PARIS — Kyiv and its European allies are eyeing the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos next week as a key venue for Donald Trump to throw his weight behind American commitments on a peace plan for Ukraine. Trump’s presence at the elite business and political event, along with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is seen as a prime opportunity to get the U.S. president to personally endorse U.S. commitments discussed during a high-level meeting in Paris last week, most critically on what America can offer to deter Russia from further attacks. Two senior European officials said the big hope was that Trump could commit to those U.S.-backed security guarantees for Ukraine at the Swiss meeting, but two others said the target could be Trump’s endorsement of a lower-level economic pact on postwar recovery. In either case, the goal is to lock in engagement from Washington. French President Emmanuel Macron, who has been leading European efforts to hash out a security guarantee plan jointly with the U.K.’s Keir Starmer, will be attending the global event, according to three officials, joining a flock of European leaders. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will attend along with leaders from Germany, Spain, Belgium, Finland, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Poland and Serbia. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte will also join. Starmer’s attendance is not yet confirmed, but he would be expected to travel if hopes of clinching a deal are rising, according a U.K. official not authorized to speak publicly. He would go alongside his National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell, seen as one of the most trusted links between the U.S. and Europe in negotiations. Zelenskyy said Monday he had instructed his negotiating team to “finalize and submit for consideration at the highest level the document on the United States’ security guarantees for Ukraine.” “We are negotiating with President Trump’s representatives about the meeting schedules — our documents are largely ready for signing. We expect that the Davos format this year will be quite effective precisely in terms of our relations with partners and our recovery from Russian strikes,” he added in a separate statement out the same day. The meeting of the so-called Coalition of the Willing in Paris last Tuesday was followed by several bilateral meetings at diplomatic level, according to two diplomats, including with U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. Both men’s show of support at the Paris meeting was interpreted as an encouraging sign of U.S. commitment, even if an explicit promise from Washington on a Ukraine backstop was scrapped from the leaders’ final joint statement. Esther Webber reported from London. Veronika Melkozerova reported from Kyiv and Zoya Sheftalovich reported from Brussels.

Donald Trump will be the major draw at this year’s World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, even as the U.S. president’s policies continue to undermine the spirit of global cooperation the elite gathering has championed in the past. “We’re pleased to welcome back President Trump to Davos, and he’s bringing the largest U.S. delegation ever,” WEF chief executive Børge Brende said at a press conference Tuesday. The U.S. president will bring “five secretaries and also other key players,” including a bipartisan delegation from the U.S. Congress, Brende said. The World Economic Forum, which takes place next week in the Alpine ski resort, comes as the world hangs on Trump’s words. Since the start of the month, Trump has captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, threatened to invade Greenland, hinted he could take action in Iran over violent crackdowns on protesters, announced a temporary cap on credit card interest rates that has stoked fears of a credit crunch, and opened a criminal investigation into Jerome Powell, chair of the U.S. Federal Reserve. Brende said the meeting will take place “against the most complex geopolitical backdrop since 1945.” According to the WEF, Trump will be joined by Canadian PM Mark Carney, China’s Vice-Premier He Lifeng, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and leaders from Israel and Palestine. From Europe, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will attend along with leaders from Germany, Spain, Belgium, Finland, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Poland and Serbia. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte will also join. The informal grouping of countries supporting Ukraine, known as the “coalition of the willing,” are expected to meet with Trump and Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the WEF to seek U.S. backing for security guarantees for Ukraine, the Financial Times reported. Business leaders, including the head of AI giant Nvidia Jensen Huang and top executives from Microsoft, Meta, Palantir, Anthropic and OpenAI, will join senior leaders from JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, BlackRock and other major finance players in Davos. International organizations, which have seen their standing and funding rocked by Trump’s administration — including last week’s U.S. withdrawal from dozens of international organizations and the world’s overarching climate change treaty — will also attend. The heads of the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Health Organization and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development will take part. Celebrities and artists including David Beckham, Yo-Yo Ma, Marina Abramović, Matt Damon and will.i.am will also attend. The theme of the gathering will be “A Spirit of Dialogue.” “We do hope that a spirit of dialogue can also lead to areas where the leaders can find overlaps in interests,” Brende said.

