TBarely after the April 30 US-Ukrainian  minerals agreement was signed, the United States announced on May 1 ^its intention to “change course” by renouncing any mediation role in the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, calling on both sides to present their ideas for ending the war. Vice President Vance made this clear the same day on Fox News : “It will be up to the Russians and the Ukrainians, now that each side knows the other’s peace terms, to find an agreement and end this brutal conflict .” This retreat sends a worrying signal, with sulking serving as a strategy.

I am, unfortunately, not surprised: since January, I have tried to help the new US administration, offering my expertise, my understanding of Ukraine, and my warnings about the risks of a misguided peace process. I was present at  President Trump ‘s inauguration and have worked tirelessly to support those within the administration who still have a clear vision of the situation in Ukraine. But progress has been imperceptible. Despite the rhetoric, too many people in Washington seem driven by instincts or interests that run counter to a just and lasting peace.

Some, the “activists,” advocate peace with Russia at any cost, even if it means compromising Ukraine’s sovereignty. For them, friendship with Moscow is more important than justice for Kyiv. Trump himself simply calls for peace, driven by instinct and calculation. But there are also the “realists” who recognize that real peace cannot be achieved through appeasement, but only by strengthening Ukraine’s position and ensuring that it can no longer be threatened.

In Europe, this “realistic” camp now has an undisputed leader in President  Emmanuel Macron . He expresses a more strategic vision by rejecting concessions and providing support: trade, investment, financial systems, military and material aid. In this vision, peace is not based on hope, but on strength.

I love Ukraine; it is my homeland. I know Ukrainians; I have preserved Ukrainian identity, language, deep-rooted freedom, and a sense of compassion. I understand Russia: I had a distinguished career there, I understood how power works, what real influence over people and events means, what the Russian imperial spirit is, and what the Soviet Union means morally for modern Russia and Russians. I have worked extensively with  the “big neighbor,” China . I then fought against the collusion of gangsters and secret service agents who seized power in Russia under Vladimir Putin. Now British, I have encouraged my government to support Ukraine by all means at its disposal.

Let’s face the facts. First, Ukraine will not agree to cede captured territories, and Russia simply cannot give up what it has taken. Second, with a million people killed or wounded, homes and families destroyed, and people tortured, no peace treaty signed by this generation would have any value. Therefore, there is no point in pursuing a pipe dream. The solution will necessarily be complex and long-term: the priority must be to secure a ceasefire through increased pressure on Russia, through new economic sanctions and a European effort to provide arms and ammunition to Ukraine.

The Russian economy is vulnerable and its current militaristic orientation is unsustainable. Then, elections in Ukraine and the formation of a national unity government will take note of this new situation without renouncing lost territories, as shown by numerous historical precedents with two Germanys, two Koreas, two Cypruses, multiple frozen conflicts such as those between Russia and Japan or between China and Taiwan. Finally, we will have to wait for time to do its work, first and foremost with the death of  Vladimir Putin,  who will already be 73 years old in 2025: the collapse of this regime and the Russian population’s desire for change will then constitute the best hope for the reunification of Ukraine.

This direction requires consistency and firmness in the service of a long-term European commitment, both military and economic. President Macron has taken the reins of European leadership in Ukraine, enabling France to once again establish itself as a moral and strategic compass in the West. He honors the legacy of a Europe that remembers its own bloody lessons and dares to believe in a future where justice and peace are not contradictions, but companions.