White House love-in moved war in right direction – but potential dealbreaker looms

The Age

12 hours ago

Washington: If the purpose of the European mission to the White House was to prevent Donald Trump tilting in favour of Russia's Vladimir Putin after their Alaskan adventure, then it may broadly be considered a success, even if the tangible outcomes are difficult to discern.
The visitors were warmly welcomed, including Volodymyr Zelensky, whose last trip to the Oval Office ended catastrophically. This time, it ended with laughter and a strong handshake. The Ukrainian president called it the best of his meetings with Trump so far.
Likewise, the Europeans showered Trump with gratitude for hosting them and expending his time and energy on trying to solve the war. They praised him for being the only person who could co-ordinate with Putin and get him to the negotiating table.
That is now what Trump intends to do. He has signalled a meeting between Putin and Zelensky, followed by three-way talks that he would join, which, according to Zelensky, is the sequencing Russia offered. Zelensky says he's happy to do so. No date or location is set.
On the central question of how to protect Ukraine from a future invasion if a deal is reached, the Europeans appeared to extract from Trump a vague commitment to US involvement – though you wouldn't want to place any bets on it. In a social media post, he was clear: Europe would lead any peacekeeping force. At best, the US would play a 'co-ordinating' role, whatever that means.
The Financial Times reported the Ukrainians were essentially proposing to buy US security guarantees by promising to purchase $US100 billion ($154 billion) of American weaponry, financed by Europe, likely to include the Patriot air defence systems Zelensky wants and needs. And Trump noted: 'We're not giving [away] anything. We're selling weapons.'
There was chatter about 'NATO-like' security guarantees that would bind signatories to come to Ukraine's aid if Putin – or someone else – tried it on again. This is in lieu of letting Kyiv into NATO, which remains very much off the table.
The situation has echoes of the memorandum signed in Budapest in 1994, when Ukraine agreed to relinquish its Soviet-era nuclear arsenal in return for security 'assurances' from Russia, the US and the United Kingdom. However, Ukraine did not get what it initially sought – a guarantee of military intervention if its territorial sovereignty was breached. Rather, the signatories agreed to respect Ukraine's borders and refrain from using military or economic force against it – a commitment Russia violated years later.