Estimated time of reading: ~ 6 minutes

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been a focal point of international diplomacy, with various attempts to broker peace. Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump has been actively involved in negotiations, aiming to end the war. However, these efforts have raised concerns among European allies, who feel excluded from the talks. The current state of peace negotiations, the role of the United States, and the omission of the European Union from these discussions remain key points of contention.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, leading to a prolonged and devastating conflict. The international community has been divided in its response, with some countries providing military aid to Ukraine while others have sought diplomatic solutions. The conflict has resulted in significant human suffering, economic disruption, and geopolitical tensions.

In recent weeks, President Trump has announced a new round of peace talks between U.S. and Russian diplomats, with meetings held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. These talks have been criticized for excluding Ukrainian officials and European allies, raising concerns about the legitimacy and fairness of the negotiations. The U.S. envoy for Ukraine, General Keith Kellogg, has confirmed that Europe will not be included in these discussions, further exacerbating tensions.

European leaders have expressed dismay over being sidelined in the peace talks. The EU’s foreign policy chief has emphasized that any agreement without Ukraine or the EU would be unsuccessful, highlighting the need for a central role for Europe in negotiations. European countries have reaffirmed their support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, stressing that Ukraine must be part of any negotiations.

In response to their exclusion, EU leaders are considering appointing a special envoy for Ukraine peace talks. This move aims to ensure that European interests are represented and to define a unified stance on defense and security guarantees for Ukraine. The EU plans to discuss these matters at a summit on March 6, where they will also outline their broader vision for Ukraine’s future security and potential post-war settlement.

President Trump has been optimistic about the progress of the talks, stating that a peace deal could happen “fairly soon” or not at all. He has expressed confidence in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s willingness to keep his word, despite historical tensions and controversies surrounding their relationship. Trump’s eagerness to broker a peace deal has led some European leaders to worry that he might concede too much to Russia, potentially undermining Ukraine’s interests.

Russian President Putin has indicated that Europe’s involvement in peace talks will be necessary eventually but emphasized the need to build trust with Washington first. This stance suggests that Russia is open to broader international participation but prefers to focus on bilateral relations with the U.S. for now.

The exclusion of the EU from peace talks raises questions about the legitimacy and effectiveness of these negotiations. Without European participation, any agreement may lack the support and endorsement of key stakeholders in the region. This could lead to a lack of trust in the process and undermine the chances of a lasting peace. The EU’s exclusion has prompted a unified response from European leaders, who are now seeking to assert their role in the negotiations. The proposal to appoint a special envoy for Ukraine peace talks reflects a desire to ensure that European interests are represented and that any agreement respects Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. For Ukraine, the absence of direct involvement in the talks is a significant concern. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has made it clear that his country will not accept any agreement reached without its participation. This stance underscores the importance of including Ukraine in any negotiations to ensure that its interests are protected. Several scenarios have been proposed for securing peace in Ukraine, each with its own set of challenges and implications. One scenario involves Ukraine and European countries playing a central role in negotiations. It is considered crucial for achieving a lasting peace, as it ensures that all relevant parties are involved and committed to the agreement. Another possibility is the current path, led by the U.S. and Russia, which risks alienating European allies and Ukraine. While it may lead to short-term gains, it could result in a fragile peace that lacks broad international support. A more balanced approach suggests that the U.S. focuses on military aid while European allies address economic needs. This strategy aims to maintain U.S. involvement while ensuring that European interests are also considered.

The current peace talks in Ukraine are marked by the exclusion of the European Union, which has significant implications for the legitimacy and effectiveness of these negotiations. The U.S. has taken a leading role, but its approach has raised concerns among European allies and Ukraine. For a lasting peace to be achieved, it is essential that all relevant parties, including Ukraine and the EU, are involved in the negotiations. The EU’s efforts to assert its role through the appointment of a special envoy reflect a broader recognition of the need for inclusive and comprehensive peace talks.

As the situation continues to evolve, it remains crucial for international leaders to prioritize a collaborative approach that respects the sovereignty and interests of Ukraine. The path forward will require careful diplomacy and a commitment to ensuring that any peace agreement is robust, fair, and supported by all key stakeholders in the region.

Written by: Nenad Stekić