EU convenes emergency Ukraine talks as Trump-Putin summit looms in Alaska

European foreign ministers will gather online on Monday for an emergency session called by the EU's top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, three days before Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin sit down in Alaska to discuss ending the war in Ukraine. The extraordinary meeting, confirmed by Kallas on Sunday, reflects a growing conviction in Brussels and European capitals that any settlement negotiated bilaterally between Washington and Moscow will not survive without Kyiv and the European Union at the table.

The Alaska summit and the exclusion problem

Trump and Putin are scheduled to meet on Friday 15 August in Alaska, a venue chosen by the White House. Preparations, according to a White House official speaking on Saturday, are for a bilateral encounter; the official added that Trump was open to Volodymyr Zelensky attending, but no invitation has been extended. The Kremlin leader ruled out a meeting with Zelensky last week, telling reporters the conditions for such an encounter were "unfortunately still far" from being met. That phrasing suggests Moscow sees little reason to engage directly with the Ukrainian president while negotiating with his principal military backer.

The bilateral format is precisely what European leaders have spent months trying to prevent. Since Trump's return to the White House in January, EU capitals have warned that a great-power deal over Ukrainian territory would repeat the mistakes of 1938 and 1945, imposing borders without the consent of the people who live within them. Kallas put it bluntly on Sunday: "Any deal between the US and Russia must have Ukraine and the EU included, for it is a matter of Ukraine's and the whole of Europe's security."

Territorial swaps and the language of concession

Alarm in Kyiv and European capitals spiked after Trump told reporters a potential deal would involve "some swapping of territories to the betterment of both [sides]". The phrase, vague but deliberate, implies Ukraine could be pressed to cede land currently occupied by Russian forces in exchange for concessions elsewhere, perhaps security guarantees or reconstruction aid. For Ukraine, which insists on the restoration of its 1991 borders, any language of territorial exchange is a red line. Zelensky responded on Saturday that decisions taken without Ukraine would be "stillborn" and unworkable, a word chosen to signal that implementation would collapse the moment Ukrainian forces, officials or citizens refused to comply.

Kallas reinforced the legal position on Sunday: "As we work towards a sustainable and just peace, international law is clear: All temporarily occupied territories belong to Ukraine." The formulation "temporarily occupied" is the EU's standard terminology for Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, and it carries legal weight in the Council's sanctions framework. By repeating it on the eve of the Alaska meeting, Kallas is signalling that the EU will not recognise territorial changes imposed by force, whatever Trump and Putin agree.

European unity tested by the emergency meeting

The Monday meeting will be held online, a format that allows all 27 foreign ministers to participate without travel delays. It follows a joint statement on Saturday from the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Finland and the European Commission, a grouping that spans the EU's eastern flank, its largest economies and its nuclear powers. The statement insisted any diplomatic solution must protect the security interests of Ukraine and Europe. Notably, the United Kingdom, no longer an EU member, was included in the coordination, reflecting the depth of British concern about a US-Russia bargain that could weaken NATO's eastern deterrence.

Maintaining that unity will be tested in the coming days. Hungary's Viktor Orbán has repeatedly argued for an immediate ceasefire on current lines, a position close to Moscow's. Slovakia's Robert Fico has echoed similar sentiments. Italy's Giorgia Meloni, while supportive of Ukraine, faces domestic pressure over defence spending. Poland and the Baltic states, by contrast, view any negotiation that freezes Russian gains as an existential threat. Kallas's challenge on Monday will be to produce a common position firm enough to carry weight in Washington but flexible enough to keep all 27 aboard.

What Kallas wants from the ministers

Kallas has set three benchmarks for any agreement. First, Ukraine and the EU must be participants, not subjects. Second, a deal "must not provide a springboard for further Russian aggression against Ukraine, the transatlantic alliance and Europe", a direct reference to the fear that a frozen conflict would allow Moscow to rearm and attack again, as it did after the 2014-15 Minsk agreements. Third, the territorial integrity principle must hold: occupied territories remain Ukrainian under international law. These benchmarks will form the backbone of the EU's talking points in the days before Alaska.

The High Representative also faces a practical problem: the EU has limited leverage over the Trump-Putin meeting itself. Washington has not invited Brussels to observe, let alone participate. The EU's instruments, sanctions, financial aid, military training, reconstruction pledges, are powerful but indirect. They shape the battlefield and the postwar landscape; they do not grant a seat at a bilateral summit. Monday's meeting is as much about preparing the EU's post-summit response as about influencing the summit itself.

The security guarantee question

Behind the territorial debate lies the harder question of security guarantees. Ukraine has sought NATO membership or bilateral security pacts with major powers. The EU has offered a path to membership, but accession takes years. The United States has provided the bulk of military aid, over 100 billion euros since 2022, but Trump has signalled reluctance to commit to open-ended support. Any Alaska deal that trades territory for a vague security promise would leave Ukraine exposed. European leaders know this; their Saturday statement's emphasis on "security interests of Ukraine and Europe" is code for a guarantee with teeth, not a piece of paper.

France's Emmanuel Macron has been the most vocal on this point, calling for a major increase in European defence spending and suggesting European troops could play a role in enforcing a ceasefire. Germany's Olaf Scholz has been more cautious, ruling out German ground troops. Poland and the Baltics want NATO Article 5 extended to any ceasefire line. The Monday meeting will expose these fault lines. Kallas will need a formulation that satisfies the hawks without alienating the cautious.

Why the Minsk precedent haunts this moment

The 2014 and 2015 Minsk agreements, brokered by France and Germany with Russia and Ukraine, are the ghost at every negotiating table. They froze the front lines after Russia's initial invasion but left the political status of Donetsk and Luhansk unresolved. Russia used the pause to rebuild its forces; Ukraine used it to build a modern army. When Putin launched the full-scale invasion in February 2022, he cited Kyiv's failure to implement Minsk, a failure Kyiv attributed to Moscow's refusal to withdraw heavy weapons and hand over border control. European diplomats do not want a Minsk III. They see a bad deal as worse than no deal, because a bad deal legitimises conquest and invites the next war.