Can Europe conjure a united front in the future of Ukraine?

European leaders are fighting. His security summit called in Paris on Monday is a proof of that.

They are still staggering not being invited by the United States to talk to Russia about the future of Ukraine. The president of the United States, Donald Trump, said Sunday that he could meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin “very soon.”

Can Europe, under pressure, set aside political differences and domestic economic concerns, and create a united front in security spending and in the future of Ukraine, including the potential shipping of troops there, to force themselves in themselves in The negotiating table?

They will try.

The Trump administration is clearly not 100% safe for what they want to do with Ukraine. There were several mixed messages during the weekend.

This allows Europe to a small window of opportunity to try to persuade the US president, he is an invaluable partner.

He hopes to do that through this Paris meeting, causing the ball to be launched in two main problems required by Donald Trump: that Europe spends and does more for its own defense, and that Europe sends troops to Ukraine after a stop The fire.

European leaders insist that Kyiv also participates directly in high -fire conversations. For a long time they have maintained the opinion that “there can be no decisions about Ukraine, without Ukraine.”

But it’s even that for Europe.

It is the realization of the cold, very feared, but not entirely unexpected, that the Trump administration does not prioritize relations with the European partners or their defense.

Europe has been based on a security umbrella provided by the United States since World War II.

Depending on the parameters of Russia-United States conversations on Ukraine, and how Putin feels emboldened by them, there is also a European fear that this can end up changing the security architecture of their continent.

Historically putin the propagation of NATO to the east. The Russian neighbors, the small Soviet Baltic states and also Poland, now feel particularly exposed.

Not all European countries will be on Monday’s summit. Only those with military weight: the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and Denmark, which is expected to represent the Baltic and Nordic nations, in addition to the president of the EU Council and the Secretary General of the Alliance of the Alliance of the Alliance of Defense, NATO.

According to reports, other countries will have subsequent monitoring meetings.

Even in the small meeting of Paris, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to agree on the concrete defense expenses. Poland plans to spend 4.47% of its GDP in defense in 2025. The United Kingdom is fighting, and has not yet reached 2.5% of its GDP.

But leaders can commit to coordinate better, spend more within NATO and shoulders with most of the reconstruction of the postwar period of Ukraine. The EU is expected to also reinforce its defense effort.

A large part of the Paris meeting will also focus on the issue of sending troops to Ukraine after a high fire.

The idea that is being discussed is not for peace maintenance troops, but rather a “strength of tranquility”, parked behind, instead of in any eventual line of high fire.

The objective of a European troop presence would be three times. To send a message to the Ukrainians: they are not alone. Another message to the United States, to show that Europe is “making its share” for the defense of its own contine Kiev alone.

But it is a controversial concept and may not be popular among voters. In Italy, for example, 50% of people asked not to send more weapons to Ukraine, no matter sending sons and daughters, sisters and brothers there.

There are so many questions still without an answer:

How many troops would each European country have to send, for how long and under whose mandate? What would be your mission statement? For example, if Russia broke the terms of a high agreed fire, would that mean that European soldiers would be directly at war with Russia? Would the United States support if so?

Europe would want a security guarantee of the United States before deploying soldiers in Ukraine. You may not get one.

It is too much to decide on Monday. And leaders, including the United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer, come to Paris with their own domestic concerns: Can an additional defense expense be allowed, do you have the troops to send to Ukraine? Germany is nervous for making concrete commitments just before a heated general choice.

But this summit is a brightest brushstroke than small impression. The conversation can at least start publicly.

Will Donald Trump pay attention?

Difficult to know.

There is talk of sending an envoy to Washington after the Paris meeting to present the case of Europe. The Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni, is close to the Trump administration, for example.

Sir Keir Starmer has a planned visit to Washington in a few days. This could be his opportunity to act as a bridge between Europe and the United States.

The Paris meeting also offers an opportunity for the United Kingdom and other European leaders to repair relations after Brexit’s bitterness.

Mark Leonard, head of the European Board of Foreign Affairs, points out that Starmer could “demonstrate that Great Britain is an interested party responsible for European security … something that will be noticed and will translate into good will when it comes to negotiations on other issues “

Issues such as commercial relations and the cooperation of the application of the law that the United Kingdom hopes to improve with the EU in the future.

The host nation France feels safe. President Macron has long advised Europe depends less on external countries for supply chains, technological capacities and much, when it comes to defense. A year ago, the idea of ​​the troops in the floor in Ukraine was discussing for the first time.

France is “fiercely proud” that its intelligence and security services are not intertwined with the United States, unlike the United Kingdom, says Georgina Wright, deputy director of International Studies at the Institut Montaigne. That makes it less complicated to unravel, now that Trump is in the White House, demanding that Europe takes care of it.

The United States has sent a document to European allies consisting of six points and questions, such as what countries would be willing to deploy troops in Ukraine as part of a peace agreement, and which governments would be prepared to increase sanctions to Russia, including more strictly strictly strictly enforce existing ones.

But Julianne Smith, until recently the American ambassador to NATO, says that this type of complicated diplomatic work normally has weeks of meetings and cannot be organized with full forms.

He adds that whatever Europe’s leaders achieve in Paris, if they use it to demand a seat at the Ukraine negotiating table, their hand is weak.

“If Trump flashes and says no, Europe refuses to help completely? They can’t cut their nose to annoy the face.”

Essentially, if the United States plans to move away from Ukraine and Europe more widely in terms of security, they will have to significantly increase their defense game anyway.

If Donald Trump is not looking, Vladimir Putin certainly is.