THE SUMMIT THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN AND THE LAW THAT HANGS IN THE BALANCE - Cristina Di Silvio - ETHICA SOCIETAS-Rivista di scienze umane e sociali

The Suspended Flight: Putin, Budapest, and Jurisdiction

Abstract: The evolution of the conflict in Ukraine, marked by alternating phases of drone warfare and trench battles, is experiencing a substantial military stalemate. U.S. mediation has shown limited effectiveness on Russia, perhaps due to Washington’s focus on the Gaza crisis. At the same time, a new summit between Trump and Putin had been proposed, but unfortunately it will not take place — primarily due to procedural, criminal-law, and political concerns. Europe, notably, was not invited, even though it should serve as the guarantor of Ukraine.

Keywords: #trump #USforeignpolitics #donaldtrump #putin #ucraina #geopolitics #politics #cristinadisilvio #ethicasocietas #ethicasocietasrivista #scientificreview #humansciences #scienzesociali #ethicasocietasupli

italian version

The Missed Summit and the Canceled Flight

There will be no summit — at least not now, and certainly not in Budapest — not between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

The news, now confirmed by official White House sources and reported by Reuters, carries the definitive tone of doors closing and the lingering echo of vanished negotiations: “There are no plans for a meeting in the immediate future,” a senior U.S. official declared.

It marks the end — or perhaps merely the suspension — of a diplomatic attempt that made silence its only form of announcement and secrecy its operative principle.

A silence heavier than a thousand statements. Behind that “no plans” lies an entire collapsed negotiation framework. The fragile dialogue between Moscow and Washington has broken down in the past 48 hours. Clear signs had already emerged from the phone conversation between Secretary of State Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, which was meant to pave the way for a bilateral meeting — later postponed.

In the muffled language of diplomacy, postponement already means failure.

The positions are simply too far apart: the Kremlin has reiterated its opposition to an immediate ceasefire and to any freezing of the front line, which would be perceived as legitimizing the territorial status quo. But what likely shattered the fragile balance was the revelation — attributed to a senior Ukrainian official — that Trump had directly asked Zelensky to relinquish the Donbas during their meeting last Friday. A request that, if confirmed, is not only politically explosive but a direct blow to the legitimacy of Ukraine’s resistance and, even more profoundly, to the integrity of international law, which prohibits territorial acquisition through armed aggression.

Kyiv stands firm, aware that peace cannot be built on mutilation. Europe continues to watch — allied yet powerless — perched on the ridge of power between Washington and Moscow. Yet something is stirring. A joint document signed by ten European countries and the EU leadership has firmly reaffirmed the red line: no change in international borders can be accepted if obtained by force.

According to Bloomberg sources, a twelve-point peace plan is already in an advanced stage.

Zelensky, writing on Telegram, summarized it with strategic clarity: “The front line can be a starting point for diplomacy, but Russia only wants to buy time. The deployment of Tomahawks could be the key to peace.”

On Thursday, in Brussels, the Ukrainian president will address the European Council. There, it will be decided whether Europe will continue to be a spectator — or reclaim its role as a protagonist.

And yet, the missed summit in Budapest is not merely a diplomatic crisis.

It is also a juridical failure foretold.

The “Wanted” President…

Putin remains the subject of an international arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes committed in Ukraine.

Under the Rome Statute, Hungary — as a State Party — has the legal obligation to execute the warrant should the Russian president set foot, or even cast the shadow of his presidential jet, within European legal space.

Budapest, however, has already distanced itself from any such obligation. In March 2023, the Orbán government declared that it would not arrest Putin, invoking the alleged incompatibility of the warrant with Hungarian domestic law — a legally untenable position that exposes Hungary to a clear violation of its international obligations and renders international criminal law a blunted weapon.

In international law, inaction is action.

Not arresting is tolerating. Letting pass is legitimizing.

The question of overflight rights — seemingly technical — is, in fact, the central legal issue. According to the 1944 Chicago Convention, each state exercises exclusive sovereignty over its own airspace. Authorizing or denying the passage of the Russian presidential jet is, therefore, a sovereign act — but also a moral choice.

Allowing Putin’s flight would amount to passive cooperation in evading an international warrant — a form of silent complicity.

Meanwhile, the European Union fractures into conflicting statements — with Germany, France, and Belgium reaffirming full cooperation with the ICC, while Hungary, Slovakia, and Bulgaria invoke national sovereignty. A dangerous precedent emerges: international law as a variable-geometry system, applied only where politics allows.

The aborted summit in Budapest marks more than a diplomatic failure: it reveals the fault line between an order based on law and a disorder based on force.

Putin will not fly — but the mere possibility that he could, unpunished, is already a flight of the Shadow.

Today, Europe’s sky hangs suspended between two models:

one in which every head of state is accountable to universal justice,

and one in which justice stops at the threshold of power.

The first is the future. The second, a return to impunity.