Although a ceasefire to stop the killing in Ukraine appeared closer this week after Ukrainian President Zelensky sent President Trump a letter promising to cooperate with his peace efforts, European states are floating several unhelpful proposals that could hurt the peace process.
Zelensky was supposed to sign a deal at the White House last Friday, giving the U.S. access to his country’s rare earth mineral deposits. However, Zelensky’s insistence on first resolving other issues and his rude behavior during an Oval Office meeting with President Trump and Vice President Vance caused him to be booted from the White House and his relationship with Trump to break down.
This relationship breakdown led President Trump to say for the second time in a week that if Zelensky continued to resist his efforts to negotiate a ceasefire, he might walk away from the conflict. Tensions grew further when Zelensky said on March 3 that the end of the war with Russia was “very, very far away,” a comment that irritated Trump because it appeared to be a jab at his peace efforts. Also on March 3, President Trump paused U.S. military aid to Ukraine to pressure Zelensky to support his peace efforts.
Tensions between Zelensky and Trump appeared to improve by March 4 after the Ukrainian leader sent a conciliatory letter to Trump in which he agreed to work under President Trump’s leadership and “come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer.” Zelensky said he was prepared to agree to “a truce in the sky—ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy, and other civilian infrastructure—and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same.”
Zelensky also said Ukraine was prepared to sign a deal giving the US preferential access to Ukraine’s natural resources and minerals at “any time and in any convenient format.”
During his address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday, President Trump expressed his appreciation for Zelensky’s letter. U.S. and Ukrainian officials said the next day that discussions were underway on the date and location of a new round of formal U.S.-Ukraine negotiations.
Europe’s positions on stopping the fighting in Ukraine have been inconsistent and somewhat unhelpful. In meetings at the White House with President Trump last week, French President Macron and UK Prime Minister Stamer dropped their previous constant criticism of Trump’s Ukraine peace efforts and said they were prepared to support these efforts.
European leaders quickly embraced Zelensky after his disastrous White House visit at a meeting with the Ukrainian leader in London on March 2. French and UK leaders said after the meeting that they would form a “coalition of the willing” to bring peace to Ukraine and would prepare a peace plan for President Trump. There was some talk that European leaders thought the breakdown in U.S.-Ukraine relations threatened America’s relationship with Europe and that the U.S. could no longer be seen as a reliable ally.
The French/UK peace plan is expected to include a one-month truce and their previous proposal to send peacekeepers from the UK, France, and other European states to Ukraine. This is consistent with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s statement at the Munich Security Conference that the U.S. supported deploying European and non-European peacekeepers to monitor and verify a ceasefire.
However, in addition to deploying peacekeepers, Ukrainian and European leaders want to create “security assurances.” This would include a deterrence force that would respond militarily to any Russian violations of a ceasefire. According to members of two leading European think tanks, this force would be comprised of European troops, deployed to Ukraine, and sent without Russia’s consent.
Such a deterrence force would be inconsistent with the concept of peacekeeping, which is only deployed with the full consent of warring parties. It also seems inevitable that Russia will not agree to a ceasefire if such a force is to be deployed because Moscow will not agree to the deployment of NATO combat troops in Ukraine. Russia may also not agree to UK or French troops serving as peacekeepers.
Moreover, some Trump officials believe the U.S.-Ukraine rare earth metals agreement is a more realistic form of deterrence because it will lead to U.S. economic interests and personnel in Ukraine.
European states are preparing their peace plan without any dialogue with Moscow. European states continue to refuse to talk to Russian President Putin and are suspicious of the Trump administration’s diplomacy with Russia. They also insist that they have “seats at the table” during any negotiations with Russia or Ukraine. According to a member of a leading European think tank, European leaders are especially determined to be present at any U.S.-Ukraine-Russia peace talks to ensure there is a reasonable agreement and to put Ukraine in a better bargaining position to reject a bad deal.
However, it appears that the real reason why European leaders want to be at the negotiating table is because they do not trust President Trump and his peace efforts, even though they did nothing to stop the war before Trump won the 2024 election.
According to Trump administration officials, the state of play for a ceasefire in the Ukraine War is promising. There are ongoing behind-the-scenes talks with Ukraine and Russia. Formal U.S.-Ukraine talks will be held soon. U.S. suspensions of military aid and intelligence to Ukraine are reportedly temporary and will be lifted if Zelensky cooperates with U.S. peace efforts.
