The European military leaders asked Donald Trump to send F-35 to Romania, as part of the security guarantees for Ukraine. Romania did not find, this time, at the table table. Why?
Finnish President Stubb, along with Ukrainian counterpart Zelenski and Ursula von der Leyen
The head of the US General Staff, General Dan Caine, hosted the heads of armies in the UK, Germany, France, Finland and Italy to discuss Kiev's security guarantee options. There were the representatives of the countries that joined Volodimir Zelenski on Monday to support them at the White House meeting.
Romanian President Nicușor Dan was not present at the Washington meeting
Although the Romanian leaders declare themselves Pro Ukraine, they do not want to engage too much in visible actions in this direction. President Nicușor Dan, who participated online in the recent debates of the will, said that, at the last meeting, the one on Tuesday, some leaders “were more optimistic, and others more pessimistic about how Russia will behave”, emphasizing that he is in the category of fishermen: “Russia will be drawn, and that is why it will be important, and that is why it will be important, and which is why it will be convinced, to apply the package of sanctions they have prepared. “
Even today, the Foreign Minister of Moscow Sergei Lavrov explained that Vladimir Putin is prepared to meet with Ukrainian president Volodimir Zelenski, but that all problems should be solved, specifying that there would be a doubt about “Zelenski's legitimacy” to sign a peace agreement.
Russia seems to seek pretexts for the delay of peace, in parallel with violent attacks on Ukraine, which is why Europeans need formulas for the Ukrainian army to withstand.
Not all Europeans are very concerned, but especially the great powers – France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom. They were added to Finland, a country with a quarter of the population of Romania and which has just entered NATO less than two years ago.
Active Finland, absent Romania
Why is Finland so involved in the fair resolution of the conflict in Ukraine, and Romania so shy? How about the Finnish president runs at all the great meetings, while the head of the Romanian state prefers hiking among the monasteries, just when the important leaders of the continent bet on the future of Europe?
Why does Nicușor Dan speak from the meadow, while Alexander Stubb does the pleadings in the Oval Office? Is the difference between the two related to the different political traditions of the two states or to their education? Or maybe the institutions behind them have different visions?
Romania prefers, as many times in history, to have an invisible profile, not to assume too much the opinions, that it is not known what follows. He slips beneath the great debates of the world and sits in the shadow of his allies in silence, so that it can make a pirouette in the opposite direction.
Finland makes exactly the opposite, and the president of Helsinki, Alexander Stubb, made his country a star of the struggle for the sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.
Alexander Stubb's arguments
Stubb says in a DW interview with naturalness that Finland has “one of the largest armies in Europe”, equipped with “advanced air and dry” air systems developed so that Finland can be sure to defend “independently” and to remain a contributor rather than a security consumer.
Alexander Stubb: Finland has “one of the biggest armies in Europe”
Finland has a border of 1300 kilometers with Russia, but the president of the stubb says he sleeps quietly, because in the country there is bunkers for over 90% of the population, that together with Poland the two states in Europe have the largest F-16 aircraft and will soon come to F-35, and the population is prepared and trained for a conflict with Russia.
The Finnish president is one of Ukraine's most powerful supporters in front of the United States and one of the European leaders with great trump. Not just because he was in Finland's national bay team, but especially because he knows how to assert his principles and argue them with examples from the dramatic past of his country.
He has a doctorate at London School of Economics, he was prime minister, Minister of Finance, Foreign Affairs, professor and director of the famous university of transnational governance. Unlike him, Nicușor Dan seems much less prepared and neither he nor the institutions behind him have the ability to make Romania a continental player.
When asked about what he believes in relation to the concept of peace against the territories, the Minister of Defense, Ionuț Mosteanu, gave a typical answer: “I say not to enter the details of this peace.”
Romania, only echo in the big decisions
Bucharest is just the echo of the great powers, which is why it will be difficult to win and when the problem of the reconstruction of Ukraine will be asked, although Nicușor Dan still talks about the strengths of the country, about the logistics centers through which humanitarian and military aids have elapsed and which will be transformed into transport for materials.
The Romanian president seems more interested in this post-war than about how and what is negotiated now. As if Romania was not interested in the future map of the continent. It is not unexpected, therefore, there is no talk of Romania without its representatives being at the table.
For now, the news is good: the heads of the major European powers have requested the performance of the US F-35 military aircraft to Romania, according to The Times, so that from the Kogălniceanu military base, the Black Sea and the adjacent spaces can be secured than until now.
A formula for the present and future. In addition, several NATO soldiers at the east border of Romania and several sophisticated coast defense systems and beyond. But who to ask them, if the Romanian leaders are not in the offices in which they are designed including the future of their country?
Sabina Fati – DW
