Trump’s ceasefire pivot will have caused a dismay in Kyiv

No matter in Alaska. It was always the most likely and, in the absence of the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, perhaps the most desirable result.

But the pivot of American president Donald Trump far from the need for an immediate cease-fire, which he said beforehand that he wanted, will have caused a deep consternation in kyiv and in Europe.

The position of Russia has long been that a cease-fire has only been able to present itself in the context of a full regulation holding the interests of Russia-and inevitably implies the capitulation of Ukraine.

This is the position that Trump, once again, seems to have approved.

“It has been determined by all means of ending the horrible war between Russia and Ukraine,” he wrote on Truth Social, “is to go directly to a peace agreement”.

Ceasefire, he noted: “Often, do not hold”.

This seems to fly to the main request from Ukraine, approved by all its European donors: that a unconditional cease-fire must come first.

Above all, he also bought the time of Vladimir Putin of Russia on the battlefield, where he is convinced that he wins.

“If Putin’s military objective was to avoid immediate constraints on Russian operations in Ukraine, he seems to have succeeded,” said Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute.

During their brief appearance of the press last night, Putin warned Ukraine and the Europeans not to “throw a key” in the work of unpertified progress that he and Trump had made.

But that, for kyiv and his allies, is precisely what Trump did, cancel the achievements of what they all hoped for a previous week of frantic diplomacy aimed at influencing the result in Alaska.

It is a reminder, as if we needed, of Trump’s trend to echo the views of the last person to have his ear.

For a short time this morning, European leaders will have retained their breath, waiting to see if their efforts had borne fruit or were put aside.

True to his word before the summit, Trump took the phone to Zelensky. The two men spoke for an hour, before being joined by European leaders.

Zelensky said the call was “long and substantial” and that he would go to Washington on Monday for his first visit since the disastrous meeting of the oval office in February.

Since then, the European allies of kyiv working assiduously to repair the damage and the Zelensky school in the best way to manage the capricious and volatile occupant of the White House.

“I am grateful for the invitation,” said Zelensky, adding “it is important that the strength of America has an impact on the situation”.

But in a later article, after Trump’s declaration on Truth Social, Zelensky adopted a more urgent tone.

“The killings should stop as soon as possible,” he said. “The fire must stop both on the battlefield and in the sky, as well as against our port infrastructure.”

Europe’s “Trump Whisperers” resumed this morning when they stopped last week.

They stressed the vital importance of involving Ukraine in conversations on its future but also a break, as they know that they must do regularly, to show the appreciation of Trump’s efforts.

“President Trump’s efforts brought us closer to ending the Russian illegal war in Ukraine,” British Prime Minister Sir Keir Keir Starmer said.

Starmer said he had welcomed what he called “the opening” of the United States, with Europe, to provide “robust security guarantees” for Ukraine in the event of agreement.

If and when the fighting eventually ends, the precise nature of these guarantees must be stated with much more details than that has so far been the case.

Despite the emerging role of Europe as the main military, economic and political funder of Ukraine, everyone knows that the future security of Ukraine cannot really be ensured without the substantial support of the United States.

In his own comments on the summit of Alaska, the chief of Italy, Giorgia Meloni, said that the guarantees for Ukraine could be “inspired by article 5 of NATO” – the principle of collective defense signed by all NATO members.

Several reports this morning suggested that the idea of guarantees outside NATO but equivalent to article 5 was discussed during the last call between Trump and European leaders.

But in the wake of Trump’s apparent appearance this morning, you can almost hear the sound of minds turning through European capitals.

In London, the government seems to put a courageous face.

“If you can do everything (a ceasefire and a peace agreement) at once or in quick succession, this is obviously a good thing,” said a senior street source.

“But we all want to see the fights stop”.

Trump moved away from the idea of an immediate ceasefire, undoubtedly informed by Putin’s highly controversial story about the way the cease-fire broke out in the past.

The quasi-sleep in Alaska already represented a victory for no cost for Putin. The return of an international pariah to the international scene (although scorching with unambiguous demonstrations of American soldiers could at the Elmendorf-Richardson air base) and some of the external signs of a state visit.

The threat of an increase in American sanctions against Moscow also fell, Trump saying that it can be two or three weeks before he even thinks about it.

All this raises a multitude of questions about what could salute Zelensky, both on Monday in Washington and when he finally finds himself in the room with Putin and Trump.

What advice does Trump have for the Ukrainian leader, asked Sean Hannity de Fox.

“Give an agreement,” came the blunt response. “Russia is very great power and this is not the case.”