This is John Batter, a conversation with my colleague Annotol Leven of the Quincy Institute

about the possibility of Europe taking the lead in the Ukraine conflict.

Europe taking the lead not only is a supplier and a military bulwark, but also as a political voice

to lead to negotiations and armistists something that is not just a stalemate or Ukraine back on its heels without

enough amo. The reports are routine now that Ukraine is winding down its

ability to resist the Russian aggression. What is to be done? I ask Anatole, is there

a person in Europe can take the lead given the reluctance of the Republican Party and the

doubts about Ukraine from the leading candidate for the and the

Republican Party for the presidency,

and at all answers in very careful way

and also comes to the opinion about how long Ukraine can last without funding, without

ammo, without leadership from the United States.

There's Anatole leave it.

Nobody. I'm afraid, and that is also because the Europeans, you know, having the French and Germans having reached the Minsk II agreement on a ceasefire and peace in the

Donbass then did nothing to sustain it and the statements by the then French and German leaders Hollande and Merkel

that this was a basically a trick they never intended to hold the Ukrainians to the

agreement it was just a way to gain Ukraine more time to rearm.

That has destroyed trust in France and well in the present French and German establishments in Russia.

And both the French and German governments are now much too weak, really, to initiate something like that. Now if Trump is elected and

Europe looks as if it's going to be left on its own, then they may be impelled into a peace initiative.

They would simply have no choice.

But I think they won't do anything of that kind until after the US elections.

...