The sweatshirt with the URSS writing with which Russian Foreign Minister Sergej Lavrov showed up at the top with Putin did not promise anything good, and nothing good was. The “historic” summit between Trump and Putin (often abuse the “historical” adjective, which however does not seem excessive this time) has in fact resolved in a fact, at least to what has been known. It may be that in the three hours of interview something positive has been reached, and that the fruits will emerge in the coming weeks, but the fact that at the end of the meeting there has not been a common document as always happens in diplomacy does not bode well (indeed, what was told by Trump and Putin was substantially different, further sign of the difficulties). The reaction of the Ukrainians was vehement (“disgusting, shameful and useless”) that of the Europeans is vaga.

Of course, at a first evaluation it seems different the booty that the two leaders bring home. Certainly the most positive is Putin, which falls within the great international assembly after having been excluded from it in the aftermath of February 24, 2022: if you think that since then a war criminal has been declared, that an international capture mandate has been marked on him and that instead has now been received with all the honors by the president of the planetary superpower, then it is understood that for him the result of the vertex cannot be considered negative.

For Trump the balance is completely different. The man who had to put an end to all wars within 24 hours collects yet another failure (after the one on Gaza), and also shows at its base how large the distance between the words and the facts is, between the foams pronounced on live TV and the harsh reality of things.

Beyond the fact, as we said, that perhaps in the next few days we will understand better, that details will emerge that will clarify aspects that have remained dark so far (it is likely that Trump and Putin have treated on bilateral aspects such as Arctic, rare and otherwise that interests us less), what is striking in the way of doing Trump is the almost amateur spirit with which certain foreign policy dossier are conducted. Something halfway between a talent and a great Truman Show: everything he makes a show, as long as there is something on stage. An old rule of diplomacy is in fact that certain leaders “prepare”, that the Sherpa already conclude agreements that then the leaders must in fact only sign, since at this level the “failure” is too expensive in terms of image. None of this happened, at least on the American side, and at least to hear what Trump said on the eve “I will look at Putin in the eyes and in two minutes I will understand what he has in his head”. Evidently the tsar in his head had only what he wanted, and no will to reach an agreement. Between the two, Putin certainly appeared as the most “centered” one.

The only positive aspect for Ukraine and Europe is that there have been no agreements to ratify or reject, which was Kiev’s great fear. Being in front of an agreement in some way for Ukraine “endeavable” but at the same time formulated because it could not be rejected. A taking-or-hard to digest, like the sale of the territories in exchange for the end of hostilities. In this sense, the game is still open, but (negative aspect) the will of the Kremlin not to close the game means that Moscow is not satisfied with a partial victory, which Trump certainly offered him and that he had already been circulated in recent weeks. If Putin has not closed it means that he wants to go all the way, that the “sale of territories” proposed by Trump is not enough for him, and wants or more territories or “security” guarantees for Russia that others cannot accept or would never have accepted.

Trump spoke of a next three -way top, with Zelensky and Putin together, called him by inviting him to the United States, perhaps to involve him. The Ukrainian president accepted with enthusiasm, eager to enter the game. We will see. Of course, now for Kiev and above all the EU the bar of responsibility has further risen. The moment in which mediation uses fails, at least so it seems, the space for Europe grows. In the awareness, however, that the appeals to the ceased the fire are useless, and in the face of such an aggressive Putin, aggressive to the point of rejecting any hypothesis of agreement and decided in reaffirming their positions, only the words bring little. More sanctions will be needed, perhaps more secondary sanctions (to those countries that make business with Russia, allowing them to keep their economy standing), the increase in military aid and perhaps the willingness to send troops to ensure the safety of Ukraine in the post-agreement phase. Will the EU be willing to raise your involvement or will it be limited to indignant declarations?