Discussion about security guarantees remains largely theoretical

And after wasting six months in fruitless negotiations, the Russian leader has now turned everything upside down by claiming that ceasefires are no longer relevant.

- 

FROM B1 What the world needs is a final "settlement" of what he calls the Ukraine "crisis".

Mr Putin's tactic is simple: to drag the war on by talking about a settlement which cannot happen in the hope that Mr Trump loses interest and abandons Ukraine to Russia's mercy.

But the Europeans are now engaged in their time-gaining exercise. They know that they can do little to wean Mr Trump away from his fascination with the Russia leader. Their current objective is much simpler: to prevent Mr Trump from making any concessions to Russia at the expense of Ukraine. And this means humouring and flattering Mr Trump, while constantly inventing new diplomatic initiatives intended to corner Russia.

The result is a prolonged game of diplomatic ping pong. Mr Putin offers a Russia-US summit; the Europeans instead propose a trilateral summit with Ukrainian President Zelensky too. Mr Putin suggests a peace conference; the Europeans demand a ceasefire.

Both sides know their opponents' answers even before the offers are made; the only one who seems to be blissfully unaware of this tactic is Mr Trump. But then, that is the chief purpose of this game.

NOW YOU SEE IT, NOW YOU DON'T: GUARANTEEING UKRAINE'S INSECURITY Arguably, Europe's chief achievement over the current week has been to persuade the US that, regardless of how the war stops, Ukraine should be offered security guarantees for its future. Only if he gets such guarantees will President Zelensky agree to stop fighting. And only based on such guarantees will any Ukrainian politician agree to freeze the current frontline, leaving around a fifth of Ukraine's territory under Russian occupation. Yet what do these guarantees mean in practice?