Former French Envoy to Moscow Warns of New US-Russia Convergence

Published: February 14, 2026 | A senior French diplomat who served in Moscow right through the onset of the Ukraine struggle delivers a stark caution a few elementary and perilous shift in international geopolitics: the emergence of a sensible, issue-specific convergence between the United States and Russia. This research, according to firsthand revel in and a essential assessment of worldwide international relations, suggests a realignment that might reshape European safety and the rules-based worldwide order.

Introduction: A Diplomat’s Alarm Bell

Pierre Lévy, France’s Ambassador to Russia from 2020 till 2024, stood on the epicenter of international relations as members of the family catastrophically collapsed. His tenure witnessed the overall, fateful months resulting in Vladimir Putin’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine—an match Lévy later chronicled in his e-book, Au cœur de l. a. Russie en guerre (“At the Heart of Wartime Russia”). Now, talking forward of a significant European convention, Lévy identifies a development he considers similarly ominous: a nascent US-Russia convergence on key strategic problems, maximum visibly within the realm of Ukraine peace negotiations. This caution transcends partisan politics, pointing to a possible geopolitical realignment the place shared transactional pursuits briefly override long-standing ideological and safety opposition, with profound implications for Europe and the transatlantic alliance.

Key Points: The Core of the Warning

Pierre Lévy’s overview is constructed on a number of interconnected observations that shape a coherent narrative of moving alliances. The central thesis is that the simple, united entrance towards Russian aggression that existed in early 2022 has fractured, giving option to a extra complicated and threatening multipolar dynamic.

The UN General Assembly as a Geopolitical Barometer

Lévy makes use of the vote casting tendencies on the United Nations as his maximum concrete proof. The distinction between the March 2022 solution and the 2025 votes is stark and telling:

• March 2, 2022: In the quick aftermath of the full-scale invasion, the UN General Assembly handed a solution condemning Russian aggression and putting forward Ukraine’s territorial integrity with an amazing 141 votes in prefer (out of 193). Only 5 countries (Russia, Belarus, Eritrea, North Korea, Syria) voted towards, with 35 abstentions, together with China. This represented a near-global consensus.
• 2025 Resolutions: The panorama had dramatically modified. Two competing resolutions emerged: one subsidized through Ukraine and European countries, keeping up the 2022 rules; a 2nd, promoted through the United States below a 2nd Trump management, that explicitly allied with Russia to push for a “fast peace.” This US-drafted textual content, in step with Lévy’s framing, lacked condemnation of Russian aggression and didn’t uphold Ukraine’s territorial integrity, as a substitute prioritizing a ceasefire and negotiations on phrases favorable to Moscow.

This evolution in vote casting blocs and diplomatic sponsorship is the “barometer” Lévy cites. It demonstrates a elementary shift in US overseas coverage in opposition to Russia, shifting from containment and improve for Ukraine to a realistic partnership for a selected result.

The “Quick Peace” Nexus: US and Russian Interests Align

The engine of this convergence is the shared need between the Trump management and the Putin executive for a swift finish to the Ukraine warfare. For Russia, a “fast peace” legitimizes territorial features and freezes the battlefield in its prefer with out additional army or financial degradation. For america management below Trump, as described, it represents a swift solution to a overseas entanglement, a possible diplomatic “win,” and a reallocation of strategic focal point in opposition to the Indo-Pacific. This transactional international relations creates a brief however robust alignment, sidelining European allies and Ukrainian sovereignty within the procedure.

The Erosion of the Transatlantic Consensus on Russia

Since the Cold War, US and European coverage in opposition to Russia, whilst infrequently differing in nuance, operated on a elementary consensus: that Russian aggression will have to be met with solidarity and that European safety was once a shared transatlantic worry. Lévy’s caution signifies this consensus has damaged. The US, performing unilaterally or with a unique set of priorities, is now pursuing a route that at once contradicts the longstanding European place of supporting Ukraine’s proper to self-defense and restoring its territorial integrity. This transatlantic rift is the principle end result of the brand new convergence.

Background: From Unity to Fragmentation

To perceive the importance of Lévy’s caution, one will have to hint the arc from the quick post-invasion solidarity to the fractured international relations of 2025.

The 2022 Consensus: A Moment of Global Clarity

The February 24, 2022 invasion caused an unparalleled wave of worldwide condemnation. The UN vote on March second was once now not simply symbolic; it caused cascading sanctions, army support programs for Ukraine from the West, and a diplomatic isolation of Russia that was once near-total. This duration was once outlined through a transparent rules-based order narrative: a contravention of sovereignty could be punished, and the sufferer supported. Europe, below important US investment and force, performed a central position in keeping up this entrance.

