I t has been a month, since Donald Trump took office for the second time as President of the United States, still significant geopolitical shifts are already taking place, especially around the conflict in Ukraine. The approaches of the new US administration to international relations, Euro-Atlantic partnership and security were more clearly stated by US Vice President JD Vance at the Munich Security Conference. In his speech, he strongly criticized European countries, accusing them of undermining the foundations of their own security and stability. According to the US Vice President, threats to European democracy do not come from other states such as Russia or China, but from within. Regarding the Euro-Atlantic partnership, Vance reconfirmed the Trump administration’s commitment to European security, stressing the need to increase European defense contributions. Vance, however, didn’t clarify Trump’s plans to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. 

The US approach caused confusion in Europe, which was further deepened by talks between US and Russian representatives in Riyadh.  Although both sides claim that their primary goal was to initiate a dialogue between Washington and Moscow, their statements contained very clear signals suggesting not only an interest in restoring bilateral relations but also in resolving the conflict in Ukraine, which is essentially seen as part of the complete package of US-Russian relations. Noteworthy,  the discussion of the conflict took place without the participation of the European Union and Ukraine. It is clear from the position of the American side that Washington intends to engage in direct dialogue exclusively with Moscow on this issue in the near future. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the European Union will eventually join the talks as it has also imposed sanctions on Russia. The American side is silent on a common stance or at least an alignment of stances. 

Although the new US administration’s approach to the Euro-Atlantic partnership was not new to the European Union, Washington’s practical steps are causing alarm in Brussels. The EU has long discussed the need to reduce dependence on the US, but there are no practical steps. In the coming months, the EU’s number one talk will be to assess its own needs and ensure European security, including support for Kyiv. The European Union should also strive to secure a seat at the table on the Ukraine issue, as it poses a serious security challenge for Europe and as echoed in European capitals, there can be no US-Russia agreement on the EU without Brussels’s involvement.  

In the current situation, the French President sees opportunities to take the initiative to unite Europe and neutralize the existing challenges, especially against the backdrop of electoral processes in Germany. After convening two summits of European heads of state in parallel to the meeting in Riyadh, Emmanuel Macron said that Europe would support Ukraine and take full responsibility for ensuring peace and security in Europe. Macron also confirmed that European countries will increase spending on defense and security. It is noteworthy, that the meetings took place with a limited number of EU member states, with the participation of non-EU countries and Canada, given the recent challenges to European unity and the consensual nature of decision-making. 

As for Ukraine, it was a cold shower for the latter, especially the statements of the American side after the Riyadh. Vladimir Zelensky hoped to form a unified position with the US and the EU before negotiations with Russia. However, the outcome of the meeting held in Saudi Arabia neutralizes this possibility. Tensions between the United States and Ukraine deepen amid Donald Trump’s statements reminiscent of Russian threats. In particular, the main conflict concerns Zelensky’s legitimacy, which has long been present in Russia’s official discourse. Trump demands Zelensky hold elections in Ukraine, claiming that Zelensky’s support is 4%, which Zelensky counters with a poll by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, showing 57% confidence rating in him. Moreover, the Constitution of Ukraine does not provide for elections during wartime. It was noteworthy, that continuing this theme, Trump called Zelensky a ‘dictator’ and accused him of inciting war. On the one hand, it is a challenge to the Western value system, on the other hand, it could become a dangerous precedent for other states intent on resolving conflicts militarily. 

In such a situation, negotiations with the US on minerals are being conducted in parallel, through which Kyiv is trying to get security guarantees from Washington: finding allies is Ukraine’s main problem. First, of course, is Europe, which is interested in ending the conflict without Ukraine’s surrender. It is no coincidence that amid the shift in the US position, Europe promises to support Ukraine, including on the political and diplomatic front. Another potential ally for Kyiv is Turkey, which also seeks a seat at the negotiating table. This was the reason for Zelensky’s visit to Ankara, along with his meeting in Riyadh. During that meeting, the Turkish president stated that Turkey is ready to hold talks on the Ukrainian issue, recalling Turkey’s participation in implementing the grain deal. 

New players are becoming active in the Ukrainian conflict, such as Saudi Arabia, which has successfully held US-Russian negotiations. The role and possible influence of other centers of power in the context of geopolitical realignment should also not be underestimated. For instance, the Chinese Foreign Ministry recently stated that Beijing together with the European Union, can serve as a ‘constructive force’ in a changing world, working jointly to uphold multilateralism and address global challenges.  

A possible mineral agreement between the US and Ukraine will be important in the coming weeks, which could significantly affect the US position on peace and the negotiation process.