The Davos conference comes just in time for the inauguration of Donald J. Trump 2.0, and Europe is worried. Trump is like an asteroid heading toward Earth, says Hubert Vedrine, the former French foreign minister, and discussions about the impact on the cozy international bubble that gathers every year in the expensive snow of the Swiss Alps will be dominated by debates.
Mr. Trump talks in various ways about massive new tariffs, about seizing Canada, Greenland and the Panama Canal, and about linking American involvement in European defense not only to Europeans increasing their military spending but also to reducing their trade surplus with the United States.
Mr. Vidrine and other analysts warn that Mr. Trump likes to talk big and then bargain, and that threats and issues come and go. As his former National Security Advisor John Bolton He once told USA TodayWorking in the White House under Mr. Trump was “like living in a pinball machine,” as Mr. Trump moved from one issue to the next.
But Ukraine is likely to be one of the dominant topics in Davos. Mr. Trump says he wants to end the war in one day, something no one takes literally, not even his special adviser on Ukraine, Keith Kellogg. Trump or not, Ukraine is slowly losing the war, and negotiations are coming to try to end the bloodshed, perhaps this spring.
But on what basis is the main question. Russian President Vladimir Putin faces rising inflation and interest rates, but has placed his country in a wartime economy in what he presents as an existential struggle with the West. Despite the heavy human losses, it has so far been able to compensate for its losses with large financial incentives: 70% of its forces are contract soldiers and only 7% are conscripts, said Zaki Al-Aidi, a French analyst who advises the former European Union foreign policy official. , Josep Borrell Fonteles.
Putin believes he is winning the war and that the West’s resolve to continue supporting Ukraine at such a high economic cost, with so little Ukrainian progress in the trenches, is waning, says Liana Fix of the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. Therefore, even if Mr. Putin agrees to a request or even a request from Mr. Trump to enter into negotiations, he is unlikely to agree to an unconditional ceasefire and will insist on strict conditions for ending the war.
In his customary end-of-year press conference and stunning television presentation, Putin repeated his claim that Ukraine is not in fact an independent country. He said any negotiations would start from “current facts on the ground” and would be based on Russia’s position in talks with the Ukrainians in Istanbul in 2022: that Ukraine agree to abandon its NATO aspirations and become a neutral state, accepting tough restrictions. On the size of its armed forces and changing some of its laws to respect Russian interests. It is unclear whether Mr Putin would accept Ukraine’s EU membership, but it is doubtful, given that his opposition to the much weaker association agreement between Kiev and Brussels led to the 2013 Maidan uprising.
“Putin wants a rearranged world, where Ukraine is under control and NATO is in retreat,” Ms Fix said. An American official, who spoke anonymously due to the sensitivity of the issue, said that Putin wants “not only a neutral Ukraine, but he wants it neutralized.”
Norbert Röttgen, a foreign policy expert and CDU lawmaker, said Putin’s stated intentions to rearrange Europe’s security architecture, undermine NATO and disconnect Washington from Europe, go beyond Ukraine and should not be ignored. Winning the German elections in late February. He said: “The future of Europe is a security issue, and we must make this war a failure for Russia.” “Because even if it works at all, the lesson is that war works.”
It is not clear how Russia’s failure can be guaranteed without a sharp and rapid increase in European support for Kiev. European leaders talk about the need to do this and spend more to defend themselves. But they are divided over how serious a threat Russia poses to them. They face financial difficulties of their own, with low growth and an aging population, and they disagree on how much to spend on their militaries, even as Trump is also expected to demand that Europe take on much of the burden of supporting Ukraine.
Mr. Trump’s lack of interest in multilateral alliances and his desire to shift focus to China means that responsibility for European security “is now ours for the first time since December 1941, and Europe is not ready for this fundamental change,” Röttgen said.
Mark Rutte, the new Secretary General of NATO, who will be in Davos, similarly argues that Europe must do more in its own defense to support Ukraine so it can negotiate forcefully and deter Russia in the future, regardless of who the American is. president. He said European allies “must switch to a war mentality.” He will urge NATO to set a new military spending target of 3% or even 3.5% of GDP at the alliance’s next summit meeting this summer in The Hague.
Given that Russia is not on the verge of collapse, Mr. Al-Aidi said: “We in Europe need to deter Russia, strengthen our defense and start working seriously together.”
Mr. Röttgen echoed this call. He said Europe simply must do more and more efficiently, and do so through NATO, with less nationalism. “Europe must understand that its defense industry is about security and not just jobs,” he said.
Ukrainian leaders realize that negotiations are coming. Some time ago, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stopped insisting that the war could only end with the restoration of full Ukrainian control over its 1991 borders, including Crimea and large parts of eastern Ukraine, which had long been occupied by Russian forces. Instead, Zelensky, who will visit Davos, emphasizes his country’s security guarantees after the fighting stops, and insists that only NATO membership will be satisfactory.
This is unlikely to happen, as most analysts and officials in Washington and Europe agree. But many, including Mr. Rutte and key members of the outgoing Biden administration, nonetheless argue that just another big push of support for Ukraine this year will push Mr. Putin into more serious negotiations. But it is unclear where this big boost will come from.
Charles A. said: “We keep hearing that Ukraine is fighting our war, but let’s tell the truth,” said Kupchan, a former Obama administration official and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He added, “The United States has a policy without a strategy,” stressing that the West will support Ukraine as much as it takes, and that Ukraine alone can decide when and how to negotiate, as if Washington had no interests of its own. He added: “This is dangerous and turns Ukraine into a failed state.”
Kupchan said that some see Russia and its desire to continue the war collapsing under economic and trade pressure. “But I see the opposite: Russia is doing well, Ukraine is running out of gas, without enough manpower or air defence, and it’s not as if everything is in Western warehouses – we don’t have it.”
But even if the fighting ends, the tougher issue, everyone agrees, is Ukraine’s future security. Is there a possible form of NATO membership and collective security that covers only part of sovereign Ukraine? Will membership of the European Union, which is also considered at a distant stage, be sufficient? What would Russia tolerate, and can any promises not to invade again be trusted?
Some argue — and believe Mr. Trump might demand — that Europe should address Ukraine’s security and suggest sending European troops after the ceasefire. But will they be there to monitor the ceasefire or monitor the ceasefire? If so, given the enormous size of Ukraine and its long border with Russia, how many thousands of troops would be needed? How much will it all cost? Will this draw forces away from the defense of NATO members and undermine their confidence in the Alliance’s commitment to collective defence? Do they need American air cover?
The proposal to send European troops, originally put forward by the Estonians and mentioned at times by French President Emmanuel Macron, has been met with a great deal of skepticism, including by Poland, which has a long border with Russia.
A senior German official, who also spoke anonymously as part of normal diplomatic practice, described the entire discussion as premature and irresponsible, giving Russia an easy way to divide Europe and the United States. He said that first one must see how the war ends.
For Mr. Röttgen, the war is less about territory than about Ukraine’s sovereignty. He added: “Ukraine must become a sovereign and viable state.” This at least seems possible, but what remains unclear is how to ensure that the emerging Ukraine is not invaded again.
