Welcome back to Off the Record, coming to you from Brussels.
This week, a story made my jaw hit the floor.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has floated a three-way meeting with Donald Trump and China’s Xi Jinping to discuss a way out of the war in Ukraine, which he started. Trump seemed to confirm the pitch, without putting a date on it, suggesting it could be good for the world if it included denuclearisation.
If you’re not alarmed by this, you should be.
Putin wants a Yalta 2.0 moment. One that would restore his international stature and present Russia as a great power, much like the three-way summit that helped shape the post-WWII order 81 years ago in the resort city of Yalta.
In 1945, as victory over Nazi Germany drew closer, Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin gathered in Yalta to divvy up the post-war world. The conference helped lay the groundwork for spheres of influence across Europe, with the Soviets subsequently cementing their control over practically all of Eastern Europe.
Churchill was an imperfect man, but nonetheless the war hero Great Britain needed at the time. He walked away from the whole affair disenchanted.
He knew the Soviets would engulf half of Europe, leaving the continent divided by an Iron Curtain for decades to come. In the midst of it all, Poland would be sacrificed, alongside the Baltic states, much of Central Europe and parts of the Balkans. And he was right. But he still had to accept the deal.
Yalta dictated the terms of a new world order, but also set the stage for the Cold War. Of course, the echoes of history can be cruel: Yalta has been under Russian occupation since 2014, following Moscow’s illegal annexation of Crimea.
If you follow that logic, the modern-day triumvirate of Trump, Xi and Putin would get together and split up the world for the next 100 years. One piece for you, another for me — you get the gist of it.
Presumably, the talks would focus on Ukraine and Taiwan. If Yalta 2.0 works anything like the 1945 conference, the three would cut a backroom deal and the rest of the world would have no choice but to go along with it. Putin would emerge as the winner, which explains why he’s pitching it in the first place.
Russia is a nuclear power, but it is no longer a great power. Putin, who once called the collapse of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” for Russia, has long sought to restore Moscow’s lost sphere of influence.
If Trump joins that meeting, he would be handing the Russian leader his biggest strategic victory since the Soviet Union’s collapse.
Along the way, the US President would alienate America’s friends. Trump may not think much of his allies, but they are crucial. Policing the world has brought Washington lucrative deals, enormous influence and military bases that it needs for its own security, whether Trump likes to admit it or not.
A new Yalta without his allies would certify the death of the West as we know it.
The Europeans should be very concerned, as they too are on the chopping board in this dangerous ménage à trois. A backroom deal over Kyiv’s head would also spell the end of the transatlantic relationship and erode NATO’s deterrence.
Brussels may insist it is in the game, but it’s clear that much is happening behind its back already. The Europeans need their own peace plan and a clear definition of what a good outcome truly entails — for Ukraine and for Europe.
Inevitably, this will force the EU to confront uncomfortable questions it has long avoided, from the territories Ukraine may not get back to the security guarantees it will need to provide in exchange for a US backstop. That means boots on the ground to ensure peace, and it can’t just be France and the UK.
The EU will also need to ring-fence funding for Ukraine as the political cycle turns against continued support. Let’s face it: it is expensive, and it’s becoming unpopular as protests over the cost of living mount.
Our politicians need to do a much better job of explaining that our security is at stake too, with more than 4,000 kilometres of Europe’s eastern flank at play. It is in Europe’s interest to reach a fair deal in Ukraine. The opposite will come back to haunt us.
Europe needs its own peace plan, starting with the appointment of an envoy who can secure a seat at the negotiating table, set out a clear negotiating position and report back. This should have been done a year ago. Enough with the Trump whisperer strategy. It doesn’t work. It is futile as long as Europe is not represented by someone who can speak with a political mandate.
If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu. Serve it while it’s hot.
Thank you for reading Off The Record make sure to subscribe here.