Peace After Fight House?

medium118688882After the disastrous Feb 28 Oval Office meeting between Trump, Vance, and Zelenskyy, one’s tempted to despair. Putin will continue to attack Ukraine, US support for Ukraine is in doubt, and rift between US and Europe-Ukraine is widening. Kremlin is gleeful that aggression can continue.Such despair, however, is unwarranted at the moment. Issues affecting Ukraine and Europe remain as before the meeting. US, Europe and Ukraine still have a common interest in addressing them. They need to end Russia’s war on acceptable terms, guarantee a secure, sovereign and independent Ukraine, and deter Putin from launching a new war in Europe. Failure to do so risks Putin launching a war that engulfs EU countries such as Finland, Estonia and Lithuania as he seeks to rebuild the Russian Empire — a war that this time would involve all of Europe and US.The formula Trump had been developing — a ceasefire, payment for US military support from Ukraine’s natural resources, and European security guarantees for Ukraine (with some US backup) — can still provide a viable path forward. After emotions cool a bit, we may still end up following this formula.To facilitate a return to track, UK’s Starmer hosted Zelenskyy and several European leaders on March 2 in London. Following this meeting, UK and France will now take the lead with Ukraine to craft a concept for a ceasefire and future security arrangements that will be presented to US. Such a proposal has the potential to realign US, Europe and Ukraine interests.Such a step is critical, because after the Oval Office meet, Trump said he doesn’t believe Zelenskyy wants peace, or that he would accept a ceasefire. A concrete plan that commits Ukraine to a ceasefire and long-term peace — but in a way that also shines the spotlight on Putin’s ongoing aggression — should assuage this concern.Moreover, Macron and Starmer are enlisting other European countries in a “coalition of the willing” aimed at deterring future Russian attacks. This will also be a strong statement to Trump that Europe is taking the lead and fully “doing its share” to guarantee security in Europe.Yet even with plans for a ceasefire and deployed European deterrence forces, Ukraine will need financial resources to pay for building up impregnable defence capability. There are three potential sources.First are the minerals. Zelenskyy said on March 2 he’s prepared to sign the natural resources deal as soon as possible. If Trump is prepared to sign as well, this alone could provide sufficient financial resources to reimburse US for military assistance Ukraine’s already been provided, as well as that which can be provided in the future. This is a good deal for both countries and should be agreed to quickly, if both sides can overcome their emotional reactions to the Oval Office meeting.A second financial pathway is for US and/or EU to provide substantial loans to Ukraine. US already had “lend-lease” legislation on the books for most of 2022 and 2023, and Republican Congressman Joe Wilson (South Carolina) has proposed renewing these authorities in 2025. EU could do the same. Ukraine should be able to borrow the funds it needs to buy weapons, and to pay back the loans after the war, just as UK did with its own WWII lend-lease programme from US.A third — and indeed the most obvious pathway — is for Europe to seize already frozen Russian Central Bank reserves and use them to buy arms and ammunition for Ukraine. Such a move would not set a precedent for handling any other sovereign reserves: Russia’s actions over the past three years are so unique that a singular case can be made concerning Moscow’s aggression, which would by no means automatically apply to other countries.Even with sufficient financial resources, however, there is the intangible element of US ‘backup’. Deterrence of future Russian aggression based on European efforts alone will not work. Moscow believes Europe is weak and divided. It needs to see US is also engaged. There is no need for US “boots on the ground” in Ukraine, but US economic investment in Ukraine, as well as military enabling support, including intelligence, logistics and an ‘over-the-horizon’ presence, will be critical to ensuring Kremlin takes any peace deal seriously.Obtaining US ‘backup’ is now immensely more complicated given the recent blowup between Zelenskyy and Trump. From a purely tactical perspective, Trump would have wanted to hold back on committing US support precisely because he wants to keep the pressure on Europe and Ukraine to define what they’ll do first. But now there is an emotional element that must also be overcome.End of day, however, reality has a way of concentrating minds. US, Europe and Ukraine share a common interest in preventing a military defeat for Ukraine. They share an interest in seeing a sovereign, independent, and prosperous Ukraine become a full part of Europe — and thus a bulwark against future Russian aggression in Europe. While emotions have run high the past few days, ultimately, common interests of US, Europe and Ukraine will bring them together again around a formula that leads to a tense but sustainable peace.The writer is Distinguished Fellow at Center for European Policy Analysis, and former US ambassador to NATO (2008-2009). He is a columnist based in Washington DC, and Special Rep on Ukraine in Trump 1.0.