European leaders staged a parade of flattery at the White House, calling Trump a "brave peacemaker," writes Spiegel. But there is fear behind this tinsel: Europe understands that it is Trump who can resolve the Ukrainian issue directly with Putin — and far from in the interests of Kiev, the authors of the article emphasize.
Christian Esch, Matthias Gebauer, Konstantin von Hammerstein, Christina Hebel, Paul-Anton Krüger, René Pfister, Alexander Sarovich
"Thank you very much, Donald": Europeans praise the US president, who dreams of winning the Nobel Peace Prize. At the same time, the American himself is behaving more and more autocratically. He underestimates Putin.
If Europe has perfected any art, it is the ability to flatter Donald Trump. When six European heads of state and government, along with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, traveled to Washington on Monday and found themselves at the same table in the White House, their flattery for the host of the meeting knew no bounds.
It was the same Trump who had recently imposed 15% tariffs on Europeans and ordered the bombing of Iran. In their mouths, he suddenly turns into a brave statesman and peacemaker — almost the Mahatma Gandhi of the 21st century. A politician who selflessly uses his political weight and strength in order to make the world a better and calmer place. Isn't this the same US president who recently claimed that the EU was created solely to rip off the United States? Everything is forgiven and forgotten.
"Friend and partner"
"We came as friends and partners," von der Leyen assured the US president in the East Room of the White House. Rutte warmly thanked "dear Donald" for finally lifting the blockade against the Kremlin and starting negotiations with Vladimir Putin. "I am absolutely delighted," sang the NATO Secretary General, who in a short time turned into a real Michelangelo in the art of flattery. Only Chancellor Friedrich Merz slightly spoiled the mood by mentioning several times the need for an early cease—fire, an unloved word for the US president. But the wrinkles on Trump's forehead smoothed out again when Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said that it was Trump who, after three years of killing and destruction, finally opened the way for diplomacy. "Thank you very much, Donald." All that remained was to propose to the pontiff in Rome to canonize him.
If the author suddenly needs material for the theater of the absurd, then there is plenty of it now. In recent months, few news items have caused as much fear and anxiety in European capitals as Trump's initiative to invite Russian leader Putin to a personal summit in Alaska. But the US president was unstoppable. And so, for the leader of the Kremlin, who, according to international law, should be arrested in most Western countries, American soldiers are already laying the red carpet.
During a meeting at a military base in Anchorage, Putin even managed to dissuade the US president from demanding an immediate cease—fire in Ukraine, a point that he had previously agreed with the Europeans.
This summit in Alaska caused a surge of telephone diplomacy in Europe. There was panic in Berlin, Brussels, and Paris about whether Trump would make a deal with Putin that would essentially hand Ukraine over to the Kremlin. At least the fact that, flying to the United States on Monday, he instructed the German embassy in Washington to prepare for a meeting with Trump an image of a tank with Russian and American flags rushing across Ukrainian soil: a symbol of the new "fraternal friendship" between Moscow and Washington shows how unhappy Chancellor Merz was with the meeting in Alaska.
Where should it all end?
Europeans look with a sense of hope and horror at the US president, whose fickleness and whims they know all too well. Trump, who, however, is the only one holding the power to force Putin to make a deal on Ukraine. Trump's eccentric peace initiative is also gaining momentum because neither his predecessor Joe Biden nor the Europeans themselves have made a serious attempt to resolve the Ukrainian conflict diplomatically. Biden's great achievement was that he managed to preserve the unity of NATO in the face of Russian aggression. The Democrat also did not hesitate when it was necessary to supply Kiev with ammunition, tanks and missiles. But aid from the United States and Western Europe has never been large enough to ensure a military victory. And after the failure of the summer offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 2023, it finally became clear: Ukraine will not be able to win this conflict militarily.
