PARIS. — Encouraged by Donald Trump's complacency, Vladimir Putin dreams of a new "Yalta" alongside the United States and China. The Russian president would like to use the APEC summit, on November 18 and 19 in Shenzhen, to discuss the fate of Ukraine with his American and Chinese counterparts. The White House confirmed a trilateral meeting for November 19, but without Ukraine on the agenda. But if this dream were to come true, what would become of Europe?
In February 1945, in the Livadia Palace in Crimea, Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin, leaning over a map, redrew Europe without asking the opinion of those whose borders they were tracing. Trump, Xi and Putin will meet this week
Eighty-one years later, Vladimir Putin dreams of recreating the scene under the neon lights of Shenzhen, the technological showcase of southern China. The setting has changed, and so has the cast: Donald Trump in the role of Roosevelt and Xi Jinping as host. Only the same ambition remains intact: to decide the fate of Ukraine among the great powers, far from Kyiv and Brussels. The master of the Kremlin has been favorable to the idea since October 1, before the Valdai discussion club. According to the Wall Street Journal, he subsequently proposed it to Donald Trump during a phone call on October 9: a trilateral meeting on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, to end the war on terms favorable to Moscow. It was Pyotr Tolstoy, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Duma, who dared to make the comparison with Yalta.
But why now? Because the wind is still blowing in the Kremlin's favor. In recent weeks, Washington abandoned new tariffs on oil, lifted sanctions and allowed Russian diesel to flow back into world markets, offering a reprieve to the Russian war machine. Delighted, the pro-Kremlin press crowned Trump, calling him a "professional magician."
Trump welcomes Putin at the Anchorage summit in August 2025 ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS - AFP
On October 19, in front of the White House, the American president went further: "Honestly, Russia has behaved well in Ukraine," he dared to say. The day before, Russian attacks had killed six people in Kharkiv, including several children. At the same time, the satellite early-warning system and intelligence sharing that protect Ukraine from Russian missiles suffered interruptions for more than a week, as noted by the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA). The service was not fully restored until October 24.
Primus inter pares
The Kremlin, convinced that Ukraine is on the verge of collapse, is bombing its power plants and depots to make its cities uninhabitable before winter. "We will only negotiate on our terms," proclaimed the tabloid Moskovsky Komsomolets. In any case, for Putin, the mere image would amount to victory. A photo alongside Trump and Xi would make him the "primus inter pares" (first among equals), estimates Moscow analyst Alexander Bratersky. "The mere fact of meeting will be a success," sellable to Russian public opinion, he asserts.
Traditional Russian matryoshka dolls with the figures of Putin, Trump and Xi Jinping in a souvenir shop in Moscow Alexander Zemlianichenko - AP
The problem for Putin is that, apparently, the other two guests have no intention of eating the same menu... at least publicly. Donald Trump has shown himself open to everything: "Anything I can do to end the war, whether someone is present or not," he had said. But on Friday, the White House made a decision: the three leaders will meet on November 19, on the sidelines of APEC. But not to divide up Ukraine. According to a senior American official quoted by the press, "the question of the reduction of nuclear arsenals" will be the central focus of the meeting, something unprecedented among the leaders of the three largest arsenals on the planet. The war in Iran will also be addressed. But Ukraine will not be on the agenda, "since discussions on the Ukrainian conflict follow a separate process that does not include China," the White House said.
In Beijing, the enthusiasm is even lower. On October 30, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier mentioned to Xi Jinping the possibility of a summit dedicated to Ukraine. "You could see the surprise on his face," he recounted. According to him, Xi explained that the three leaders would probably meet in Shenzhen, but not to talk about Ukraine, a European conflict where "the Europeans must sit at the table," he would have said.
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier alongside Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky (Archive) NICOLAS TUCAT - AFP
To accept that meeting, China would have imposed its conditions: a meticulously scheduled meeting, a prior written declaration and a minimum of debate. In the absence of a prior agreement on the agenda, it will prefer bilateral meetings. For some experts, Xi, who claims Taiwan "at his strategic core," would take advantage of any opening to push the United States out of the Pacific. It remains to be seen what Beijing will concede on nuclear matters: its diplomacy recently described the trilateral disarmament negotiations as "neither fair, nor reasonable, nor realistic."
"Talking about a new Yalta makes no sense. Yalta was the summit of the victors concerned with defining their spheres of influence. We are not at that point," declares Tatiana Kastouéva-Jean, of the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI). François Heisbourg, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, considers it "a mere illusion." In his view, obsessed with Taiwan, China "will not commit to Ukraine." The only imaginable American gain would be for Beijing to abandon North Korea, Moscow's only real ally. "But Beijing will never hand over North Korea in exchange for Taiwan," he concludes.
