Four victories of Putin in Alaska

Americanist Pavel Dubravsky explains what happened at the meeting in Ankorida and what to wait for Ukraine now

The personnel, on which Vladimir Putin, the leader of the Rogue country, suspected of war crimes in Ukraine, first solemnly walks along the red carpet from the plane of the aircraft, then the US president applauds him, holds out his hand and sits next to him in the limousine, and went around the whole world. After almost three hours of negotiations between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin (plus delegations), commentators spoke that these personnel became the main, if not the only result of the US and Russia summit in Alaska. What could have happened behind closed doors, to which Trump and Putin agreed, as this will affect the war in Europe, explains the American, political strategist, author of the Campaign InSider telegram channel Pavel Dubravsky.

This material was first published on the website of the Wind project.

The interlocutor of the “wind” uses the wording of “conflict”, but the “new newspaper Europe” calls what is happening the full -scale war of Russia against Ukraine.

Pavel Dubravsky

Americanist

- Pavel, that the meeting of President Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska brought, what is the result?

- Here you need to start initially from the expectations of each side. From the US point of view, this meeting had several contexts, globally - two scenarios. The first is cool for Trump: signing a truce or an announcement of at least a ceasefire. That is, Trump had to go out and say: we agreed, we have Deal, a deal. The second scenario is the minimum: Trump understands that it is impossible to talk with the Russian side, this conflict cannot be moved from the dead point, and announces that the United States is coming out of negotiations, and Ukraine and Russia are left alone with each other and with the European Union.

- It turned out neither one nor that.

- It turned out much more interesting. The Russian side had its own approach, for Russia it was a meeting of reformatting relations. It should generally be considered from such positions that this is not only about Ukraine, although many discuss this meeting only in the context of Ukraine. In fact, it really was a meeting “under Ukraine”, but the Russian side went to it with a large number of proposals and ideas for discussion. As Vladimir Putin said about them at a press conference: this is the Arctic, and the development of the Far East, the Middle East in terms of counteracting conflicts, and global terrorism, and so on, so on, so on. Russia came to discuss the cooperation of the two countries and potential benefits from it.

Why wasn’t one of Trump's potential scenarios realized? Because, firstly, Putin managed to convince him that Russia has an advantage on the battlefield, and no matter what Trump would undertake, no matter what sanctions to introduce, this advantage will remain. The second-Russia was able to convey its position on the expansion of NATO and on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, and Trump realized that Russia was interested only in the constant ceasefire and signing the armistice agreement, so that the very prerequisites were resolved, due to which this conflict, according to Russia, began. And Trump understood this.

- Understood?

- Got it, because before that he thought that Russia was simply filling the price, that it wants to negotiate on more favorable terms. Russia said: we are not interested in a temporary truce, otherwise this conflict will pop up in five years, twenty, forty and so on, and we want to solve once and for all. And Trump understood this. He realized that he did not have counterarguments against such a position.

- So he went to reporters, as it seemed to me, disappointed?

- Rather tired. Apparently, the dispute was just about this: Vladimir, let's now agree on a truce, stop shooting, and then discuss the details of the transaction. But the Russian side repeats for more than three years: no, first, let's discuss the specific conditions on what items we will agree on, then we will sign the contract once and for all, we will close the issue. These are two completely different approaches.

And in this regard, I would say that Russian diplomacy, of course, won. Firstly, Trump left the disappointed, he did not receive his “deal”. At the same time, Putin very cleverly called him Moscow, and Trump himself admitted that this would be a strong blow to him: "Of course, I will get for such an offer." It looks like this throughout the world: Russia is discussing not only Ukraine with the United States.

There is a second important victory of Russian diplomacy. Previously, the European Union and the USA represented by Joe Biden and its administration retained the position: while the conflict continues, only Ukraine is being discussed with Russia - and nothing more. Now it has changed, the leaders of both countries discussed not only Ukraine, but also other topics, for example, the Arctic.

The third victory is visual: the American president is talking with Vladimir Putin. Last summer, the leaders of many large countries, including India, China, and even NATO countries, if I am not mistaken, came to Antoniu Gutterish. That is, Russia is not in isolation, this issue is also removed.

The fourth victory - Russia managed to sell its understanding of the conflict with Ukraine. Judging by the fact that he writes the press about the last telephone conversation of Zelensky and Trump, the American president told the Ukrainian: Russia cannot be moved from the dead point, you will have to finally agree on yourself. Therefore, in the next two weeks we will understand whether Ukraine is ready to discuss this. And there is an important aspect: the Ukrainian president, who used to say that “the territories are not discussed”, they are inscribed in the country's Constitution, a couple of days before the meeting, he said that this is not about the territories, but about the security of Ukraine.

- Zelensky from the very beginning spoke of security guarantees.

- But now he spoke not so much about security guarantees as about the maintenance of Ukraine as a state as a subject of international relations. I see this step towards the compromise. Let's look at it from the point of view of RealPolitik, with such a cynical approach to international relations: one side has resources, and the other is running out.

No matter how the United States is putting on to Russia, now it does not have tools that can increase costs so that Russia instantly get out of the conflict. They simply do not exist. All 19 packages of the sanctions of the European Union were expected for the Russian side, Russia is ready to bear these costs.

- But what about the famous Trump sanctions - 100% duties for countries buying Russian energy? Or even 500%, if under the bill of Graham - Blumenthal, if Putin does not agree to the world?

