Ukraine and the Russian Federation agree that it is time to stop as the Trump cyclone has finally hit the war. With the telephone conversations with Putin and Zelensky this week, the newly elected US president has practically started those "peace" talks that he had evoked during his victorious election campaign. In fact, he had promised to end that bloody war in one dayIn reality, we will have to wait weeks if not months to reach an agreement.
But under what conditions? Who won?
Putin could claim to have won if he achieved all or most of the objectives he had declared from the beginning: the fall of the Zelensky government, complete neutrality of Ukraine, annexation of Ukrainian territories, corresponding to four regions north of Crimea, to the Federation to secure the peninsula, end of economic sanctions. For Ukraine, it would instead be a matter of regaining all the territories occupied since 2014 by Moscow, being free to join the European Union and obtaining reassurances about its security by joining NATO.
Let's just say that It is unlikely that the two contenders will be able to achieve all of their declared objectives.
Both have cards to play but many of those in the hands of the Ukrainians depend on its allies. Furthermore, Kyiv is, at this stage of the conflict, on the defensive and continues to be attacked throughout its territory.
The Russians also have weaknesses, even though they started negotiations from a position of advantage deriving from the current progress of military operations that see them with the initiative in hand: they have not entirely conquered the four southern Ukrainian regions, they are losing hundreds of combat vehicles and up to a thousand soldiers every day, they are unable to stop attacks on their homeland by Ukrainian drones and missiles, suffering the destruction of many refineries and fuel depots, they suffer from an economy that presents very worrying indicators (official data, which could be even worse) such as inflation that has been constantly traveling at 10% for months and interest rates above 20%, just to name a few.
We do not know what the negotiations will produce. Much will depend on the attitude of the United States, which has two important cards in its hands with which to exert very heavy pressure on both.
With regard to Ukraine, it could end military support and prevent at least temporarily, as already stated by several US representatives, its membership in NATO. On the contrary, it could weigh on Russia, a possible continuation of aid to Kyiv (even if not free, receiving in return its rare earths) or the tightening of economic sanctions.
Will it be a real peace?
Everyone is asking for an agreement that will lead to a lasting peace, but this would mean accepting very heavy compromises that neither Ukraine nor the Russian oligarchs would willingly accept. Therefore, it is more likely that we will arrive at a armistice, leaving to future times the agreements regarding the territories conquered by the Russian Federation (which were, and under international law remain, Ukrainian). It cannot even be ruled out that the fighting will continue.
And Europe?
The European Union, essentially because of its structure of the Governance the current system, which also allows smaller countries to veto, is going through a period of intrinsic weakness.
To overcome this impasse and to balance the new assertive US policy, the governments of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Poland and the United Kingdom, in recent days have signed, together with the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security of the European Union, a declaration (Weimar Statement) with which they say they are ready to strengthen their support for Ukraine, committing themselves to its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Russia's war of aggression.
The goal, according to these countries, is to achieve a just, complete and lasting peace that guarantees Ukraine's interests and theirs. They also demand that Europe participate in any negotiations and that Ukraine be provided with strong security guarantees, a condition they consider necessary for transatlantic security itself.
This is a strong statement, in a certain sense unexpected, which attempts to bring Europe back among the protagonists of the ongoing games.
Moving from words to deeds will be the real challenge for Europe.
Zelensky had asked his allies for 200 soldiers to provide Ukraine with the necessary reassurances in the event of a freeze in the conflict. The US has declared that it would not deploy troops in Ukraine and that Kyiv's accession to NATO is not currently conceivable. At this point, someone else must take on the burden and it can only be Europe, possibly the European Union. But if an agreement between its member countries cannot be reached, an initiative could be launched by a coalition of the willing such as the one in the format Weimar Plus.
To tell the truth, 200 thousand soldiers seems an exaggerated figure as well as unsustainable over time. There is already the Ukrainian army, in difficulty but not defeated, which in the event of a cessation of hostilities could be reduced by even half of its forces, bringing them to 150 thousand soldiers.
The addition of another 40-50 thousand soldiers by the allies could be sufficient to ensure the necessary deterrence. This would involve permanently deploying two or three divisions with three brigades under them, plus combat and logistical support. If necessary, these forces should be doubled by possibly deploying one or two army corps.
Are there any? Italy has an army corps command (NRDC-IT), three divisions and about ten brigades, with a total of 60-70 thousand soldiers in the operational area. While it is understood that the current NATO and UN commitments will have to continue to be met (in particular with the NRDC-IT command, a division and at least three brigades), a sufficient number of commands would still be available to meet, together with the other allies, the new need in Ukraine. Some problems could arise in Italy from the availability of soldiers, given the current commitments also on the national territory with "Safe Roads". Hence the request of the Chief of Staff to increase the number of Army personnel by a few thousand units in addition to the need to start the establishment of a operational reserve.
It is time for Europe (or part of it) to make its voice heard at international tables together with Great Britain in a historical period that sees global and regional actors increasingly assertive and eager to follow an expansionist agenda seasoned with strong selfishness. European inaction could lead our continent to irrelevance and decline. We should avoid this by courageously facing burdens and risks.
Photo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine / author / X