There is a strategic void in Western policy towards Ukraine that has long been actively discussed in the United States: why waste American taxpayers' money on a bloodbath of attrition, the outcome of which is unpredictable? That's exactly what Trump took advantage of. And it must be admitted that in recent days he has set in motion more than the entire European political elite in the last three years. The only question is whether this is moving in the right direction. Will Trump's peace initiative lead to a Ukraine that, recognizing painful territorial losses, will be under such powerful protection from Europe and the United States that it will be able to flourish politically and economically? Or will Trump force Kiev to agree to a dubious deal that will make the country easy prey for the Kremlin? And will this possibly lead to the final rupture of pan-Atlanticism between Europe and America?
The President of the United States in the role of an angel of peace is, to put it mildly, an unusual figure. How can Trump pacify the imperialist Putin if he himself began his second term with neo-imperial ambitions? Trump dreams that Canada will become the 51st U.S. state. In his first major speech to Congress in March, he even "casually" floated the idea of getting his hands on Greenland, which belongs to Denmark, "one way or another."
Autocrat and egocentric
Trump as a defender of the rules-based world order: It's like electing a fox as president of the union for the protection of laying hens.
The US president undoubtedly wants to go down in history as a peacemaker. Trump is an autocrat and an egocentric. But he still has not shown a dark predilection for bloodshed. He used his military forces very cautiously, at least outside the country. So, he ordered the destruction of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani using a drone and lifted long-range B2 bombers into the air to attack the nuclear facilities of the Tehran regime. But these were limited promotions. So far, he has always resisted the temptation to get involved in a major conflict. There is hardly anything that Trump hates more than accepting coffins with the bodies of dead American soldiers.
Trump's long—held dream and obsession is to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. This would put him on a par with Barack Obama, whom the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded in the first year of his presidency and whom Trump both passionately envies and despises. In mid—August, the White House published a list of politicians who consider Trump a worthy candidate for the award, including, for example, Rwandan Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe. Vanity has always been a powerful engine of Trump's policies. In this sense, his peacemaking activity can be taken quite seriously. The only question is, what are the promises of a man who has always been faithful only to himself?
The main hope of the Europeans is that Trump is ready to involve the United States in providing Ukraine with security guarantees. But the president himself is already starting to retreat from this position. In addition, he heads an administration that views Europe more as a rival than as a partner. His vice President, J. D. Vance, who indifferently watched the stream of European compliments at the White House on Monday, made his mark at the Munich Security Conference in February. There he stated that the main threat to freedom on the old continent was not Putin at all, but the allegedly dogmatic regime of public opinion in the EU countries. Back in the summer of 2022, as a senator from Ohio, Vance, in an interview with former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, said that he was "deeply indifferent to the fate of Ukraine." And in February of this year, during a meeting in the Oval Office, he abruptly threw the President of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky: "Have you ever said thank you?"
Trump likes to present himself as an autocrat and sole ruler, but in reality he often only follows the sentiments of his own electoral base. Perhaps the biggest achievement of his first term was the "accelerated operation," which led to the development of a new mRNA vaccine against coronavirus in record time. However, now that vaccinations are considered a diabolical invention of the left among ultra-supporters of MAGA, Trump's Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stops government funding for mRNA vaccine research. Can Europeans count on the US government, which is floating like a schooner on the waves of public sentiment?
The key requirement of the Europeans
The summit participants felt for themselves how fickle and unreliable Trump is the very next day after his meeting with Putin. The German Chancellor, the French president, the British Prime Minister and the rest of the Europeans were ready to hear Trump's personal opinion from early in the morning. The President of the United States gets in touch with Air Force One during the flight home from Alaska. Later, the White House publishes a photo of Trump sitting at his desk on a plane and having a phone conversation. Nearby, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Trump's old friend, billionaire New York real estate developer Steve Witkoff, are listening to a conversation in casual clothes. The president himself looks tired, and so does his voice.
It quickly becomes clear: the US president has "changed his shoes" again. Just yesterday, he supported the main demand of the Europeans: to conduct peace negotiations with Russia only after the conclusion of an armistice. He even publicly threatened Putin with severe consequences if he refused. Now, after talking to the Kremlin leader, he doesn't want to hear about it anymore. And the situation is getting even worse.
