Europeans avoided the worst in Washington, as Chancellor Mertz observed on Tuesday. The climate was good, as almost all the participants were tired of pointing out, but there are still many ambiguities in the “agreed” meeting at the Trump-Zelenzky-Europeans meeting. Let’s look briefly the most important points one can keep.

Awaiting the Putin Reply

Donald Trump undertook to organize a direct meeting of Presidents of Russia and Ukraine within a two -week direct meeting before going on a trilateral with the participation of the US president himself. It remains to be seen when and how ready Putin is for that. So far there is no official positioning by Moscow. Europeans seem to believe in his willingness, as Mertz stressed.

The ceasefire of the fire

Europeans, and especially Mertz, insist that it will be bad to start talks at the time, which will continue to fall on the front. Trump said he “ended six wars” (which is not exactly true) without hearing the word truce, reaching a final peace deal. This point is crucial to Europeans because so far they have insisted that there is no possibility of dialogue with Putin as long as he does not stop war operations. In essence, Trump asks them to retreat from a key position.

The participation of Europeans

Emmanuel Macron was the one who insisted on converting a subsequent trilateral into a quadruple, saying that this war concerns not only Ukraine, but the whole of Europe. At some point in his face, the discontent that Europe in many phases of the Washington-Moschas approach was treated as an observer in many stages of Europe, seemed “painted”. The European participation formula is being sought and will be discussed in Brussels today. Security guarantees.

On the issue of security guarantees after peace, there has been progress in the (also unclear) “commitment” Trump to US participation. Putin and Trump have agreed that it seems that such a force should not be under the flag of NATO. Europeans will be called upon to participate by sending forces to Ukraine. Germany now seems ready to do it as Merz announced “in consultation” with the allies and this is definitely a historical development. However, this issue will be extremely complicated, as everyone admits.

100 billion for weapons in Ukraine

The issue of the defensive “shielding” of Ukraine is intertwined with security guarantees. Here, an additional 100 billion package, which will be funded by Europeans and will obviously concern (or only?) US Weapons. And this issue is in clarification. However, Trump’s phrase did not go unnoticed during Zelenski’s reception: “We do not give weapons, we sell weapons.”

Soil concessions

There was much talk about the issue of territorial concessions, on the occasion of the map shown by the US president in his Ukrainian counterpart with the situation on the front. Everything shows that Ukraine will be forced to proceed with territorial concessions, as Macron has implied. Mertz, however, stressed that this is something that cannot be imposed from the outside and the Ukrainians should decide on their own. The question is here until Zelenski can reach and if Putin insists on demands that in the West they consider unacceptable.

And a matter of ‘aesthetics’ policy

What was not unnoticed by US media was the constant thanks of Europeans to Trump, to the extent that it can also be annoying. It was clear that the attempt not to cause him, if not to devour him. Also at times with funny and personal “flattering” comments have shown that they are not worthy of the seriousness of the issue, “a horrible war with hundreds of thousands of dead”, as Trump often pointed out. These Europeans have shown united, but not necessarily “robust”.