The greatest paradox of all was described by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk. On his way to the summit of European leaders in London on Sunday 2 March, convened to try to find a solution to the situation in Ukraine, he said: “500 million Europeans are asking 300 million Americans to protect them from 140 million Russians.” He then added: “If we are to count for anything, we should count on ourselves. Because Europe is a world power.” Tusk is the leader of a country threatened by Russia and at the forefront (it must be said) of efforts to help Ukraine and its people.
Along with other leaders, he recently visited London, where he met with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and called for unity and concrete proposals.
It seems that the US can no longer be relied on and Trump, after humiliating Zelensky in the White House ambush, is now flirting with Putin. Rutte, the NATO Secretary General, appears to be deferring to US positions. Some European politicians are siding with Russia (Orban in Hungary, Fico in Slovakia and a few other second-tier figures) and the EU is struggling to close ranks. So who can we rely on?
Tusk is reminding Europe of its historic mission. In London, it became clear that France and the United Kingdom are the current key players (the latter, despite Brexit, has rejoined the European family due to urgent circumstances). Macron and Starmer are the leaders of the only two countries with nuclear capabilities and powerful armies. This is not the case for Germany, Italy, Spain…
Paris and London clearly have more to say if a purely muscle-flexing response is expected. And they find support in Ursula von der Leyen. The Commission President repeated what she has been saying for some time: ‘We urgently need to rearm Europe. And to this end we will present a comprehensive rearmament plan on 6 March”, at this week’s European Council. On that occasion, the EU 27 are expected to discuss some of the options put forward by the EU Commission for financing the “defence industry” – i.e. the war industry (use of the Community budget, new common debt, funds from the European Investment Bank, etc.). One thing is certain: some countries will opt out. Is the time ripe for a new form of “enhanced cooperation”, as was the case with the Euro? Against this backdrop, Sunday’s meeting in the British capital revealed the different positions of European leaders: some are taking a stand against Washington and Moscow, others are trying to act as a bridge to the Trump administration, while some others are backtracking, considering Ukraine a lost cause.
There was certainly a conspicuous and regrettable absence of voices in London calling for a ‘just and lasting peace’ for Ukraine (including respect for its territorial integrity and reparations, at least for material damage) to be responsibly achieved through an immediate ceasefire and political and diplomatic talks between the attacked country and the Russian aggressor, mediated by the European Union and perhaps the UN. All other options would lead to a frightening escalation of the war.
Putin and his cohorts are to blame – there’s no point in beating about the bush, Moscow is responsible for the current disaster – there have already been too many dead and wounded on both sides. Ukraine is a country in mourning and in ruins; on the Russian side, too, many young lives have been sacrificed, always and in any case too many. Concentrating on defence and deterrence is one answer. But it’s not the real answer, which is peace.
Download in pdf / txt / rtf
