Wind of Change in the Northern Black Sea Coast

Nicolai Tkac

The geopolitical storm stirred up by Donald Trump is methodically sweeping away the ‘rules-based world’. This year, the changes will likely be felt especially strongly in the Northern Black Sea region, including Moldova.

The year 2025 seems to be a milestone for the countries of the Northern Black Sea region. Let us try to understand what the key geopolitical players will do next and how it will affect the fate of our neighbouring countries and Moldova itself. The USA carries the message to Garcia With each passing day, the futility of the EU’s attempts to persuade Donald Trump to change his strategy regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict becomes increasingly evident. The U.S. president remains steadfast on two fundamental principles: bringing the war to a swift end based on the current battlefield realities and ensuring that American expenditures during the conflict are compensated through access to Ukrainian resources. The abruptly halted arms deliveries and restricted intelligence sharing serve as a sort of ‘final American warning’ to Kyiv: either accept Washington’s offer to act as a peace broker capable of engaging in dialogue with Russia and as a close economic partner, or risk losing the White House’s attention and support altogether. At the same time, these new demands are being voiced quite openly. DOGE head Elon Musk floated the idea that Volodymyr Zelensky should be “offered some sort of amnesty in a neutral country in exchange for a peaceful transition to democracy in Ukraine”—in other words, step down from power. Donald Trump and other members of his team have been expressing similar views.  Moreover, according to Western media reports, the cornerstone of future U.S.-Ukraine relations—the deal on mineral resources—could become ‘bigger and better’ for the United States. Adding to this picture is the intention to revoke the temporary protected status of approximately 240,000 Ukrainians in the U.S., who, if deported back home, are more likely to join the opposition to Zelensky’s regime rather than support it. It turns out that after initially rejecting the American deal and staging a demarche in the Oval Office, Ukraine’s leadership has now received a U.S. ultimatum with only three options: surrender resources, surrender power, and leave the country. Russia’s cautious manoeuvring The Russian Federation is acting with considerable caution, avoiding any abrupt moves either on the front lines or in diplomacy. Many experts believe that Russia, the U.S., and China have already agreed on the general contours of a post-war order in Europe, with only the finer details now being worked out. Whether this is true or not remains uncertain.  Nevertheless, a sharp and public thaw in relations between Russia and the U.S. is an undeniable fact, as are the ongoing negotiations—mostly behind closed doors—focused on restoring normal relations and ending the war. It is evident that the interim culmination of this process will be a high-level summit (with some reports suggesting that preparations have been expedited). While it may not bring a definitive end to the conflict, it is expected to lay the groundwork for further de-escalation.  As they prepare the ground for talks between their leaders, both sides are regularly exchanging compliments and diplomatic courtesies—for example, through ambassadorial appointments. Meanwhile, Moscow remains uninvolved in the disputes between Trump’s and Zelensky’s teams but is trying to capitalize on them. A particularly noteworthy development is a leak from American media suggesting that Russia has offered the U.S. a share of ownership rights to natural resources in its ‘acquired territories’.  Such a deal could help legitimize the new territorial realities for the U.S. at the economic level and unlock many long-term opportunities in bilateral relations. As of today, Russia is moving toward securing its southwestern borders and potentially obtaining business-driven guarantees for retaining its conquered territories. Moreover, the Russian Armed Forces continue their offensive on the front, having successfully cut into the Ukrainian stronghold in the Kursk sector. This success will strengthen the Kremlin’s negotiating position and could potentially allow Russia to redeploy forces to conclude the conflict along other geographic lines. Does the EU choose the war? The EU red tape is increasingly building a totalitarian machine under the guise of democracy and diversity, in which alternative viewpoints are unacceptable. Attempts to create a military-political bloc from an economic one, uniting under the idea of protecting the European community from the ‘aggressive Russia’, seem distinctly Orwellian. Notably, the collective public statements of EU leaders reduce all European policy to the notion that it is necessary to fight Russia, as much as possible with foreign (Ukrainian) hands, and then—with their own, ‘rearmed’—for which they plan to spend hundreds of billions of euros. At the same time, no steps have been taken to stop the war and confrontation through diplomatic means. On the contrary, the rhetoric is as confrontational as possible, even involving nuclear components, which has not gone unnoticed in the Kremlin. Given that these approaches are radically different from those currently pursued by Washington, it’s no surprise that the EU has ended up on the sidelines of the peace process in Ukraine—and is unlikely to have any significant influence on it. In addition, the self-isolation of the leaders of most EU countries from the problems of their own states in favor of militarization and indefinite support for Ukraine is likely to further shift voter preferences. Europe will soon face a choice: either completely discard the illusion of democracy by ignoring public opinion or allow alternative forces and politicians to come to power. In this regard, the situation in Romania will be illustrative, where the issue of registering Calin Georgescu as a candidate will soon need to be addressed. So far, it seems that the almost guaranteed winner of the elections may simply be excluded, which could exacerbate tensions both within Romania and in relations between the U.S. and the EU. The shadowy prospects for Ukraine Unable to quickly adjust to the change in U.S. policy, Ukraine’s leadership is desperately trying to save itself by negotiating personal security guarantees and insisting on continued sponsorship in the same manner as before. The failure to recognize the changing times has already led to serious consequences for Ukrainians, which are referred to in the West as ‘coercion to peace’. It seems that the recent decisions and statements from the White House, combined with the impotence of the European Union, which has so far offered nothing more than empty words, have had an effect on Kyiv, which has agreed to participate in negotiations in Saudi Arabia. The delegations will meet next Tuesday to discuss the end of the war and an economic agreement, likely under worsened conditions. It turns out that a peaceful settlement in the current realities means the final loss of five regions (including Crimea), the transfer of control over natural resources and possibly other assets to the United States, and leaves the country with large war-time debts, infrastructure destruction, and a demographic crisis. Moreover, the collapse of Zelensky and the rise of new forces to power seems almost inevitable, with these forces likely facing years of working as crisis managers. Much will depend on whether the international community can accumulate funds and investments for the post-war reconstruction of Ukraine. If not, then the prospects for the neighboring state will become very bleak. Moldova is at the crossroad For our country, the bottom line is that we continue to lose U.S. financial support, and symbolic decisions regarding the construction of a new American embassy building are unlikely to help. The European Union may try to take on additional expenses to support Moldova, but given the militaristic mindset of the European bureaucracy, there won’t be enough money for everyone in the foreseeable future. Peace in Ukraine, based on mutual respect between the U.S. and Russia, will be cemented by business interests. The transformation of Ukraine’s neighboring regions into demilitarized zones under joint Russian-American oversight will create a new reality on Moldova’s eastern borders. In this scenario, the Odesa and Mykolaiv regions will be under special scrutiny as strategic logistics hubs essential for resource exports. Against this backdrop, the need to finance the anti-Russian policies pursued by the current Moldovan authorities will likely decline critically, leaving the country with even greater debts and a divided society. However, this could also present a unique opportunity—to break away from a course that is detrimental to us. That said, the ruling PAS is clearly incapable of such a shift. Therefore, the solution could be a total and as swift as possible political reset, bringing to power more competent elites capable of pragmatic communication with key capitals. Otherwise, Moldova faces nothing good in the foreseeable future.