The collapse of the "last chance" strategy

That portal reported the analyzes of experts who believed that the meeting in the Oval Office, which turned into a spectacular argument, was a lesson that Ukraine and Europe should learn &quot;to fend for themselves.&quot;Hours after Trump and his vice president, JD Vance, tried to humiliate Zelensky, the Ukrainian president took to Platform X to deliver a message of reconciliation that contrasted with the violent attacks he himself endured in the White House.&quot;I thank President Trump and Congress for their support,&quot; Zelensky wrote.&quot;Despite the difficult conversation, we remain strategic partners. However, we need to be honest and direct with each other in order to truly understand our common goals,&quot; added Zelensky.The conciliatory tone of the Ukrainian president contrasts with the sharpness of the dispute with Trump and the videos that went around the world. This caused an avalanche of reactions, especially from European leaders, who overwhelmingly expressed their support for Ukraine.In addition to the shameful scene, the incident represents a serious warning for European countries. With this behavior towards Zelensky, the US president and vice president confirmed that the US is abandoning its role as the protector of the continent and that it is getting closer to Russia.International politics lecturer and author of the book &quot;How the conflict of forces shapes Europe&quot; Pierre Laroche told Mediapart that the reaction of Trump and Vance &quot;is an indicator of their state of mind&quot;, because it is not known whether the attempt to humiliate Zelensky was intentional, or whether the situation got out of control.Laroche said that when there are disagreements during a diplomatic meeting, efforts are always made not to make it public.&quot;This time, Trump didn&#39;t want to hide those disagreements, but wanted to make them public. He even said he was glad the cameras were on and recorded that scene. I don&#39;t know if he wanted it in advance, but certainly the dramatization of the situation was completely successful,&quot; Laroche said, adding that Trump and Vance obviously wanted to make it clear that they have not changed their position on Ukraine.The expert added that if there was an intention to humiliate, then the question arises as to what goal should have been achieved.&quot;If there was an intention behind it, we have to ask ourselves why? The Americans do not need to weaken the Ukrainians or humiliate Zelensky to achieve their goals. What was the point of that dramatization,&quot; Laroche asked, Mediapart reported.According to him, some believe that this is Trump&#39;s way of blaming Zelensky for the failure of negotiations with the Russians, without admitting that it is the Russians who do not want peace.&quot;It&#39;s better to hit the weaker one and say - Look, it&#39;s the Ukrainians who don&#39;t want peace,&quot; Laroche said.In his opinion, the incident also reveals the failure of the last-chance strategy defended by some Europeans, such as French President Emmanuel Macron or British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who hoped to have a last chance for reconciliation.Many in Europe wanted to believe that it was still possible to influence Trump with a little politeness and psychological manipulation, such as flattery or offering a good deal.Trump shattered that illusion. He showed that he has a firm idea in mind and that his vice president and his entire administration share it. His position on Ukraine is not an ill-considered whim, he believes.US president has made it clear that there is no need to discuss security with him anymore, because he is not interested in that. The only thing he wants is for a peace agreement to be signed, and immediately, and that&#39;s why he gets annoyed when long-term solutions are mentioned, Laroche said, adding that Trump just wants to &quot;get rid of the Ukrainian issue and move on.&quot;According to him, the incident in the White House is not a historical turning point, but an additional episode in a series of events in recent weeks that can be called Russian-American rapprochement.At the beginning, it was thought that the US wanted direct negotiations with Russia, behind the backs of Europe and Ukraine. Then the two powers, USA and Russia, started to talk about cooperation, overcoming differences for positive cooperation in the future. In parallel, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was in Brussels to propose a complete redefinition of transatlantic ties.&quot;Some alliance can still be mentioned, but in reality it is a division of labor offered by the USA, in which Europe should ensure security, not only in Europe, but also on the American continent and in the Pacific. It is not a question of breaking cooperation in itself, because they still say that they are friends of the Europeans, with whom they have common interests,&quot; said Laroche.The expert adds that this is a clear rejection of the central responsibility of the Americans in ensuring European security. Trump himself told British Prime Minister Keir Starmer that British soldiers are &quot;amazing soldiers who can take care of themselves.&quot;It seems like a form of flattery, but basically the British were worried.&quot;We should now keep in mind that the Americans start from the principle that Europeans are capable of managing on their own,&quot; said Laroche, assessing that in some way this will help Europe to move forward, to strengthen itself, but Europe first &quot;needs to get rid of illusions about Trump and accept reality.&quot;It is clear that the Europeans did not create the problem, but the Americans want to redefine their obligations in Europe.&quot;Some (in Europe) are affected by a kind of abandonment syndrome that prevents them from imagining support for Ukraine and European security, without the US remaining the conductor that guarantees world peace, ready to intervene when things go wrong. Trump openly said that he does not have the same goals as the Europeans regarding Ukraine,&quot; the expert said.Until now, there has always been an excuse to justify not making too bold decisions. Those excuses were that we should wait, that maybe it was a misunderstanding and that there is a possibility to continue as before.And such a vision of relations with the US has done much to stifle calls for strategic autonomy. It was thought that it would upset the Americans and therefore create more problems, and for some the expression of strategic autonomy was simply forbidden, according to the French expert.Europe can no longer say to itself - &quot;We are not going to do anything because the current situation is fragile, and even such a fragile situation should not be further disturbed&quot;. The situation is currently already like that on the field and if nothing is done, nothing will be solved, Laroche concluded, as reported by Mediapart.

The collapse of the "last chance" strategy

0 Komentari