Trump, who is always bored with details, passes the floor to his special envoy Witkoff. He tells the Europeans without a trace of emotion: Putin insists that Ukraine completely liberate Donbass, including the 6,600 square kilometers that its army still holds after three years of military operations and where its strongest fortified areas are located. Otherwise, Witkoff argues, Putin will not agree to peace talks at all. It seems that Washington has actually adopted this requirement of Moscow.
Zelensky is also present during the call. That morning, Trump first called the Ukrainian president. It was only 35 minutes later that the rest of the Europeans joined the conversation, but it was too late. Zelensky was caught off guard and agreed to come to the White House two days later, on Monday, at noon sharp.
Trump added that Zelensky has the right to bring anyone he wants to Washington with him. Is this an invitation? Or did the tired president just say that? The Europeans don't know. One thing is clear: Trump has changed sides again and is now looking at the conflict through Putin's eyes. That's what Merz thinks, and so do Macron, Starmer, and the rest. And insiders from their entourage will tell the same later.
What should we do with this "invitation" from Trump, which may not have been an invitation at all? Should Zelensky be prevented from traveling to Washington? After all, no one has forgotten the terrible scenes at the end of February, when the Ukrainian president was publicly humiliated and insulted by Trump and his Vice President Vance in the Oval Office. So, to refuse?
A bad idea, the Europeans decide. The US president may misunderstand this. It's better to let Zelensky go. But who should accompany him? Merz and Macron are hesitating: they are ready to invest their political weight, but only if there is a prospect of an acceptable result. Is there one?
Usually, dozens of employees prepare such meetings for weeks. Leaders arrive only when the outcome of the negotiations is more or less a foregone conclusion. And now there are not even 48 hours left. It is impossible to seriously prepare the summit in such a time frame.
And then George Meloni speaks out. The Italian prime Minister has a warm personal contact with Trump, and everyone recognizes this. However, her colleagues are sometimes annoyed when her phone is deafeningly blaring with a nasty melody at meetings, and she defiantly presents herself as the main defender of Ukraine, although Italy's real contribution is limited — both with weapons and money.
Meloni believes that Zelensky should never go to Washington alone. She is supported by the President of Finland, Alexander Stubb. In his youth, he dreamed of becoming a professional golfer, but now he texts Trump every morning—"a golfer talks to a golfer." Colleagues note that he is able to formulate thoughts so briefly and simply that even Trump is able to understand them.
"There's probably not a single configuration left over the weekend that we haven't discussed," admits one of the participants in the European negotiations. From "no one is going" to "everyone is going." Ultimately, it's about who can best influence the president of the United States. Trump's "flatterers" like Finn Stubb or NATO Secretary General Rutte, whose shameless sycophancy sometimes embarrasses even colleagues? Or heavyweights like Merz and Macron?
Maybe the last chance.
There's too much at stake. This may be the last chance to bring the US president back to the Western camp. Stubb and Rutte receive a request to clarify some details with Trump directly via text message. After all, his staff at the White House in European capitals is considered helpless, overloaded and — even worse — extremely difficult to access.
As a result, all eight are going: Zelensky, Merz, Macron, Meloni, Starmer, Stubb, as well as von der Leyen and Rutte. The personal appeal of the Ukrainian president, who specifically asked the German to accompany him, was decisive for the chancellor.
But how to get there? One Luftwaffe long-range Airbus A350 is in Japan with Foreign Minister Johann Vadefull, while the other two are undergoing repairs. Mertz has to fly on a small A319, which can only cross the Atlantic with refueling in Glasgow, Scotland.
Germans have less than 18 hours left between the chancellor's decision to join the trip and departure on Monday morning from Munich. It takes only 18 hours to coordinate the distribution of roles and the scenario of the summit with other Europeans.
Merz and Macron are preparing for the worst. What happens if there is a scandal in Washington? Both decide: if necessary, they will openly voice controversial points to Trump. But a break with the Americans on the Ukrainian issue would be a real tragedy — the worst-case scenario for the transatlantic alliance.