- So far I see that Trump does not want to use sanctions at all. He examines Russia from the perspective of what mistakes Joe Biden made: he ignored Russia for almost three years, did not communicate with Putin, because of this the conflict continued and became more intense. It seems to me that if the American side connected in 2022, the conflict could be completed or at least suspended, Istanbul agreements were developed and discussed in March - April 2022. Therefore, Trump is important not to hide in negotiations with Russia only through the prism of Ukraine. He understands that this would be a big mistake, Russia is a country that has interests in different international spheres, in different regions, it has many allies, and it makes no sense to break or limit relations only because of the conflict in Ukraine.

The key point related to sanctions concerns that very bill on 500 percent duties. It seems to me that after this meeting, the topic of sanctions ceased to be relevant. Most likely, now Trump realized that it makes no sense to impose these sanctions, they would really not affect anything. This does not mean that he will not impose sanctions, it is quite possible that over time he will introduce. But if you analyze it with rhetoric, it is clear that he does not want to use this tool, otherwise he would have announced the sanctions today if he thought that the conversation was negative.

-Trump still depends on the opinions of American voters and on the party comrades, and the Republicans are mostly configured not in favor of Russia. How can he discuss any trade relations with Russia in such a situation?

- I don’t believe in the history of trade in Russia and the United States, we have the minimum turnover in comparison with other countries, with the European Union and others, we sell few goods to each other. This is due to both geography and long -standing, since the time of Barack Obama, sanctions. In principle, we have few economic ties. For example, Brazil is more important than Russia from the point of view of the sale of, say, fertilizers, and Russian state -owned companies are developing Latin America. The same thing is China. There are countries with which trading brings money to the Russian budget, but the United States is a different story.

- But we are not talking about trade itself, but about cooperation in the Arctic, about the return of Exxon Mobil to Russian deposits and so on. How can this be discussed with the head of the country, which your population considers an outcast, and its leader - a war criminal? There were what protests in Alaska.

- In the USA there is no such opinion about Russia. Most of the Americans do not care about this conflict, they did not even know where Ukraine was located until 2022. Polls fix that the majority in the United States advocates resolving this conflict by reconciliation or ceasefire. As for the Republican Party, there is also no such general mood there. The Republican Party wants American taxpayers to not pay for this conflict so that the United States does not participate in this conflict.

There are two main directions in the Republican Party. The first is Mark Rubio, who believes that Russia must be pressed, and sanctions should be used. But Rubio is in the minority today, and we saw how he acquired with Yuri Ushakov, and Sergei Lavrov supported his elbow, shook his hands and talked very warmly with them. Because he is a team player, he does as the team requires, in particular its leader Trump.

The second direction is such an isolationist approach, it is represented by Vice President Jay Di Wans. This does not mean that the United States should be isolated from the rest of the world, but this means that they do not participate in other people's conflicts. Now this approach dominates, although Vance himself was not at the event. Therefore, I would not say that the Republican Party does not like Russia. There is an “extremist-terrorist” by Lindsay Graham, but this is a special case, a real hawk, an old school of the American Republican Party, which is dying today.

- And therefore, Kirill Dmitriev, after the meeting, announced that the negotiations were “surprisingly good”?

- So Trump also appreciated negotiations at ten points. But I think that Trump retains his face rather than really believes that negotiations have passed ten out of ten. Because “ten out of ten” for him is a deal.

- And the deal, as he said, going out to the press, no.

- Yes, he said that the parties have not yet approached the deal. But it is very important that he understood the Russian side and those nuances that Putin could not transfer either by phone or through Steve Whitkoff. If you analyze the results of the meeting in such a vein, then I would say that this is a good meeting. The two countries did not talk for a long time, were in isolation in relation to each other, and now they checked the clock and realized how they generally see this conflict.

Then I would suggest looking at the following aspects. The first is Trump's statement after meeting with Vladimir Zelensky and European leaders. The second - whether Trump will announce in a week about the next meeting with Putin, if she announces, when she will take place where and with whom. All this together will tell us in which direction the development of the conflict or its stop will move.

- Donald Trump has more than once threatened that he would get out of these negotiations at all, sort it out, they say, yourself. If he now realized that Russia could not be shifted, then did such a moment come? Vladimir Zelensky will not move either ...

- Zelensky will move.

- Are you sure?

- And what resources do he have to continue to persist? A promise of weapons and finance by the European Union? In France, they cannot move away from the latest elections, they do not allow one of the candidates, although, in my opinion, everything is legal and reasonably there with this. Germany? Merts barely agreed with the coalition, and now they are completely changing the re -equipment programs, migrants. Europe is busy with an internal crisis. Yes, she participates in this conflict. But the two countries that constantly speak out on this subject are France and Great Britain. In France, the presidential re -election soon, in the UK, the crisis and the ruling party, and the opposition, the third party is generally popular there. They all have no up to Ukraine. They have voters who do not want to finance other people's conflicts.

Therefore, I do not see in Ukraine any real resources, except for constant promises. These promises only played a cruel joke, because it is not a realistic policy. Promises promises, but financially this issue is not yet very implemented from Europe.

As for Trump's potential exit from negotiations, he really has such an option. But, it seems to me, he still wants to bring this deal to the end.

Just now he realized that Russia was acting from a position of power, and there is no way to put pressure on it, because it is ready to bear costs. