Brussels has been watching the Washington summit between Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelensky, and European leaders with great attention. August 18 was one of the rare occasions in which the EU was involved by the new American administration in the peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine . And for this reason, it had to be exploited well. However, the optimism seemed ostentatious, and distances remain. Even within European families, as evidenced by the online pre-summit of the European People's Party , held on the eve of the American summit. Representing the EPP around the White House table were German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, and Finnish President Alexander Stubb. The signals were one of apparent unity, even if the divisions, according to what was gathered by Ilfattoquotidiano.it, clearly emerged during the meeting convened by the party's president Manfred Weber.
The main European family is divided into two fairly clearly defined parts between Eastern and Western European countries, in an imaginary Iron Curtain that roughly follows the old NATO-Warsaw Pact borders. On one side is Donald Tusk's Poland, supported by the Scandinavian countries and, above all, the Baltic countries, such as Estonia, led by Lady CFSP Kaja Kallas. Their approach, not exactly in line with that emerging in Washington, is based on one assumption: Putin cannot be trusted, so there is no choice but to continue to maintain high pressure on Russia and adopt an intransigent approach. According to reports, the most active members of the coalition that emerged during the meeting between the party presidency and the heads of state and government were Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson and his Finnish counterpart Petteri Orpo. The countries on these positions share one great fear: being the next victim of the Russian army.
Then there is the question of rearmament. Eastern European countries, while aware that the EU's internal security and deterrence rationale would remain, fear that a peace based on conditions also imposed by Putin could undermine Europe's rearmament project. This concern is not shared, for example, by the German Chancellor, who instead considers the process irreversible, given that Berlin has decided to pursue it primarily at the national level. This is also why the German leader has taken a more communicative stance, while stressing that, in his opinion, a ceasefire is necessary for the success of the peace negotiations. This position is also shared by Ursula von der Leyen, still reeling from the trade dispute with Washington, and by Forza Italia.
The government in Rome, however, managed to get everyone to agree on its proposal to sign an agreement between allies that would establish a guarantee mechanism for Kiev similar to that provided for in Article 5 of NATO: in the event of a military attack on Ukrainian soil, the signatory countries would be called upon to intervene in its defense. This is a point that Giorgia Meloni reiterated during the Washington summit and which also received the blessing of the President of the European Council, Antonio Costa, on Tuesday at the end of the summit between European heads of state and government. The delegations of the Eastern European People's Party (EPP) countries also seem to find a sort of guarantee in this proposal: if the allies are willing to commit themselves to the defense of a non-NATO state, they said, why shouldn't they also do the same for us members of the Alliance?
