
