The Long War and War Weariness

As the warfare advanced into a prolonged struggle of attrition, a number of elements started to pressure the preliminary solidarity. Economic prices from sanctions and effort disruptions hit European economies laborious. US political cycles introduced a transformation in management, with Donald Trump returning to persistent in 2025 on a platform essential of persisted support to Ukraine. Simultaneously, the Global South, whilst now not endorsing the invasion, grew more and more pissed off with what it noticed as Western hypocrisy and a focal point on European safety over different conflicts. This created house for selection diplomatic projects, which america below Trump was once now keen to guide, in partnership with Russia.

The Trump Factor: “America First” Meets Grand Bargain

Donald Trump’s overseas coverage philosophy, targeted on “America First” and transactional deal-making, is the catalyst for the convergence. His management considered the Ukraine struggle essentially as a pricey stalemate to be ended, now not as a elementary take a look at of European safety structure. This viewpoint naturally aligned with Putin’s mentioned objective of a swift, negotiated agreement that acknowledges new realities at the flooring. The US-Russia partnership for peace talks, subsequently, emerged now not from shared values however from a shared need to near a bankruptcy, without reference to European or Ukrainian personal tastes.

Analysis: Implications of the New Convergence

Lévy’s caution isn’t simply a few unmarried peace originality; it’s concerning the destabilizing precedent set through this new diplomatic alignment. The implications are multifaceted and critical.

1. The Sacrifice of Ukrainian Sovereignty

The maximum direct sufferer is Ukraine. A peace procedure brokered through the 2 events to the warfare—the aggressor and a 3rd birthday party (america) prioritizing an finish to the struggle over justice—essentially pressures Ukraine to simply accept phrases that fall wanting the recovery of its 1991 borders, together with Crimea. The concept of territorial integrity, a cornerstone of the UN Charter, is being bargained away for the sake of a ceasefire. This units a perilous precedent that would possibly makes proper in worldwide members of the family.

2. The Marginalization of Europe

Europe, which has borne the brunt of the refugee disaster, financial fallout, and safety danger, is being sidelined within the international relations that may resolve its personal long term safety surroundings. This speeds up the long-standing European dependency on america for safety whilst demonstrating its utter loss of leverage when america comes to a decision to behave unilaterally. It forces a brutal reckoning with the desire for European strategic autonomy, an idea up to now extra aspirational than sensible.

3. The Rewarding of Aggression and Weakening of Norms

A agreement that successfully freezes the warfare with Russian forces in ownership of important Ukrainian territory rewards the preliminary aggression. It indicators to different possible aggressors {that a} sustained army marketing campaign, adopted through a negotiated “freeze,” can reach territorial goals with out whole originality or enduring pariah standing, supplied an impressive 3rd birthday party sees an finish to the warfare as in its pastime. This erosion of worldwide norms towards territorial conquest is a long-term strategic loss for international balance.

4. A New Bipolarity? Not Quite, But a Multipolar Mess

This isn’t a go back to the US-Soviet bipolarity of the Cold War, the place the 2 superpowers controlled spheres of affect. The international is just too interconnected, and China is a emerging persistent. Instead, it issues towards a extra chaotic multipolar international characterised through fluid, issue-specific alignments. The US and Russia converge on finishing the Ukraine struggle however stay diametrically adversarial on problems like Iran, North Korea, and fingers keep an eye on. This pragmatism over concept makes the worldwide gadget much less predictable and extra liable to nice persistent horse-trading on the expense of smaller states.

Practical Advice: Navigating the New Reality

For European policymakers, analysts, and voters, Lévy’s caution calls for a strategic reaction. The generation of assuming automated US alignment on core European safety problems is over.

For European Governments and the EU

• Accelerate Defense Integration: Double down on projects just like the European Peace Facility and PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation). The objective will have to be to broaden a reputable, unbiased European protection commercial base and command construction, lowering the operational dependency on US intelligence, logistics, and strategic decision-making.
• Forge a Unified Diplomatic Voice: Develop a commonplace European place on any Ukraine peace framework that unequivocally helps Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as outlined through worldwide regulation. This calls for overcoming inside divisions between states extra and no more uncovered to Russian force.
• Diversify Strategic Partnerships: Deepen safety and financial ties with like-minded companions past america, together with the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, and key NATO allies. Build coalitions of the keen to improve Ukraine’s reconstruction and long-term safety promises, without reference to US coverage.
• Engage Proactively with america Administration: While criticizing the convergence with Russia, European leaders will have to articulate a transparent, long-term case for a way a simply and sturdy peace in Ukraine is in fact in america nationwide pastime, linking it to NATO credibility and the deterrence of long term aggression globally.