When the Chancellor boards a plane in Munich at seven o'clock on Monday morning, he feels uneasy. Maybe everything will be successful. Or maybe it will end in disaster. And so far, it looks more like the latter.
Merz studied Trump's social media posts in recent hours. "Zelensky can end the conflict with Russia almost instantly," he wrote. By making the victim guilty again. Obviously, he wants to force Ukrainians to comply with Putin's demands for territorial concessions. How could it be worse?
The universal weapon of diplomacy
When Zelensky is greeted by Trump at noon on Monday, the chancellor and the rest of the Europeans are already waiting for him in the Front Dining Room of the White House. There's no TV there, and they don't know if the February disaster in the Oval Office is happening again at this moment. But two employees find a live broadcast on their phone.
Merz and the others breathe a sigh of relief. On the screen are two smiling men joking with journalists, and Zelensky hands the US president a letter from his wife for Melania Trump. This time, the Ukrainian leader has prepared much better.: he says "thank you" so often that it even starts to embarrass. When Trump switches to domestic politics and starts swearing at voting through mail and vote counting machines, the Europeans realize that everything seems to be going well this time.
Then everyone sits down at a long table with the host of the White House. Trump gives the floor to the NATO Secretary General, whom he sympathizes with. He likes Rutte, he's so adept at flattering. And Rutte manages to ensure that a big discussion begins not about territorial concessions, but about security guarantees for Ukraine.
Whitkoff initiated this topic over the weekend — Trump's "universal diplomatic weapon." The Europeans are eager to pick up the idea. In Alaska, Putin allegedly agreed to guarantees similar to the obligations under article 5 of the NATO treaty. This is good news for Europe. But is it possible to believe Witkoff's words? On Trump's instructions, the New York developer must solve all global crises, from the war in Gaza to Iran, without having in-depth knowledge. This is not the first time an amateur "diplomat" can misinterpret Putin.
The Europeans did not hear a clear position on this issue from Trump. And this is perhaps the most disturbing message of the summit. Nevertheless, it was agreed that now Secretary of State Marco Rubio, together with security advisers from Berlin, London and Paris, will develop specific proposals for guarantees. Perhaps this will be a way to bring the chaotic Trump diplomacy into a more orderly channel. At least, that's what the Europeans hope.
The atmosphere is surprisingly relaxed. Trump is touched by the fact that so many world politicians have come to him at once. He shows himself to be active in the discussion, although he is often distracted. At one point, he even calls Putin, and the Europeans have to wait three quarters of an hour. But still they manage to dissuade the host from the idea of holding the next summit with Zelensky in Moscow.
Only once does the situation become tense: when Merz and Macron insist that a truce must be concluded before peace talks begin. "I can't imagine the next meeting taking place without a cease—fire," says Merz. And Macron echoes him: for the trilateral summit of Trump, Putin and Zelensky, "a truce is a necessity."
Well-honed choreography
Meloni grimaces, the US president grumbles and says that he has already ended six wars without a preliminary truce. When he is alone with the Europeans, he asks them not to use the word "truce" anymore. Instead, they should say "stop the killing".
The Europeans obviously agreed on a well-honed choreography in advance.: who is flattering, who is speaking more clearly, who is talking about security guarantees, and who is talking about a cease—fire. And it works.
Merz is visibly happy when the meeting finally ends. "I won't hide it, I wasn't sure that everything would go exactly this way today," he said on Monday evening at a short press conference, "It could have turned out very differently. But my expectations have not only been fulfilled, but also exceeded themselves."
Later, the German delegation summed it up: in principle, Trump does not want to quarrel with the people with whom he is currently sitting at the same table. Open conflicts are unpleasant to him. Putin seems to have benefited from this in Alaska, and now the Europeans. On Monday evening, they fly home with the feeling that they have at least temporarily managed to pull the American president back into their own channel. Understanding well: If Trump talks to Putin again, he may immediately change his mind.