Kyiv is in talks with the United States about a possible free-trade agreement, as Ukraine seeks to entice a reluctant Washington to provide firm security guarantees, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said. Such a deal would involve tariff-free trade with the U.S. and would give Ukraine “very serious cards,” Zelenskyy said in an interview with Bloomberg published late Friday.  He has not yet discussed it directly with U.S. President Donald Trump, Zelenskyy said, adding that he expects to meet with Trump either in the U.S. or at the Davos conference in Switzerland, which starts on Jan. 19.  Prospects of a trade deal come as all sides start to consider more seriously how to end the war in Ukraine and how to ensure peace in the future. Europe and the U.S. presented a detailed plan for Ukraine in Paris earlier this week, including security guarantees with American backing and a promise to deploy British and French troops after a ceasefire.  But Washington did not sign on to join a multinational force for Ukraine, raising concerns about its level of commitment. The offer of a free-trade deal could act as an additional incentive for the U.S. to remain committed to protecting Ukraine after the end of the war. Zelenskyy said in the Bloomberg interview that he wants specific commitments from Washington. “I don’t want everything to end up in them merely promising to react,” he said. “I really want something more concrete.” Zelenskyy said his negotiator, Rustem Umerov, had a call on Friday with Trump’s special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, and that U.S. representatives have been in contact with Russia recently in “some kind of format.” Ukraine has given its views on territorial proposals, which the U.S. side will share with Russia for its own responses, Zelenskyy said.  Ukraine also is considering a plan, proposed by the U.S., to create a buffer zone between the two sides after troops pull back. “The format is difficult but fair,” Zelenskyy said. Zelenskyy added that he is not opposed to European leaders talking to Russia. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Friday joined French President Emmanuel Macron in calling for dialogue with Moscow. 

Donald Trump started his second term by calling the European Union an “atrocity” on trade. He said it was created to “screw” Americans. As he imposed the highest tariffs in a century, he derided Europe as “pathetic.” And to round off the year, he slammed the continent as “weak” and “decaying.” In the midst of all this, Ursula von der Leyen, the EU’s top official, somehow summoned the composure to fly to Trump’s Scottish golf resort to smile and shake hands on a one-sided trade deal that will inflict untold pain on European exporters. She even managed a thumbs up in the family photo with Trump afterwards. Yes, it’s been one hell of a year for the world’s biggest trading relationship. The economic consequences will take years to materialize — but the short-term impact is manifest: in forcing Europe to face up to its overreliance on the U.S. security umbrella and find new friends to trade with. With a warning that the following might trigger flashbacks, we take you through POLITICO’s coverage of Europe’s traumatic trade year at the hands of Trump: JANUARY As Trump returns to the White House, we explore how America’s trading partners are wargaming his trade threats. The big idea? Escalate to de-escalate. It’s a playbook we later saw unfold in Trump’s clashes with China and Canada. But, in the event, the EU never dares to escalate. Trump’s return does galvanize the EU into advancing trade deals with other partners — like Mexico or Latin America’s Mercosur bloc. “Europe will keep seeking cooperation — not only with our long-time like-minded friends, but with any country we share interests with,” von der Leyen tells the World Economic Forum the day after Trump is sworn in. FEBRUARY As Trump announces that he will reimpose steel and aluminum tariffs, von der Leyen vows a “firm and proportionate response.” The bloc has strengthened its trade defenses since his first term, and needs to be ready to activate them, advises former top Commission trade official Jean-Luc Demarty: “Especially with a personality like Trump, if we don’t react, he’ll trample us.” That begs the question as to whether trade wars are as easy to win, as Trump likes to say. The short answer is, of course, “no.” Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič, meanwhile, packs a suitcase full of concessions on his first mission to Washington. At the end of the month, Brussels threatens to use its trade “bazooka” — a trade-defense weapon called the Anti-Coercion Instrument — after Trump says the European Union was created to “screw” America. MARCH We called it early with this cover story by Nicholas Vinocur and Camille Gijs: Trump wants to destroy the EU — and rebuild it in his image. As Trump’s steel tariffs enter force, Brussels announces retaliatory measures that far exceed those it imposed in his first term. And, as he builds up to his “Liberation Day” tariff announcement, the EU signals retaliation extending beyond goods to services such as tech and banking. (None of these are implemented.) APRIL “They rip us off. It’s so sad to see. It’s so pathetic,” Trump taunts the EU as he throws it into the sin bin along with China, Japan, Taiwan and Korea. In his Liberation Day announcement in the White House Rose Garden, Trump whacks the EU with a 20 percent “reciprocal” tariff. Von der Leyen’s response the next morning is weak: She says only that the EU is “prepared to respond.” That’s because, even though the EU has strengthened its trade armory, its 27 member countries can’t agree to deploy it. The bloc nonetheless busies itself with drawing up a retaliation list of goods made in states run by Trump’s Republican allies — including trucks, cigarettes and ice cream. MAY The EU’s hit list gets longer in response to Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs — with planes and automobiles targeted in a €100 billion counterstrike that looks scary on paper but is never acted on.  We report exclusively that Brussels is ramping up contacts with a Pacific trade group called the CPTPP. And we assess the chances of Trump pressuring the EU into a big, beautiful trade deal by threatening to raise duties on European exports to 50 percent. The verdict? Dream on!  JUNE The setting shifts to the Canadian Rockies — where a G7 summit takes on a G6 vs. Trump dynamic as other leaders seek ways to cooperate with him on Russia and China even as he pummels them with tariffs. Von der Leyen tries her best, turning hawkish on China in a bid to find common ground. Back in Brussels, at a European leaders’ summit, von der Leyen announces her pivot to Asia — floating the idea of a world trade club without the U.S. JULY As the clock counts down to Trump’s July 9 deal deadline, the lack of unity among the EU’s 27 member countries undermines its credibility as a negotiating partner to be reckoned with. There’s still hope that the EU can lock in a 10 percent tariff, but should it take the deal or leave it? The deadline slips and, as talks drag on, it looks more likely that the EU will end up with a 15 percent baseline tariff — far higher than Europe had feared at the start of Trump’s term. Brussels is still talking about retaliation but … yeah … you already know that won’t happen. With Trump in Scotland for a golfing weekend, von der Leyen jets in to shake hands on a historic, but one-sided trade deal at his Turnberry resort. Koen Verhelst also flies in to get the big story. “It was heavy lifting we had to do,” von der Leyen said, stressing that the 15 percent tariff would be a ceiling. AUGUST Despite the thumbs-up in Turnberry, recriminations soon fly that the EU has accepted a bad deal. EU leaders defend it as the best they could get, given Europe’s reliance on the U.S. to guarantee its security. The two sides come out with a joint statement spelling out the terms — POLITICO breaks it down. Not only does the EU come off worse in the Turnberry deal, but it also sacrifices its long-term commitment to rules-based trade in return for Trump’s uncertain support for Ukraine. The realization slowly dawns that Europe’s humiliation could be profound and long-lasting. With the ink barely dry on the accord, Trump takes aim at digital taxes and regulation that he views as discriminatory. It’s a blast that is clearly aimed at Brussels. SEPTEMBER The torrent of trade news slows — allowing Antonia Zimmermann to travel to Ireland’s “Viagra Village” to report how Trump’s drive to reshore drug production threatens Europe’s top pharmaceuticals exporter. OCTOBER EU leaders resist Trump’s pressure to tear up the bloc’s business rules, instead trying to present a red tape-cutting drive pushed by von der Leyen as a self-generated reform that has the fringe benefit of addressing U.S. concerns.    NOVEMBER Attention shifts to Washington as the U.S. Supreme Court hears challenges to Trump’s sweeping tariffs. The justices are skeptical of his invocation of emergency powers to justify them. Even Trump appointees on the bench subject his lawyer to tough questioning.  A row flares on the first visit to Brussels by U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. Lutnick presses for concessions on EU digital regulation in exchange for possible tariff relief on steel. “Blackmail,” is the counterblast from Teresa Ribera, the EU’s top competition regulator. DECEMBER The year ends as it started, with another Trump broadside against Europe and its leaders. “I think they’re weak,” he tells POLITICO. “They don’t know what to do on trade, either.”

