Professor of History of International Relations at the University of Padua, Antonio Varsoriwas in Athens for the conference “Global Crisis and Democratic Transition in Southern Europe: a Political History” of the Hellenic Parliament Foundation and analyzes in “Vima” the developments of the Russo-Ukrainian war from a European perspective.
How do you expect the return of Donald Trump to the White House to affect the development of the war in Ukraine?
“No matter how much his pre-election words are analyzed, even what he says now that he has been elected, we cannot know for sure what his actions will be, as we are talking about an unpredictable man. What we can take for granted is that he will stop the American aid that has been sent all this time to , as it was a very popular campaign promise, both for voters and inside the Republican Party.
However, we must focus on the fact that the data from his previous tenure have shown us that this is a man who easily changes his mind. So I would say that the big question that should concern us in this case is what will Europe do.
At the beginning of the war, and up to a point, we saw an EU fully committed to the victory of Ukraine, but now the ultimate goal of the so-called “final victory” has begun to be redefined. Although we never knew exactly what that final victory would mean, in theory it would involve the total recapture of Ukrainian territory. That doesn’t seem possible now.”
Will Europe finally have a say in the negotiations?
“First, to sit at the negotiating table, the EU must accept the possibility of a diplomatic solution that is likely to be very different from the ‘final victory’ heralded by its leaders, while it needs to accept that it will eventually be negotiated with . At the same time, it should reach a common position, which is difficult since it consists of 27 different countries with different perspectives on this war, e.g. the Baltic countries are very worried, while for Spain and Portugal something seems distant.
With these as facts, I would consider a more effective solution the presence of some leaders of European countries at the negotiation table, such as e.g. of , instead of Ursula von der Leyen and her commissioners. However, at the given moment, with the unstable political situation in which both France and Germany, the two great powers of the EU, find themselves, this also seems difficult”.
Europe should also possibly accept the concession of Ukrainian territories to Russia…
“I believe that if Europe finally gets to have a say in the negotiations, with any representation, it will propose various proposals until they end up with the concession of the occupied territories to Russia and their recognition. This could be either Ukrainian sovereignty with Russian influence or ceding the territories in exchange for the European perspective on Ukraine – which I of course find unlikely for many reasons.
Then there is the possibility of a solution like in Korea, where in theory the war has not officially ended and the hostilities have ended with an armistice – which of course has been in place since 1953 to this day. Or the possibility of a unilateral, unrecognized occupation, as in Cyprus – a situation that has also remained stagnant for half a century. However, be that as it may, Russia with or without it and Donbass is a huge country with a large nuclear force. This means that for better or for worse Europe will have to find a way to deal with this big neighbor – and it’s always easier to deal with when there’s no war.”
Where does this leave Europe in terms of security?
“No one can predict. For now, Russia is indeed a threat in several areas. However, speaking as a historian, in the long run the situation can change, as can conditions, external and internal. We saw it in WWII, we saw it more recently when Europe wanted Russian gas.
Yes, at this stage the EU must find ways to be protected against Russia, but this country is here, next to us, not on the moon. No one knows what will happen in five years, Putin may not be president anymore, the EU may decide it wants to do economic transactions with Russia again. The events in Syria showed how fluid a situation can be after all.”
