You should listen to Bart de Wever. Ever since the Belgian Prime Minister managed to single-handedly prevent access to the Russian billions deposited in Belgium, which was massively pushed by Brussels and Berlin, we have known what kind of political caliber this man is.

De Wever now made comments about Russia that once again run completely counter to what Brussels and Berlin say about Ukraine and Russia – and are perhaps closer to the truth for that very reason: “In private, the European heads of state and government agree with me, but no one dares to say it out loud: We have to end the conflict in the interests of Europe, without being naive towards Putin.”

Deal with Putin: Is there a four-eye society in Europe?

Here, de Wever addresses a European society of four eyes: people talk differently in public than in private. What is meant is: There is an official version, let’s call it: unwavering loyalty to Ukraine, and a four-eyes version, and that means: Ensure a quick peace in the Ukraine warin order to then get back into the energy business with Russia. So make a deal Vladimir Putin.

What is explosive is that de Wever says he is not alone in his thinking. Of course, de Wever doesn’t say that anyone who thinks like he does. But the fact is that in recent weeks both French President Emmanuel Macron and Italy’s Prime Minister Georgia Meloni have spoken out in favor of direct European negotiations with Russia’s Putin.

Others like Hungary’s Victor Orban have been in favor of it for a long time. Belgium’s head of government openly states the calculation behind it; it is the conclusion of a comprehensive failure: “Since we cannot put Putin under pressure by sending weapons to Ukraine and cannot bring down his economy without the support of the USA, we only have one method left: to conclude an agreement.”

Zelensky finds himself in a dangerous dilemma

De Wever said these sentences shortly before the EU summit. Looking at the result, one can say: They were prophetic, because the current European summit gave Ukraine a double defeat. Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) and Co. failed in their attempt to get Hungary and Slovakia to loosen the 90 billion loan to Ukraine that had already been approved.

The Hungarian insists on the delivery of Russian oil through the Druzhba pipeline, which was destroyed in the war and which, in his eyes, Ukraine is delaying in repairing. In fact, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyj announced the repairs for May – and thus intervened in the Hungarian election campaign: at the expense of Orban.

As a result, the 90 billion that Ukraine needs will not flow for the time being. The Russian coffers are ringing because Russia’s Putin is the ultimate beneficiary of the Iran war.

Up to $151 billion could flow into Putin’s war chest

In a study by the Kyiv School of Economics, which is available to everyone on its website and which was first reported by “Spiegel”, three scenarios are put forward, depending on the duration of the Iran war. Conclusion: Even if the battle ends soon, Russia will receive an additional $45 billion. If the Iran war lasts six months, it will pour a whopping $151 billion into Putin’s war chest – this year alone.

This means that Russia can continue to finance its war of aggression against Ukraine for a very long time – while Ukraine is running out of money – also because of the Europeans’ self-paralysis. The 90 billion that Hungary and Slovakia – both of which are dependent on Russian energy – would have been all the more important.

The conflict has been simmering for months – and, as far as we know, the Europeans have done nothing to defuse it. They – Brussels and Berlin in the lead – declared Orban a scapegoat and hoped that the Hungarian would buckle under their pressure. But he isn’t – which was foreseeable. Especially since Orban’s competitor in the upcoming election in April doesn’t think any differently than Orban on the issue of Russian oil. On this front, a defeat for Orban would not help either Merz or Commission head Ursula von der Leyen.

What’s still missing here: the Americans. Zelensky’s biggest concern is that the US, frustrated with him or the equally intransigent Russians, will pull out of the negotiations. US President Donald Trump has cut down direct arms supplies to Ukraine, but the Americans are still helping the Ukrainians in such a way that the Europeans say they cannot replace them.

The German energy shortage is also home-made

Europe had a dual strategy: to support Ukraine militarily and to weaken Russia financially. Without the support of the USA, this would have failed – says de Wever. Hence the compulsion to now seek a “deal” with the Russians. Quite apart from the fact that Germany, for example, is paying very dearly for giving up Russian oil and gas, also because Berlin is foregoing both nuclear power and gas fracking.

The Eastern Europeans are strictly against negotiations with the Russians. Poland and the Baltic states already fear a “hybrid” attack by Putin’s hordes with the “green men” who started the Ukraine war.

EU Council President Costa now says that “a day will come” when the EU will have to talk to Russia. But “not now.” And after peace then only through military security of peace, but not “through energy”.

In this way, Costa, as Council President, is trying to somehow hold the diverging European “shop” together. After this inconclusive, failed summit, one thing is certain: If Trump pulls out of the Russia negotiations tomorrow, the Europeans would have to carry on somehow. Without knowing, however, whether, when, who and with what goal should negotiate with Putin (and Zelensky).

Europe seems, above all, to be lost, beyond the full-throated declarations from Brussels and Berlin.