The leading foreign policy official for the European Union had a blunt assessment on the preparation of Trump’s obvious willingness to give Russia leader Vladimir V. Putin, many of what he wants in Ukraine, and even before the negotiations begin. to end the three -year war.
“It is a calm,” said employee Kaja Kallas at the Munich Security Conference. “He has never worked.”
Mrs Kallas, a former prime minister of Estonia, was almost the only European diplomat to give the word “direction”, with all her historical appeal, though she was one of the few willing to do so.
It was an almost universal description of the disorganized and often publicly contradictory approach to Trump’s administration: What kind of peace agreement does President Trump have in mind? And will it be with Mr Putin above the leaders of both Ukrainians and Europeans, whom Mr Trump obviously expects to bring the burden of Ukraine’s future security?
After days of lectures and private meetings in Munich, many officials said they were more confusing than before they arrived. Statements by US Defense Minister Pete Hegseth, in his first attempt at international diplomacy, ran as opposed to statements by Vice President JD Vance, also in his first international business from his inauguration.
And European officials said they had tried, unsuccessfully, to export to Mr Trump’s national security team to ensure that Mr Putin did not simply use the ceasefire to rebuild his acceptable army and, in little years, come back take the rest of Ukraine.
They also said that they were surprised that Mr Trump, who enjoys his negotiating skills in the real estate business, was willing to give up so much leverage before entering the negotiations for the fate of 233,000 square miles from some of Europe’s most precious agricultural hectares. A focus on technological innovation.
Hundreds of conference participants entered a hotel room on Friday afternoon to hear Mr Vance, waiting to take these issues to a long -awaited address. However, for the surprise of the policy -makers and the defense officials and the information they had filled, he once reported Ukraine, only during the crossing, while teaching European leaders to suppress the speech of Maga -like political movements at their country.
It did not offer a road map for negotiations or even any strategic vision of what Europe should look like after the most devastating war in Epirus in 80 years. Nor does it promise that Europe or Kiev would be central to the negotiations on Ukraine’s border and its survival as an independent state.
Later on the day, at the end of a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky in Ukraine shortly before boarding the Air Force two to return to Washington, Mr Vance offered a little more, the most anxious targets for upcoming talks with Russia.
“We want the war to end, we want the murder to stop, but we want to achieve a durable, constant peace, not the kind of peace that will have Eastern Europe in a conflict just two years down,” he said.
The last phrase was critical because many European leaders said they were afraid that Mr Trump wanted a deal so badly – and maybe the Nobel Peace Prize he said he was worth – that he would agree on terms that would leave Ukraine in the cold and allow In Russia to rebuild its destructive forces and re -attack Ukraine – and perhaps later, Moldova, and even test NATO in the Baltic nations.
But Mr Vance rejected all the questions about whether Russia could maintain the land that had invaded illegally or how to reach an agreement if Mr Zelensky was not yet ready to meet with Mr. Putin, who argued that Ukraine is not even a real country.
“I want to keep the choice here for the negotiators,” Mr Vance said.
He said nothing about a timetable for the negotiations or if he had reviewed with Mr Zelensky, as expected, a Ukrainian plan for access to the United States in some of the country’s rare land. This was one of Mr Trump’s requests for continuous support.
Mr Vance may have said so little because Mr Hegseth, the Minister of Defense, appeared to have given so much, then, and then, on Friday, accused the media for his misinterpretation.
On Wednesday, Mr Hegseth said that the Ukrainians had to understand that they would lose much of their country in Russia as part of any settlement. He added that if an agreement was hit, no US military would participate in a peacekeeping force in the Ukrainian territory. It would be over the Europeans to police any ceasefire or formal truce-with a special, non-native power. This regime will ensure that if it attacks, the United States will not be drawn to a war to defend its allies in NATO.
When his comments were violated throughout Europe and reported by Mr Zelensky, he said he had given nothing and that only Mr Trump had the power to decide what he could and would not surrender. He never talked about what Russia might need to leave in a negotiation – if anything.
Last week, one NATO foreign minister said, their allies told them that all the options for Ukraine were on the table and that the White House was open to discussions. Now, the issues are less clear, especially after Mr Trump’s telephone conversation with Mr Putin earlier this week.
The problem, the minister said, is that the regular mechanism of foreign policies has been deliberately broken, with various officials attracting Mr Trump in different respects. The allies do not have a clear picture of how decisions are made, the minister said, a change from the last 20 years.
And if there is no machine, the allies cannot plan and have a strategy, said the minister, who insisted on anonymity because of the diplomatic practice and sensitivity of the issue.
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said Trump’s call with Mr Putin, breaking his isolation, was a surprise to the allies. “This is not the way others do foreign policy, but this is now the reality,” he told German public radio.
There is also a growing consensus that Europe should make a strong opposite to Mr Trump, especially for Ukraine support.
“Ukraine has a service and resists aggression,” said Radoslaw Sikorski, Poland’s Foreign Minister. “He has allies who will support it to come to what they can. Therefore, it must be included in any negotiation that concerns it.”
Ukraine has a low chance of surviving Russia’s attack without US support, Mr Zelensky said in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press with Kristen Welker”.
“In all difficult situations, you have a chance. But we will have a low chance – low chance of surviving without the support of the United States,” he said in an excerpt released on Friday. The full interview will be broadcast on Sunday.
Ministers of Foreign Affairs and officials from various European countries – including Britain, France and Germany – met in Paris on Wednesday night and issued a statement that further supports Ukraine.
“We look forward to discussing the road ahead with our American allies,” he said. “Ukraine and Europe must be part of any negotiations. Ukraine should be equipped with strong security guarantees.”