European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde on Thursday pushed back against suggestions that she may vacate her post early to preside over the World Economic Forum, the glitzy annual gathering of elite international bankers in the Swiss Alps. “I can very firmly [say] that I have always been fully determined to deliver on my mission and I’m determined to complete my term, so I regret to tell you that you’re not about to see the back of me,” Lagarde told a press conference in Frankfurt following Thursday’s monetary policy decision. The response comes a week after German financier Klaus Schwab caused embarrassment for Lagarde by revealing in an interview plans to have her succeed him at the helm of the WEF. Schwab, who quit the organization in April amid an investigation into his conduct, told the Financial Times that he and Lagarde had discussed her jumping ship before the conclusion of her term at the ECB in 2027, and asserted that an apartment had been reserved for her in the WEF’s Villa Mundi complex on the shores of Lake Geneva. In its initial response, the ECB had said Lagarde “has always been fully committed to deliver on her mission and is determined to complete her term,” a message it also circulated internally, according to two ECB officials familiar with the matter. But the carefully phrased statement didn’t exclude the possibility that Lagarde may, at least at an early stage, have entertained the idea of leaving before the end of her term. At least some of the staff at the 5,000-strong institution were miffed by the perceived affront. Questions over the former IMF chief’s ambitions have swirled ever since she took the helm of the ECB at the end of 2019, amid rumors that she didn’t care for monetary policy and would prefer a more political role. Such rumors have not been dispelled by repeated speeches on grand geopolitical themes that have gone well beyond the normal boundaries of monetary policy. It “kinda reinforces the idea she’s using the ECB as a stepping stone,” one bank employee told POLITICO. Another user, writing on the bank’s internal message board, asked sourly what it said about the prestige and stature of the central bank if its head is considering “leaving it for an event management company.” ECB staff told POLITICO that no one at the bank had raised the issue at a town hall meeting earlier this week. However, “in the canteen, over coffee etc., everybody’s gossiping about this,” one staffer said. On Thursday, Lagarde — wearing a pendant that said “In Charge” — sought to downplay the significance of the claims, which she described as “far less important than the future of the economy and the future of our monetary policy.”

Christine Lagarde has discussed leaving the European Central Bank early to take over running the World Economic Forum according to its founder Klaus Schwab. Schwab told the Financial Times he had met with the ECB president to arrange her taking over from him as chief executive in early 2027. Lagarde’s term with the ECB runs until the end of October of that year. The WEF runs the annual Davos extravaganza high up in the Swiss Alps, welcoming world leaders, financial titans and captains of industry. Schwab, who left the WEF last month amid accusations of financial improprieties which he denies, said he had made arrangements for Lagarde to take an apartment in the Villa Mundi in Geneva, where the WEF has its administrative offices. The most recent discussions they had on the subject, he added, were in early April in Frankfurt, “to discuss with her the leadership transition [at WEF] with myself remaining chair until she was ready to take over, at the latest, early 2027.” He added that he had planned for “several years” for Lagarde to succeed him. An ECB spokesperson contradicted Schwab, saying that “President Lagarde has always been fully committed to deliver on her mission and is determined to complete her term.” Lagarde is a regular at the Davos meetings in January. She joined the WEF’s board of trustees in 2019 while still managing director of the International Monetary Fund. In a statement, the WEF said: “The WEF is not in any position to comment on possible confidential discussions that may have taken place between our former chairman and Madame Lagarde. Regarding Villa Mundi, this is new information to us. The venue is now being used by our staff and constituents as part of the Forum’s ongoing work.”

