The war in Ukraine will reach four and a half years this August since its beginning, with the Russian invasion of February 2022. There are no signs of de-escalation or negotiation between Kyiv and Moscow. Both armies are increasingly targeting civilian objectives. At this point, it has become a war of attrition both at the front and in the rear: military, psychological, political, and economic attrition. Neither side has enough strength to defeat the enemy. One side and the other are seeking a position of advantage, not for victory, but to sit at the future negotiation table from a position of strength.
What was supposed to be Trump's express mediation has turned out from the start, and with grotesque moments like Putin's red carpet reception in Alaska, to be a real failure of pointless ups and downs. Given the character, both the shows and the failures were predictable. Now it seems the American president has more rapport with Zelenski than with Putin, but this could change again. Unpredictability is Trump's most characteristic trait.
Given that Europe is clearly, and logically, on Zelensky's side, only the United States can lead a viable mediation. But it must be reliable. Not as it has been so far. That is, it must be done in the traditional diplomatic way: without haste, with discretion, without threats or grandiloquent explicit declarations. And all this means it cannot be done in the Trump style. In reality, the president should refrain from visibly interfering and remain in the background. But considering his insatiable desire for the spotlight, it is not entirely realistic to conceive of this possibility.
There is only one hope: that Trump himself is fed up with his undeniable failures in Ukraine itself and in Iran and that, therefore, he is willing to leave room for his people on the condition that they achieve for him the triumph of European peace before the end of his term. Because for the November "midterms it is already too late.
Europe, of course, should also be involved in the diplomatic solution. Beyond rearming, seeking medium and long-term defensive autonomy outside the US, and supporting Zelensky without directly engaging in combat, the continental powers – and also the United Kingdom – are the most interested in ending a war on European soil that has highlighted the contradictions of the EU – and also of NATO – and has only served to strain the already complex and stagnant continental unity.
The end of the war in Ukraine must be a priority Western and European objective. The aspiration should be to steer it towards the fifth anniversary of the start of the conflict: six months remain. Collectively, we are in need of messages of hope and, above all, we need to focus efforts on other urgent global crises: the climate crisis, the migratory crisis, the democratic crisis, the educational crisis. A negotiated end that, without humiliating anyone, would mean an explicit brake on Russian expansionism and the survival of a sovereign and European Ukraine would be a good outcome. When will it be possible?
