In February 1945, as the Allies neared victory in Europe, leaders Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Joseph Stalin met at the Yalta Conference to decide the continent's future. The result was not just a peace agreement, but a pragmatic division of Europe into spheres of influence—a decision that condemned millions of people to decades under Soviet control.
Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump/PHOTO: Profimedia
Eight decades away, the contours of a new “Yalta” seem to be taking shape, not in a palace in Crimea, but in the statements and actions of the administration led by Donald Trump.
The 2025 US national security strategy describes a world divided into “spheres of influence”, in which Washington reasserts its role in the Western Hemisphere, but appears to accept Russia's influence in Eastern Europe and China's influence in East Asia, the Kyiv Post writes.
This marks a significant change from the last eight decades of American foreign policy, based on the sovereignty of states, the inviolability of borders and the right of peoples to self-determination.
In this new approach, the United States seems to be returning to the logic of the 19th century, in which great powers set the rules and smaller states become pawns – with independence negotiable and the future decided in capitals such as Moscow, Beijing or Washington.
Pressure on Ukraine, implicit concessions
The Trump administration has pushed for quick peace talks in Ukraine, while avoiding describing Russia's actions as direct aggression. His rhetoric suggests that the prolongation of the war would be the result of the decisions of the leaders involved, including President Volodymyr Zelensky, rather than the consequence of Russian expansionism.
The 2025 summit between Trump and Vladimir Putin produced no concrete progress, but highlighted the irreconcilable differences between Moscow and Kiev, as well as Washington's willingness to exert pressure on Ukraine.
Withdrawal from NATO's eastern flank
The reduction of the American military presence in Eastern Europe sends, according to critics, a clear signal. In 2025, the Pentagon notified countries such as Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Slovakia regarding the reduction of military presence.
At the same time, threats regarding the conditioning of NATO guarantees on the level of defense spending fuel the perception that the security of these states is becoming negotiable.
Belarus and Georgia, left out of the equation
Belarus appears as a clear example of this change. Although it has an important strategic position, the country is missing from Washington's stated priorities. Direct dialogue with the regime of Aleksander Lukashenko is seen by critics as legitimizing a dictatorship and abandoning the democratic opposition.
A similar situation is emerging in Georgia, where hopes for NATO membership have dimmed and US support for territorial integrity appears more reserved, despite the previous 2008 conflict with Russia.
Ambiguities within the Western alliance
The positions of some EU and NATO member states, such as Hungary and Slovakia, further complicate the situation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio's recent visit to Budapest and Bratislava highlighted this ambiguity.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has been frequently praised by Trump as his government continues to maintain energy ties with Russia and oppose European sanctions.
Similarly, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has refused to reduce energy dependence on Russia, citing major economic risks.
The fact that Washington does not sanction these positions raises questions about the cohesion of the Western alliance and signals a paradigm shift: NATO membership no longer necessarily implies a common line vis-à-vis Russia.
A return to great power politics?
Critics of this approach warn that the world could return to a system dominated by spheres of influence, where major decisions are made by great powers and smaller states have a limited role.
If this trend is confirmed, the consequences for Eastern Europe – and for the international order built after 1945 – could be profound and long-lasting.