PARIS ― French President Emmanuel Macron is celebrating a record-high wave of foreign investment in France today. Macron will seal investment deals for €20 billion as he gathers CEOs from all over the world at the Versailles palace for the annual “Choose France” kermesse, according to the president’s office. His office also confirmed €20.8 billion of investments in the artificial intelligence sector, which are part of the €109 billion investment package Macron promised at the Paris AI summit earlier this year. This year’s record amount of investments is especially welcome news for France as it grapples with sluggish economic growth, works to cut its massive budget deficit and braces for the economic consequences of the trade war with the U.S. Overall investment in Europe is dropping, especially from U.S. companies. Despite transatlantic tensions, several U.S. groups are expected to announce major investment projects, including logistics group Prologis, which will invest around €6.4 billion in new logistics facilities and data centers, and Amazon (€300 million). British digital bank Revolut will also invest €1 billion and ask French authorities for a banking license, while Spanish telecom infrastructure operator Cellnex will invest €2.5 billion. “When we take decisions that may not be the most popular, but that are coherent to make France more attractive … we succeed,” Macron said Monday morning as he visited a Daimler bus factory before heading to Versailles. During the rest of the day in Versailles, Macron will have one-on-one meetings with CEOs, attend roundtables on AI and critical minerals, and host a sumptuous dinner with executives and ministers in Versailles’ famous hall of mirrors. He will also attend a dedicated session to attract foreign movie producers to shoot in France as cinema risks becoming a new battleground in the trade war with the U.S. Macron has been organizing the “Choose France” event since he took office to showcase France’s economic attractiveness and make the point that the economic reforms he has passed during his tenure have transformed France into a more business-friendly country. France ranked as Europe’s most attractive country for foreign investors in an annual EY survey released last week. According to the study, the country registered a 14 percent drop in foreign investment last year but kept its pole position as its main rivals in this race ― Germany and the U.K. ― experienced a similar fall.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) confirmed on Wednesday that it has launched an investigation into allegations against its founder Klaus Schwab following a whistleblower letter that reportedly prompted his resignation. In a statement released Wednesday, the WEF — a non-profit best known for its annual gathering of global elites in Davos, Switzerland — said its board unanimously supported the decision to initiate an independent investigation, confirming an earlier report by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). The whistleblower letter — allegedly sent by current and former staff — accuses Schwab of financial misconduct, including misuse of WEF funds and inappropriate treatment of employees, the WSJ reported Tuesday. His wife, Hilde Schwab, is also accused of using WEF resources for personal travel. Schwab has strongly denied all the claims, the WSJ reported. A spokesperson for the WEF said in statement Wednesday that the organization’s board of trustees had “unanimously supported the Audit and Risk Committee’s decision to initiate an independent investigation following a whistleblower letter containing allegations against former Chairman Klaus Schwab.” They added: “This decision was made after consultation with external legal counsel and in line with the Forum’s fiduciary responsibilities. The investigation will be led by the Audit and Risk Committee with the support of independent legal experts.” The WEF said that while it takes the allegations against Schwab “seriously,” they “remain unproven, and will await the outcome of the investigation to comment further.” Schwab, who founded the WEF in 1971, announced his resignation as chair and member of the board of trustees on Monday, without providing further explanation for his decision. Although he had stepped down as executive chairman last year, Schwab had planned to stay on in a non-executive role until 2027. Instead, he resigned with immediate effect following an emergency board meeting held Sunday.