European states can best bring peace to Ukraine by fully supporting President Trump’s peace efforts and not by pursuing parallel plans that could undermine them. The UK/French peace plan, which may soon be presented to President Trump, might be somewhat helpful, but the real effort to stop the fighting is being conducted by Trump’s envoys. The European plan could end up being a distraction, especially because it is being drafted by Europe and Ukraine with no consultations with Russia. The UK and France should drop the deterrence force idea from their plan and instead focus on how to form and sustain a peacekeeping mission to Ukraine.
Keeping Zelensky on board with Trump’s peace efforts will continue to be a challenge. Any ceasefire agreement will require Ukraine to make some painful compromises. Europe can help by working with the U.S. to prepare the fairest deal possible and helping convince Zelensky to agree to it. Europe also must encourage the Ukrainian leader to fully cooperate with U.S. peace efforts and not tolerate or celebrate any further defiance by him.
***
Fred Fleitz previously served as National Security Council chief of staff, CIA analyst, and a House Intelligence Committee staff member.
All of this is predicated on the idea that Europeans truly want a peaceful conclusion to the Ukraine-Russia conflict or for the US to spearhead it. And at this point, I’m not sure it can be assumed that they do.
One, throughout this whole war, the EU nations have been more than willing to hide behind the US and saber-rattle at Russian while helping to fund the Russian effort through the purchase of Russian fuel products --they may stand with Ukraine but they buy from Russia. Two, they may fear Russia’s aggressive pursuit of reconstituting its former borders, not entirely without reason, but I have to question how sincere that concern truly is since they have routinely shorted their NATO obligations and done little to improve their internal military strength. Three, Europe has for decades been willing to accept US money --in one form or another-- while sneering at the US “cowboy diplomacy”. As VP Vance’s address in Munich demonstrated, this is not the inept, globalist administration of Biden; they are now dealing with the Trump administration & he is not particularly impressed by the way Europeans have utilized the peace we have guaranteed for them. Four, I have absolute faith in the ability of France to maintain their historical records of screwing up any treaty they are involved in.
I have no concrete evidence to layout here but I am not convinced that the Europeans are honest brokers in this negotiation and I would not be surprised if they wind Zelenskyy up in such a fashion so as to undermine the peace process and attempt to embarrass the Trump. It won’t be successful but I think they will try.
RK, what I think we’re seeing is the death rattle of the NWO folks. This attempt by European leaders to insert themselves into the peace process appears more an act of desperation than an act of strong will. Given the strong move to the right by the citizens of various European countries and the ascension of right leaning political parties within the countries themselves, I think it is more a move by the NWO’ers to prove they still have relevance.
In this, I think they will fail.
That may be part be of it – desperation, I mean – but I think there is a fair amount of malice in there as well. Von der Layen hinting that the proposed loans within the EU for military buildup are necessary because the US is an uncertain ally reeks of delusion and disdain. Europe, in its current incarnation, is dying and the only thing that strategy is likely to do is hasten its demise.
Task and I had a number of exchanges over the von der Layen military build-up plan. I think it totally inept and a stupid way to go about it. With NATO already in existence, I feel it a scattershot attempt that would be like Congress offering loans to the fifty states to build individual armies in order to do away with the already standing military branches.
Nothing in her loan offer appeared to contain language of coordination between the 27 EU member countries of who should be building what, when and how.
Europe, post WWII, is not philosophically the same as it was prior. They are feminized, selfish, narcissistic socialists critical of the US. They are full of rapists and the foreign criminals who do the raping. They are taught, like Americans are taught, to loathe themselves.
What made them this way? Is it multiple generations of living in peace that created their zombie nations. No… it is the last 80 years of living without war that did it.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And weak men create hard times.”
Europe is not so much about ending the war as it is about being forced to finance it. We heard no such clamor prior to Zelenskyy’s capitulation. And there is something else.
After the Treaty of Versailles’ failure to check German military growth America figured out that the Marshall Plan would eliminated conditions Post WWII that existed post WWI. That solution worked. Trump has taken the idea a step further. America was never compensated for the Marshall Plan. Now we ask for mineral rights. Is Europe OK with that or do they want to cut the US out of such a deal? The answer should be obvious.
Europe hates the Orange Man as much as any Democratic politician does. They have no intention of allowing Donald Trump to create peace and restore world order while simultaneously allowing America and the Ukraine to get wealthy simultaneously. In the process of achieving their intentions they will create a clusterf**k like nothing imaginable.