This is an unprecedented banquet.
On August 18th, Ukrainian President Zelensky made another visit to the White House. Six months ago, he was humiliated by Trump and Pence in the White House and was kicked out with an empty stomach.
Just like a scene from history, the former Zelansky has returned again. It seems that history is whispering a cruel law: in the face of absolute power disparity, the return of the weak is often not the beginning of a turnaround, but the prelude to a deeper game.
The difference is that this time, the scene is different. Zelensky was accompanied by European leaders who came in groups.
The President of the European Commission, Von Der Leyen.
Why such a big scene?
In my understanding, there are at least two reasons.
First, to prevent Zelensky from being humiliated again and accepting unacceptable conditions. Second, Europe wants to be at the table where issues of great importance to Europe are discussed, so Europe cannot be absent. It can be said that Europeans are now uninvited guests.
In name, according to Von Der Leyen, “at the invitation of Zelensky”. Zelensky is also very clear that if he goes alone, he will be humiliated by Americans again. One fence has three stakes, one hero has three helpers, so he has to invite his European brothers and sisters.
The instinct for the weak to seek protection often leads to seemingly powerful alliances, but their inner vulnerability will only be revealed under real pressure.
Actually, there are also subtleties involved. France, Germany, and Italy are considered the EU’s top three powers. Although the UK has left the EU, it is still a major European power. The attendance of leaders from these four countries, with Von Der Leyen representing the entire EU, is quite reasonable.
Among them is also the President of Finland, Stubbe. The reason is simple: Stubbe has a close relationship with Trump and can speak to him. In the political stage, personal relationships sometimes serve as leverage to influence national interests. This is both the absurdity of reality and one of the rules of power games. It is worth noting that after Trump’s meeting with Putin in Alaska, leaders from the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Finland, Poland, and the EU immediately issued a joint statement, including Poland. Among the Eastern European countries, Poland has the greatest influence and provides the most support to Ukraine. However, Trump does not take the time to meet with Tusk and prefers Polish President Nawrocki who is Tusk’s opponent. In recent phone calls with EU leaders, Trump has explicitly requested that Tusk be replaced by Nawrocki. Although in Poland’s political structure, the prime minister holds more power and attends various EU summits, Trump doesn’t care about that. Tusk is very upset about this situation and the EU has to compromise. This time in Washington D.C., Poland will not be invited to attend.
Are they still afraid of irritating Trump!
Under the strong power, the dignity of allies and internal unity often become the first to be sacrificed.
Since it is a Hongmen feast, what is the core issue?
I always feel that there are at least three issues:
First, whether to stop the fire first or reach a peace agreement first;
Second, how to exchange land;
Third, how to guarantee Ukraine.
Europe and Ukraine insist that a ceasefire must be achieved before a peace agreement can be negotiated.
Trump also insisted on this point originally. Before the Alaska meeting, he even publicly threatened that if Putin refused to stop the fire, there would be serious consequences.
However, when he met with Putin, Trump’s principles became non-existent. Moreover, he also said that Europe and Ukraine “agreed” that the best way was to reach a direct peace agreement because “ceasefire agreements often do not work”.
The “pragmatism” of the powerful can instantly reshape the rules. Yesterday’s red line is just a chip on the negotiating table today. Yesterday’s ally consensus can become a弃子 today.
The Europeans are so angry that they feel Trump represents them again.
Western media even commented that the biggest gift Trump gave to Putin was “more time to bully Ukraine”.
As for land exchange, according to current information, Putin insists that Crimea is non-negotiable and belongs entirely to Russia; for the other four states in Eastern Ukraine, Ukraine must give up the remaining Donetsk and Luhansk lands in exchange for a ceasefire in Zaharod and Odessa from Russia; Russia will also return some scattered lands in other states it occupies.
Trump tends to agree with Putin and will pressure Ukraine to accept it.
Europe and Ukraine were shocked. After three years of war, now they need to cease fire, and Ukraine has to give up more land.
However, from Russia’s perspective, given that the Russian military has taken an advantage on the battlefield currently, it is completely reasonable to ask for more.
Territories, which are soaked with the blood and tears of the nation, are just cold weights on the scales of power.
If Zelensky accepts this point, he will be a national scoundrel; if he strongly rejects it, he may fall out with Trump in negotiations.
European leaders can at least mediate and bargain for better conditions to avoid another disastrous outcome.
As for security guarantees, given the current situation, Ukraine is unlikely to join NATO, but Trump seems to have backed down and suggested providing security guarantees to Ukraine by模仿ing Article 5 of NATO.
Ah, empty promises are like the moon in the water or flowers in the mirror. In front of absolute strength, any paper guarantees may evaporate instantly.
Therefore, this White House meeting, with the EU fully represented, is bound to be a fierce negotiation. A confrontation that leads to red faces and an unfriendly parting is also possible.
Zelensky, alone, cannot handle this. With the support of the EU, he can at least put up a fight against Trump. This union of the weak, trying to gain a voice in the game of giants, is a profound portrayal of the era itself, full of tragedy and helplessness.
First, this is definitely a Hongmen feast.
Trump wants a quick solution: end the fighting, accept Putin’s conditions, and I want to win the Nobel Peace Prize while still focusing on the great power in the East. However, Europe shakes their heads like a wave-drum, insisting on fairness and justice. They demand that Trump show some respect to Ukraine and give Europeans some face. It’s possible that during light conversation, the map is redrawn with Ukraine swallowing tears and blood; it’s also possible that due to misunderstandings, things escalate quickly.
Second, this is also a collective humiliation.
I always feel that this is another kind of humiliation for Europe. After all, the US is the leader of the West. It was under the leadership and encouragement of the US that Europe contributed money, resources, and even personnel to help Ukraine against Russia, even when the Nord Stream pipeline爆炸 didn’t even flinch. But now, looking back, the leader is cozying up to Russia, leaving a group of smaller brothers looking at each other in the wind…
There’s no choice for these smaller brothers but to come to the White House collectively. The irony of history is that former followers have to go in an almost humble manner to remind their big brother not to forget the old alliance. This is not only Europe’s dilemma but also the eternal fate of those who attach themselves to power.
Third, Zelan’s story is repeating itself.
I noticed that US Secretary of State Rubio stated that so many European leaders are here not to “prevent Zelensky from being bullied,” but they have always been a crucial part of peace negotiations and dialogue. Is Rubio just spinning? Did he ask Trump and Vance?
The eyes of the world are bright. Zelensky won’t forget that six months ago at the White House, he was shouted at by Trump and Vance in front of a silent Rubio. Zelan’s story is repeating itself, but the situation is even worse this time. In power games, the return of those who have lost often brings deeper crises and harsher scrutiny.
I saw an American cartoon where European leaders were waiting outside the White House, Zelensky wearing full armor, and a White House clerk came to knock on the door and said, “Mr. President, President Zelensky is dressed formally this time…”.
How sorrowful is this “formal” armor!
It is not only a physical defense, but also the externalization of psychological scars. A leader of a weak country who attends a “peace” negotiation has to be fully armed to guard against possible humiliation. This could be the most profound metaphor of international politics in our era.