Margarita Louis-Dreyfus is chairperson of the Louis-Dreyfus Group and chair of Human Change Foundation. For too long, our society has celebrated technological innovation without asking fundamental questions about its effect on us. From social media to online dating and e-learning, digital tech’s rapid acceleration is driving a colossal cultural shift in how people interact, all while promising to unleash human potential and improve connectivity. And just last month, DeepSeek astonished investors as China challenged the U.S. over AI dominance, sending shock waves through the market. Yet, when tech ethicist and Centre of Humane Technology co-founder Tristan Harris warned a room full of CEOs in Davos that an “AI tsunami is coming,” bringing both substantial advantages and significant risks with it, his message served as a sobering reminder to question the human impact of this technological revolution. The cultural shift we’re currently experiencing is leading to what I refer to as a “human change.” Just like global climate change requires our full attention to tackle it, the changes happening to humanity — our children and younger generations, in particular — should come as a warning that if we don’t act now to stop it, we’ll be faced with the consequences in the future. Manipulative algorithms, addictive design features and business models rooted in the “attention economy” are draining human potential — not enhancing it. And the greatest risk is to our children. Countless studies show that children today spend more time in the virtual world than engaging in face-to-face exchange, which is contributing to an epidemic of loneliness and a loss of essential social skills — including emotional intelligence, resilience and the ability to nurture in-person relationships. The problem is clear: We’re facing a technological revolution that’s undermining our children’s potential and fueling loneliness. | Leon Neal/Getty Images On average, American teens spend up to nine hours per day watching or using screens, nearly five of which are spent on social media. And the impact this has on children’s brain development is profound: Research from the Winston Center shows that frequent exposure to social media heightens over-sensitivity to social feedback, leading to increased anxiety compared to children with less exposure. Similarly, Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist and author of “The Anxious Generation,” has warned that excessive smartphone and digital device use is making young people less focused and increasingly ill-equipped to navigate real-world challenges. This isn’t just about the distant future — it’s something that’s already happening. Employers are increasingly reluctant to hire Gen-Z workers due to poor problem-solving skills, communication issues, lack of attention span and inability to handle criticism. In the U.S., companies have noted that recent college graduates struggle with eye contact during interviews — a consequence of a generation that’s had most of its relationships mediated through a screen. That’s why Harris’s remarks at Davos resonated so strongly. Speaking at Future House, a joint space between Human Change — my global advocacy campaign raising awareness about technology’s impact on children’s well-being — and Project Liberty, an organization working toward a better internet, Harris’s warning was in stark contrast to his surroundings. While tech companies had plotted themselves all over the Davos Promenade, competing over AI dominance, he warned against a future that’s tech-controlled rather than human-led and the repercussions that would have.  The problem is clear: We’re facing a technological revolution that’s undermining our children’s potential and fueling loneliness. Addressing this isn’t just a parental concern but a societal one. Parents can act by delaying smartphone and social media use until their children reach the age of 16. Meanwhile, schools worldwide should ban smartphones on their premises, as evidence shows that phone-free environments improve focus, academic performance and mental health. Governments must also step up, strengthening regulations to hold tech companies accountable and uphold a “duty of care.” Australia’s move to ban social media for children under 16 sets a strong example here, while laws like the U.K.’s Online Safety Act and the EU’s Digital Services Act need to be expanded to address emerging AI-related risks. But above all, tech companies must do better. Instead of simply embracing innovation unthinkingly, they must ensure the safety of our children is prioritized in their product designs and overall business ethos. Those that fail to act will face a wave of lawsuits — like the recent case against Character.AI for harming children, or the litigation against TikTok over child deaths linked to its Blackout Challenge — and beyond damaging their reputation, this will eventually take a toll on their bottom line. Ultimately, the next generation’s well-being must be at the heart of both business and political agendas. Prioritizing children’s resilience amid this technological revolution isn’t just a moral imperative — it’s essential for the future of our societies.

