- The absence of Ukraine and the European Union from this meeting was ubiquitous and it is indeed an ominous sign.
- If Russia gains territory or achieves its goals through negotiation, it will create strong optics of Russian revisionist actions, threatening other countries in Eastern Europe, particularly Moldova, Georgia, or even NATO-member states in the Baltics.
- India’s role as a regional power and a voice in the Global South may grow in importance and its ability to act as a mediator in multilateral forums like the G20 could be strengthened.
The recent meeting between the United States and Russian officials in Saudi Arabia, excluding Ukraine, has raised significant concerns and questions. This approach appears to be driven by a desire to expedite negotiations and address broader geopolitical interests, but it has been met with criticism from Ukraine and its European allies.
The meeting took place between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov of Russia. The other important people in the room were the US. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, Russian, Saudi National Security Advisor Mosaad bin Mohammad Al-Aiban and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy advisor Yuri Ushakov. At Diriyah Palace, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia[1].
But the absence of Ukraine and the European Union from this meeting was ubiquitous and it is indeed an ominous sign. This is what happens when a nation decides to give up its power to let others decide its destiny. During the meeting, the Russians made it very clear that the “Bucharest promises of 2008” which refer to NATO’s summit in Bucharest, where the alliance declared that Ukraine and Georgia would eventually become members of NATO must be given up unconditionally by the West[2].
The meeting took place between US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov of Russia.
Russia has consistently viewed NATO’s expansion into former Soviet spheres of influence as a security threat, and the promise to Ukraine and Georgia is often cited as one of the underlying factors in subsequent conflicts, including Russia’s actions in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine from 2014 onward[3].
However, President Donald Trump’s recent criticism of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy calling him a “dictator without elections” and accusing him of prolonging the conflict for personal gain are not good signs. Trump has even suggested that Zelenskyy “better move fast or he is not going to have a country left.”
Reactions from Ukraine and European Allies
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been vocal in his opposition to any negotiations conducted without Ukraine’s involvement. He emphasized that Ukraine would not recognize any agreements reached in its absence, stating, “Ukraine regards any negotiations on Ukraine without Ukraine as ones that have no result, and we cannot recognise … any agreements about us without us.”
European leaders have also expressed their dissatisfaction with being excluded from the talks. French President Emmanuel Macron convened an emergency meeting in Paris with other European leaders to discuss the situation and to assert the necessity of including European nations in any peace negotiations concerning Ukraine. However, Zelenskyy is right when he said that Ukraine did not initiate the war, but when he allowed the US and NATO to run their agenda, he sealed the fate of his country.
The decision to hold bilateral talks without Ukrainian participation seems to stem from a strategic move by both the U.S. and Russia to lay the groundwork for potential agreements before involving other parties. Engaging in direct dialogue is the best method of confidence building as both nations work to address core issues and establish a framework that could later be presented to Ukraine and other stakeholders.
Impact on Eastern Europe and the Credibility of NATO
The US-Russia meeting in Saudi Arabia about Ukraine could indeed have far-reaching effects on Eastern Europe and they know that they are being bypassed. Eastern European countries like Poland, the Baltic States, and others have been among Ukraine’s strongest supporters, advocating for a tough stance against Russia, but this US.-Russia summit without their inclusion is a rude awakening for them making them very feel insecure when it comes to their security as these countries rely on NATO and the US for their security against potential Russian aggression.
For the Eastern European nations, any peace agreement that involves territorial concessions to Russia (e.g., Crimea or parts of the Donbas) will be a clear case of appeasement. If Russia gains territory or achieves its goals through negotiation, it will create strong optics of Russian revisionist actions, threatening other countries in Eastern Europe, particularly Moldova, Georgia, or even NATO-member states in the Baltics[4].
The US-Russia-Saudi Arabia summit on Ukraine is also now being viewed as a realignment of power politics. This can also have an impact on global energy stability over the security and sovereignty of Ukraine and the broader region. This could become a flashpoint and lead to strained relations within NATO, reduced trust in U.S. leadership, and a sense of vulnerability.
Even before Trump took the oath of office of the president of the US, he told NATO allies to significantly increase their defence spending. He proposed that NATO member nations must allocate 5% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence budgets[5]. This demand marked a substantial rise from the existing NATO guideline of 2% of GDP which Trump calls an unfair practice as it is his country that has been shouldering a disproportionate share of the alliance’s defence and called for a more balanced distribution of responsibilities within NATO.
What will be the reaction of China?
The end of the Ukraine war would likely bring a mix of challenges and opportunities for India and some moments of pause for China. Economically, it could ease inflationary pressures, stabilize supply chains, and boost growth. Strategically, it may allow India to recalibrate its foreign policy to maintain a balanced approach between Russia, the West, and Saudi Arabia which is fast emerging as a leader and stabilizing factor in the Middle East.
