Poland says no to the Budapest Summit. Will the U.S. ignore Tusk's warning?

The United States administration is considering organising a key peace summit between the president of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenski and the president of Russia Vladimir Putin. According to Politico, Budapest was chosen for the meeting. This information triggered an immediate and decisive reaction of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who publically opposed this location. The Prime Minister's opposition is not accidental – it involves tragic past and broken promises to warrant Ukraine's security. The choice of the Hungarian capital raises serious doubts, putting into question the effectiveness of possible talks and the function of Poland in shaping the future of the region.

Budapest as “neutral” land? American peace summit plans

The Politico portal, citing sources akin to the American administration, revealed White House's plans for organising trilateral peace talks. Budapest is considered to be a "neutral" place that could facilitate dialog between the parties to the conflict. The choice of the capital of Hungary is not accidental – this country, ruled by Prime Minister Viktor Orban, maintains friendly relations with Russia while presenting a little favourable position towards Ukraine. Orban is besides seen as Donald Trump's key ally in Europe, which could affect the dynamics of possible negotiations.

American plans are at an early stage, and chances of success stay uncertain. any European allies of the US express deep skepticism about the anticipation of reaching a lasting agreement, but supports the thought of dialog itself. In parallel, intensive preparations are underway for lower-level meetings to prepare the ground for a possible summit of presidents.

Why does Tusk say no? Weight of historical memorandum

Donald Tusk's opposition to Budapest as a place of peace talks is not dictated solely by “adjudices”, as he himself put on platform X. “Budapest? Not everyone remembers this, but as early as 1994 Ukraine received assurances of territorial integrity from the US, Russia and large Britain. Budapest. I may be superstitious, but this time I would effort to find a different place," the Prime Minister wrote. His words mention to Budapest Memorandumsigned December 5, 1994.

At the time, in the capital of Hungary, Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom undertook to warrant Ukraine's safety and territorial integrity. In return, Ukraine renounced its atomic arsenal, inherited from the dissolution of the russian Union, which was the 3rd largest in the world. In addition, the signatories declared that they would not apply economical force to Ukraine and undertook to address the UN safety Council in case Ukraine became a victim of nuclear-related aggression or threat of specified aggression. This is simply a key context that casts a shadow on the current proposals.

Broken Promises: Lesson from 2014 and 2022

History has painfully verified the effectiveness of the guarantees contained in the Budapest Memorandum. Following the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014, and then after the launch of a full-scale aggression against Ukraine in 2022, both Ukrainians and a crucial part of the global community, concluded that Russia had grossly broken the provisions of the signed agreement. safety guarantees, as has happened many times before in the past of the world, proved to be ineffective in the face of real aggression.

It is this painful experience from the past that drives the skepticism of Donald Tusk and his fears. For Poland, which is 1 of Ukraine's most committed allies, returning to Budapest as a place of negotiation symbolizes the repetition of the mistake and possible weakening of Kiev's position. Prime Minister Tusk stresses that lessons from the past must be drawn to prevent another diplomatic fiasco that could have disastrous consequences for safety in the region.

Other options on the table: Where could the summit take place?

Various locations were offered in the public space for the possible Putin-Zelenski Summit. French president Emmanuel Macron mentioned Geneva, which has long been considered a conventional place for global negotiations. Many politicians and experts besides pointed to Turkey as a naturally neutral ground for discussion, given its unique geopolitical position and erstwhile attempts at mediation.

Vladimir Putin himself proposed Moscow, but this proposal was immediately rejected by Volodymyr Zelenski and was not taken seriously by the global community. However, there is much evidence that the Americans are determined to prosecute a summit in Budapest. specified a decision would put the Ukrainian delegation in an awkward and highly hard negotiating situation, given the historical burden and current relations between Hungary and both parties to the conflict. Poland's position on this issue is simply a clear signal that the choice of place is crucial for the credibility and possible success of talks.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk's strong opposition to Budapest as a place of possible peace talks between Russia and Ukraine underlines the complexity and historical burden on the current geopolitical situation. Referring to the ineffective 1994 Budapest Memorandum is not only a "presumption", but above all a reminder of the broken safety guarantees that led to the current conflict. The choice of place of negotiation is symbolic and practical, affecting the credibility and position of each party.

The U.S. administration's decision to proceed its plans for Budapest, despite the clear concerns of Poland's key ally, will be a test for Western unity and its ability to learn from the past. The future of possible peace talks, and consequently the prospects for ending the war in Ukraine, depend not only on the will of the parties to the conflict, but besides on the wisdom and prudence of those who effort to initiate them. Time will show whether the informing of Poland will be heard, or whether the past will coincide with a tragic circle.