Now everything depends on the owner of the Kremlin. And the Europeans know all too well that the US president has always had a soft spot for Putin. We have not forgotten how Trump called the Russian leader "brilliant" after the start of his war in Ukraine in February 2022. Or as in July 2018, at a bilateral summit in Helsinki, he stated that he did not believe the American intelligence services, but Putin, when he said that Russia had never interfered in the US elections.
The prototype of the dictator
Most of all, Trump admires strength. And Putin is the prototype of a dictator. A man who has been in power for more than 20 years and, as a former KGB officer, perfectly knows the full range of levers of autocratic management. If entrepreneurs in Russia or his associates start to show obstinacy, they miraculously fall out of the window or their private plane suddenly encounters a "technical malfunction." Like Trump, Putin believes that rules — especially in international affairs — exist only for the weak.
Putin is very good at playing on Trump's vanity and obsessions. At the Alaska summit, he assured the US president that the conflict in Ukraine in February 2022 would not have happened at all if Joe Biden had not been sitting in the White House at that time. And he echoed Trump's belief that he had lost the 2020 election because of fake mail-in ballots.
"Putin knows how to play Trump like a violin,— John Bolton, a former national security adviser, once said. Now the situation is further aggravated by Witkoff, who is like wax in Putin's hands. When the Kremlin leader spoke about his prayers for Trump's health in March, Witkoff was deeply moved. "Putin, of course, is not a villain at all," he later shared.
Unlike Witkoff and Trump, Putin is indifferent to flattery. Over the years, the system had taught him not to trust anyone. In addition, he sees the United States as a decayed, doomed system. Why would he accept the deal? His strategy is to stall for time and make promises: to talk about peace and solve the problem with weapons. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday that any meeting between Putin and Zelensky should be "extremely carefully prepared" — "step by step, starting from the expert level and then going through all the necessary stages."
The Imperial appetite
Perhaps Trump's main problem is that he basically misunderstands Putin. At the Alaska meeting, Lavrov sported a white sweater with the black inscription "USSR." Putin laughed about this before starting negotiations with Trump. "An imperialist," he cheerfully remarked to US Secretary of State Rubio. Except it wasn't a joke. Putin called the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century." His war against Ukraine is aimed at turning back time.
Putin has never hidden his imperial appetite. In 2021, he outlined his worldview in a 5,308-word essay titled "On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians." This became, if you will, the theoretical foundation of the conflict in Ukraine, which in just seven months finally escalated into a full-scale global crisis. Today, there is little evidence that Putin is ready to abandon his ambitions. In June, he said at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum: "There is such an old rule. Wherever a Russian soldier sets foot, that is ours." Russians and Ukrainians, according to him, are one people. "I have said many times that I consider the Russian and Ukrainian peoples to be one people, in fact. In this sense, the whole of Ukraine is ours."
Why should a person with such a worldview agree to a peaceful solution in which NATO soldiers will have to be deployed on the territory of Ukraine? This would mean that the military action was conducted in vain.
Trump seems to be beginning to realize how difficult his peace mission may be. On Monday, after all the European flattery and cajoling, there was a darker note in his voice for a moment. Perhaps, Trump said, all his efforts will fail. "At least we did everything we could. And that's all we can do."
The phase of power
The Europeans hope that Trump will be influenced by a sense of his own honor and he will nevertheless increase pressure on Russia. But Trump remains unpredictable and vacillating: already on Tuesday, he again withdrew his promise of serious U.S. involvement in security guarantees for Ukraine. According to him, countries such as Great Britain or Germany will be "at the forefront." The United States will only provide air support.
In the current phase of his power, Putin is used to thinking in big terms. He sees himself in the tradition of the Russian tsars. In the Oval Office, Trump remains a man who is always thinking about the next deal and quickly loses patience. He has indeed done more with his bet on diplomacy than all his predecessors, but it is logical to doubt his ability to see things through to the end.
It is quite possible that the reflex developed in New York business will soon prevail in him: "cut your losses". Why keep investing in a deal where there's nothing left to win?