China has maintained an ambiguous stance on the Ukraine war, calling for respect for territorial sovereignty supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity. However, China has supported Russia throughout this war economically. For China to be excluded from this summit only means that Russia does not trust the Communist State and for China to be sidelined is a significant blow as it considers itself a major global player with the power to mediate in the conflict.
China now faces the prospect of being isolated in Europe and the Middle East.
China might cautiously welcome any resolution, particularly if it stabilizes global markets (e.g., energy and food) and reduces pressure on its economy. But it will view any development that comes out of this potential peace deal will probably disproportionately favour the US and push Russia towards the West as it shares cultural and religious affinity.
But what will concern China even more is that with the Ukraine war ending, global powers like the US and a reluctant Europe could shift their strategic focus more directly to the Indo-Pacific and address the challenge of China’s rise. This aligns with India’s interests, as it faces security challenges due to an unresolved border dispute with China along the Himalayan mountains. India could benefit from a more cohesive Quad (India, U.S., Japan, Australia) if Western powers are less distracted by the conflict in Europe. China now faces the prospect of being isolated in Europe and the Middle East.
Ending of the Ukraine War and its Impact on India
India’s role as a regional power and a voice in the Global South may grow in importance. India’s ability to act as a mediator or leader in multilateral forums like the G20 could be strengthened. However, India would also need to carefully navigate the evolving global power dynamics and maintain strong bilateral ties so it is always in a position to secure its national interests and strengthen its position on the world stage[6].
A resolution to the conflict would likely stabilize global energy markets. India’s heavy reliance on energy imports means that lower oil and gas prices would reduce inflation and ease fiscal pressure[7]. India has been importing discounted Russian crude during the war, but the long-term stability of energy prices would still be beneficial for its economy. If sanctions on Russia are eased, India’s energy imports from Russia might diversify further. However, competition for Russian energy could increase, especially from the US[8].
India now has to carefully look at all the developments that will take place after this meeting. It has to now carefully maintain its ties with both Russia (a traditional defence partner) and the US (critical for trade and technology) under Trump. An end to the war could reduce pressure on India to align more strongly with either, giving it more strategic flexibility.
India has to now carefully maintain its ties with both Russia (a traditional defence partner) and the US (critical for trade and technology) under Trump.
If Russia emerges weakened, India’s defence and strategic relationship with Moscow might require reevaluation. This could push India to further strengthen partnerships with Western nations, particularly the US and France, for defence and technology.
India’s defence sector is still significantly dependent on Russian military hardware. Sanctions and disruptions due to the war have already impacted spare parts and maintenance. A quick agreement to end the war could restore supply chains, but India might still accelerate the diversification of its defence imports and focus on indigenization under the Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative.
Conclusion
According to Prof John Mearsheimer, “the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West”. According to Mearsheimer Russia’s security concerns must be addressed to resolve the Ukraine crisis and the West should consider adopting a neutral stance for Ukraine, and it has to act as a buffer state between NATO and Russia to alleviate geopolitical frictions[9]. But the way things are proceeding, NATO’s relevance which has been questioned since the end of the Cold War might come to an end.
The war disrupted global wheat and fertilizer supplies, leading to price volatility. A resolution could stabilize these markets, benefiting India as a major agricultural economy dependent on affordable fertilizers and as an exporter of food grains[10]. An end to the war could improve global trade conditions, which were disrupted by sanctions, supply chain issues, and energy price spikes. This would benefit India’s export-driven sectors, particularly pharmaceuticals, IT services, and manufactured goods.
However, one thing is certain many players in the global geopolitics across all continents will now focus on potential outcomes from this meeting in the coming months. Multilateral organizations such as the G20, G7, and BRICS etc. will now recalibrate their positions with the US as Western Europe is in the throes of political, economic and more importantly is going through a serious social upheaval with the rise of nationalistic rightwing polity.
References:
- [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/world/europe/us-russia-saudi-ukraine.html
- [2] https://english.alarabiya.net/amp/News/world/2025/02/18/russia-wants-nato-to-disavow-2008-promise-to-ukraine-foreign-ministry-says
- [3] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35208636
- [4] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18023383
- [5] https://apnews.com/article/uk-trump-nato-lammy-musk-3ca68c0eba58c7e649fd5aa44df9fc26
- [6] https://diplomatist.com/2024/05/20/indias-role-in-multilateral-forums/
- [7] https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/india-s-balancing-act-navigating-the-global-energy-markets
- [8] https://grm.institute/blog/russia-ukraine-crisis-impact-on-indian-businesses-economy/
- [9] https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf
- [10] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10015268/
Balaji is a freelance writer with an MA in History and Political science and has published articles on defence and strategic affairs and book reviews. He tweets @LaxmanShriram78. Views expressed are the author’s own.
Pranav S & Vadiraja B 
Piyush Anand 
Aayush Pal