The president of Taiwan, Lai Ching-te, speaks at a conference on relations with the U.S. Taiwan is coveted by China. Taiwan Presidential Office
For Eva Seiwert, of the Berlin-based research center MERICS, what Xi wants to avoid at all costs is a failed summit that would overshadow APEC's economic showcase. Trump, finally, is above all seeking the image: that of the "indispensable mediator," according to Inderjeet Parmar, a political scientist at City St George's, in London. But he is playing with weaker cards. The Democrats have won in both chambers of Congress in the midterm elections of November 3. If they decide to fund Kyiv, the White House's room for maneuver will shrink even further, notes Moscow analyst Alexander Bratersky.
The European bill
Putin's dream, therefore, has not been buried, but postponed: once the three leaders have met, nothing will prevent Ukraine from slipping into the private meetings. Assuming this materializes, for Europe the bill would be extremely high, and above all in the east. An agreement struck between three would divide Ukraine behind the Ukrainians' backs. Volodymyr Zelensky said it bluntly: "We really don't want this to become a Yalta 2, 3 or 4, with a redistribution of spheres of influence." The Ukrainian president asks his partners not to hand Moscow "a new diplomatic advantage of great magnitude."
Donald Trump and Xi Jinping tour the National Archives in Washington (Archive) KEVIN DIETSCH - GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA
The second consequence is that it would affect the security architecture of the continent. Putin demands that NATO withdraw its troops from its borders and rejects any presence of European soldiers in Ukraine. His diplomacy has already floated the idea of non-aggression pacts with members of the Alliance. In a closed-door meeting between three, these demands could become bargaining chips, just as Europe negotiates security guarantees for Kyiv.
The third damage would be to confidence in the American umbrella. A peace imposed on Ukraine would divide NATO and reinforce the message that Pacific allies have received since Trump came to the presidency: that the United States is a "dangerous friend." The first Yalta drew the lines of the Cold War. The second could sow the seeds of a broader conflict.
Inderjeet Parmar sees in this a break with post-1945 practice, when Washington consulted its allies before negotiating with Moscow or Beijing. Europeans risk becoming secondary players, whose interests are traded on the counter of the great powers. And that is why the Kremlin is rubbing its hands.
"Trump has already managed to break Euro-Atlantic unity and now fractures are appearing in the so-called united Europe," celebrated the government daily Rossiyskaya Gazeta in October. CEPA sums up the danger, stating that even if the summit proves fruitless, what will weigh most will be the world's interpretation of it: that of a Europe relegated to the role of spectator.
Trump arrives at a press conference at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey Alex Brandon - AP
However, in the end, it would be Europe that would pay the bill. Brussels has already mobilized a loan of 90 billion euros for 2026 and 2027, and Kyiv is presenting a new deficit of 70 billion for 2027. A hasty peace in Shenzhen would leave Europeans with the burden of rebuilding, guaranteeing and monitoring an amputated Ukraine, without having been allowed to say a single word about the drawing of its borders.
Nevertheless, the experts qualify the chaos scenario. The interests of the three capitals diverge too much — from Ukraine to Taiwan, through technology and trade — to found a true "G3," considers Parmar. The real risk, according to him, lies elsewhere: the normalization of great-power bargaining, closed almost without consulting anyone.
Europe reacts
But Europe is not sitting idly by. On November 12, in Dublin, 40 states of the European Political Community stipulated in a declaration that any question affecting their security must be resolved "with the Europeans." The next day, the 27 members of the European Union (EU) designated a negotiating team, made up of the national security officials of Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy and Poland, with the support of the Commission and the European Council.
Moscow was quick to chill the atmosphere. On Friday, spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that, even though the Kremlin had not vetoed the presence of the Europeans, it first wants to know their "true intentions" before accepting "an expanded format." Russian diplomacy even denied any agreement with Washington on that point, and former president Dmitry Medvedev quipped that Europe "has not yet been invited."
Putin talks with Xi during a meeting in Samarkand, Uzbekistan (Archive) Sergei Bobylev - Pool Sputnik Kremlin
This Saturday, Peskov softened his position: Moscow does not intend to "impose conditions" on the composition of the European team. But the concern persists. "Please, no surprises," launched German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, still shaken by the Anchorage summit (Alaska) in August 2025, where the Europeans discovered with astonishment Trump's complacency toward Putin. For his part, Emmanuel Macron recalled the reality of the financial balance: "Without the Europeans, there is no support for Ukraine. American support has disappeared," he said. The Europeans, he added in Dublin, will be "those who define and decide" their future security.
The paradox of the situation is that Europe's most unexpected ally could be sitting in Beijing. Sinologist Eva Seiwert advises Kyiv and the European capitals to take advantage of Xi Jinping's own reluctance, for whom Europe remains a first-order economic partner. She also warns that a summit officially dedicated to Ukraine would send the world the unacceptable message that three leaders are arrogating to themselves the right to decide for Europe in its absence.
If in Shenzhen it is only about a photo, the game will continue at the G20 summit in Miami, on December 14 and 15. In the meantime, Europe will have to prove that it can have weight of its own without needing to be invited.
At Yalta, the peoples of Central Europe had no voice or vote. Europe has had 81 years to learn to make its own heard.
By Luisa Corradini