For Ukraine

• Maintain Unwavering Military Resolve: The number one leverage in any negotiation will stay the battlefield scenario. Continued Western army support, now doubtlessly from a extra numerous set of donors, is the most important to stop a Russian originality at the flooring that will power the worst conceivable phrases on Kyiv.
• Shape the Narrative of Peace: Proactively outline what a “simply peace” manner, emphasizing safety promises, post-war reconstruction, and responsibility for struggle crimes. Frame any US-Russia deal as a betrayal of the foundations the West has claimed to face for.
• Leverage All Diplomatic Channels: Maintain intense discussion with European capitals, the EU establishments, and sympathetic factions in america Congress and society to construct a counter-weight to the manager department’s convergence coverage.

For the Broader International Community

• Reaffirm UN Charter Principles: Middle-power and Global South countries involved concerning the precedent of territorial conquest will have to use their voices within the UN and different boards to insist that any peace in Ukraine will have to be according to the UN Charter, now not nice persistent expediency.
• Support Accountability Mechanisms: Strengthen improve for the International Criminal Court and different justice projects. A peace that denies justice is a peace that sows the seeds of long term warfare.

FAQ: Addressing Key Questions

Q1: Is this US-Russia convergence a proper alliance?

A: No. Lévy describes a “convergence” or alignment of pursuits on a selected subject—finishing the Ukraine struggle briefly. It is a tactical, transactional partnership, now not a extensive political or army alliance. The two countries stay strategic competition with elementary disagreements on many different international problems, together with NATO gain, fingers keep an eye on, and regional conflicts within the Middle East and Asia.

Q2: Does this imply america now helps Russia’s invasion of Ukraine?

A: Not explicitly. The US place, as mirrored within the 2025 UN solution Lévy references, seems to pivot from a focal point on condemning aggression and restoring territorial integrity to a number one focal point on reaching a ceasefire and negotiated agreement. This shift, in impact, accepts the Russian fait accompli of territorial conquest as a place to begin for talks, which is functionally a vital departure from the 2022 consensus and a de facto legitimization of the invasion’s result.

Q3: Could Europe merely forget about this US-Russia transfer and proceed supporting Ukraine?

A: Europe’s skill to proceed tough improve is significantly constrained with out US backing. The US supplies the majority of deadly army support, essential intelligence, and the overarching strategic nuclear deterrent that underpins NATO. If america actively agents a care for Russia and pressures Ukraine to simply accept it, European countries would face an amazing diplomatic and doubtlessly financial tide to conform. Independent European army improve, whilst rising, isn’t but at a scale to atone for a US withdrawal of improve.

This fall: Is Pierre Lévy’s view extensively shared amongst diplomats?

A: Lévy’s research, according to his distinctive place because the French envoy in Moscow right through the invasion, is a significant and credible caution from a seasoned diplomat. It aligns with the observations of many different European and NATO officers who’ve expressed alarm on the rhetoric and coverage shifts coming from the second one Trump management relating to Ukraine and Russia. However, this is a characterization of a development, now not a universally permitted reality, and is without a doubt contested through america management itself, which might body its coverage as pragmatic peacemaking.

Conclusion: A Pivotal Moment for European Security

Pierre Lévy’s caution, rooted in his intimate revel in of the descent into struggle in Moscow, charts a perilous new route in worldwide members of the family. The US-Russia convergence on a “fast peace” for Ukraine represents greater than a diplomatic dispute; it’s the manifestation of a profound geopolitical realignment. The clean, principled stance of the early UN votes has been sacrificed for the expediency of a deal between two primary powers, with Europe and Ukraine paying the fee.

The penalties are a weakened rules-based order, a rewarded aggressor, and a transatlantic alliance strained to its verge of collapse. The central query now’s whether or not Europe can summon the collective will and strategic capacity to chart its personal route—to uphold the foundations of sovereignty and territorial integrity that underpin its personal safety, and to make certain that any peace in Ukraine is solely and sturdy, now not simply handy for Washington and Moscow. The duration of assuming American investment on European safety is over. The generation of European accountability has arrived, and it’s arriving with a jolt.