It has been over four years since the Russian-Ukrainian war broke out, and neither side is managing to decide the battle militarily. This has been an exceptionally grave conflict. The first of its kind on the European continent since the end of the Second World War, it has placed NATO countries in direct confrontation with Russia.
Since the beginning of his second term, US President Donald Trump has tried to mediate between the two sides. However, his ceasefire initiative hit a wall of rigid and unattainable demands from both parties, as well as their total unwillingness to make concessions. Then came the war on Iran in late February, casting its shadow heavily over the scene. President Trump turned his back on the negotiations and immersed himself in the escalating Iran crisis.
The picture appears bleak on several levels. The war has shifted from frontline battles to a war of attrition, and now to the bombardment of cities. Ukrainian and Russian drones have reached Moscow and Kyiv alike, inflicting damage on lives and property, perpetuating and deepening the conflict.
In this turbulent climate, the presidency of the European Union decided to make a move, announcing its pursuit of a negotiating channel with Moscow in the hope of breaking the deadlock that has tightened its grip on the situation. Moscow welcomed the idea.
According to British media reports, EU foreign ministers will be holding a meeting this week in Cyprus, with negotiations with Russia top of the agenda. The meeting was preceded by extensive discussions in European capitals over who should represent Brussels in Moscow, after Russia insisted that the European representative must be a figure who had not previously made hostile statements against Russia.
This condition removed more than one candidate from consideration, foremost among them Finland’s current and former presidents. Following the withdrawal of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the balance tipped in favor of selecting former European Central Bank president and former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi. Although Draghi has been among the strongest advocates of supporting Ukraine, Moscow has not, so far, explicitly objected to his nomination.
The important question, for analysts, is not “Who will go to Moscow?” but rather “What will they go with?” Negotiating with Russia was never among the European Union’s priorities, and it remains committed to supporting Ukraine militarily, politically, and financially, enabling it to regain its territories and preventing Moscow from expanding westward.
When President Trump redrew the map of global balances, his bias for the Russian position became apparent. Consequently, the Europeans now find themselves on the defensive, trying to persuade him not to abandon Ukraine and fearing that pressure might be exerted on Kyiv to accept unfair terms.
Europe is now coordinating with Washington and Kyiv, both of which have granted their approval for its negotiation efforts, though Washington is skeptical about its utility. Meanwhile, Kyiv has insisted, from the outset, that the European Union be a partner in any upcoming negotiations, fearing that bilateral talks with Washington could produce a settlement that fails to take its interests into account.
“Never say never.” Politics is driven by interests, and wars of all kinds ultimately end through some sort of negotiation. The interests of all parties demand ending this war that is far from being resolved militarily.
For that reason, anything is possible. Even if European states succeed in agreeing on a representative to travel to Moscow, this does not mean that they will be warmly received, nor that they will return to Brussels having succeeded where President Trump himself had failed.