Wolfgang Ischinger is a former German ambassador to the U.S. and the U.K. He is president of the Munich Security Conference Foundation, and chaired the Munich Security Conference from 2008 to 2022. He teaches at the Hertie School Berlin and the University of Tübingen. A sigh of relief was heard in Davos recently, when U.S. President Donald Trump, on the heels of his inauguration speech, made it clear he wouldn’t be a pushover by sacrificing Ukraine. (If the sigh was a little a muted on Europe’s end, it was probably because he also made it clear to Denmark, one of NATO’s smaller partners, that he didn’t consider its sovereignty over Greenland to be absolute.) But are we really on the fast-track to U.S.-Russia talks? Are we on the way to negotiations on a possible cease-fire, or even a peace settlement, in Ukraine, which can all be wrapped up in weeks? Some seem to believe so. But skepticism is warranted. The idea that establishing security guarantees for Ukraine and a cease-fire line along the current front line is all that’s needed is the West’s wishful thinking. We need to be preparing for a much longer and extraordinarily complex process that will take many months. Russian President Vladimir Putin won’t want to give the impression that he’s dancing to Washington’s tune. The whole security situation in Europe, the lifting of sanctions, nuclear and conventional arms control, and overall strategic stability — it will all have to be discussed. The Russian leader will demand equal footing with Trump, and he knows two things for certain: Trump will be gone for good by early 2029, and the U.S. president will want to avoid a military conflict with Russia at almost all costs. And with Europe’s united front as shaky as it is, this could be an invitation for Putin to stall. Some initial conclusions from the various rounds of talks in Davos and the preparatory discussions for this week’s Munich Security Conference can be outlined as follows: Firstly, the cheaper the price of a cease-fire and the less watertight it is, the more expensive the peace that follows will be. Therefore, under no circumstances should support for Ukraine be reduced — on the contrary, it should be intensified. The price for Putin must be made as high as possible. Next, Trump must exercise restraint when considering summit encounters with Putin: An early summit would be a completely undeserved reward for the Russian leader. It should only be considered toward the end of a promising negotiation process. Moreover, the Russian side may well be planning a surprise military attack or major offensive in order to undermine Western or Ukrainian ideas about the negotiating framework. And while the West certainly shouldn’t make things easy for Russia, there has to be room for realism. U.S. President Donald Trump, on the heels of his inauguration speech, made it clear he wouldn’t be a pushover by sacrificing Ukraine. | Andrew Harnik/Getty Images Take, for example, the much-discussed idea of having European troops secure a cease-fire line. The political objective here is clear and sound: It would allow Europe to show Trump it’s prepared to do more for its own security than it has so far. But the devil is in the details. Estimates of the number of troops required to effectively secure a 1,000-kilometer contact line vary from 50,000 to 200,000 — the latter figure came from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy himself. Realistically, could Europe politically or militarily manage this, while the Bundeswehr is struggling to deploy a brigade to Lithuania? Doubts can, therefore, be expressed as to whether Europe would even be capable of credibly securing a cease-fire with a large numbers of troops. And the possible involvement of troops from third countries, including for example India, should be given proper consideration. For its part, Washington isn’t even thinking about putting “boots on the ground” — a stance which breaks the NATO principle that risks should be shared. It will also make it more difficult for European governments to get the buy-in they need from their parliaments. As seen from Germany, the slogan “in together — out together” has always been a healthy NATO principal. It’s important we not come up with short-sighted solutions, but set long-term priorities and prepare for a difficult, painful negotiation process, which could take a long time due to its extreme complexity. Above all, we must not only continue to provide military and financial assistance to Ukraine but increase it. This is the ideal way to achieve a successful outcome for the future of a sovereign, free and undivided Ukraine, and the restoration of Europe’s security.