Barrons Independent

Russia gains a tiny victory, Ukraine receives a temporary reprieve but remains angry, and Europe regains its relevance. The recent US-Russia discussions in Riyadh have mostly benefited Moscow. The war in Ukraine has long been depicted (incorrectly) as a NATO assault on Russia, and this bilateral meeting contributes to that erroneous perception.

Moscow is also seeing genuine, practical consequences. After Russia's deployment of a weapons-grade nerve poison on British soil against former spy Sergei Skripal, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the US and Russian embassies will resume normal operations. That is Russia coming in from the cold, possibly with a very functional justification. The Kremlin's release of American teacher Marc Fogel has led to a partial restoration of diplomatic standards.

Russia did not yield or earn a face-to-face meeting between Presidents Trump and Putin, and it is unclear who would gain from it in the long run. Such a gathering has been central to Trump's peace plan for Ukraine. However, in this period of Russian rehabilitation, it may appear that an act of normalization is more in Moscow's immediate interests. It will not happen anytime soon.

This slowness will bring small quantities of delight to Kyiv. The Riyadh meeting did not end with the White House promising Ukraine unpalatable concessions in order to expedite a poor deal with Moscow. The entire problem of peace in Ukraine will be transferred to different negotiating teams, thus postponing any conclusions.

National SecurityAdviser Mike Waltz weighed in his empty hands the scales of "territorial concessions" and "security guarantees" that both parties would have to accept as truth. (The former is something Kyiv will have to provide, while the latter is likely something Moscow will have to accept.

Zelensky canceled his scheduled travel to Riyadh on Wednesday, possibly anticipating the US-Russia summit's outcome. Instead, he railed passionately against Ukraine-related deals made without Ukraine, how he only learnt of the US-Russia meeting through the media, and said: “I don’t care if our partners think something unnecessary about us.” He is angry, but it is because of the growing US-Russian rapprochement, not because anything tragically new emerged from their summit.

Separately, the recent week of geopolitical turmoil saw a moment of calm when a trio of US officials sat before a Saudi flag (with US Middle East Envoy Steven Witkoff on the far left) acknowledged that Europe would be critical moving forward. Waltz emphasized that the notion that Europe and Ukraine were excluded from peace talks was untrue, notwithstanding Zelensky's later disagreement.

However, days before, General Keith Kellogg, Trump's Ukraine and Russia envoy, stated in Munich that the Europeans will not participate in peace talks over Ukraine due to failed diplomatic attempts during the initial wave of the conflict in 2015. Europe panicked and started formulating its own plans. Yet, 72 hours later, the Trump administration wants them to know they are still vital. Expect the stakes to rise when UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer visits Trump in Washington next week.

The failure to reach a quick agreement, as well as the outrage and concern of the past week, are ultimately beneficial to Putin. In that time, Europe has heard the US defense secretary say that the US is no longer the guarantor of European security, the US vice president falsely claim that Washington's main allies in Europe were totalitarians afraid of their own voters, and Trump's envoy to the largest war in Europe since the 1940s say that Europe would not be part of any peace deal. (Despite the fact that their troops are likely to be required for a peacekeeping mission, which is believed to be central to any agreement).

The US's permanent allies in Europe have been left scrambling to absorb the unthinkable: defending European soil from a nuclear-armed Russia without the prospect of US military intervention to deter Moscow's aggression. It may appear strange that Europe has never considered the need to defend itself alone since the end of Cold War.

But their NATO alliance is founded on mutual benefits: it was behind Britain’s deployment of troops to Iraq and Poland’s to Afghanistan, in the same way it is at the heart of Europe’s defense of its territory too. Hegseth’s very brief statement in Brussels tore the concept of NATO apart. However much the Trump administration tries to patch it together again, the fire lit last week in Brussels is as much one of Europe rushing to defend itself, as it is of Russian opportunity.

The overall agreement between Washington and Moscow is also likely to benefit Moscow. It supports the Russians' fake narrative that they are fighting NATO without provocation. It restores peer status with the US following alleged war crimes and isolation since the 2022 invasion.

It means Ukraine becomes a part of the wider picture, rather than the entire game. Finally, it concludes with Russia's reintegration into the global order, and with it, economic progress, diplomatic respectability, and forgiveness, maybe at minimal cost or concessions from Moscow.

However, the most serious issue with a slow-moving peace agreement is the front line itself. Russia is winning. Its advancements have been agonizingly slow and expensive, yet they continue to occur. Putin has time on his side right now. The longer there is concern, recalibration, and anxiety among Ukraine's partners, the weaker Ukraine's morale and sovereignty become.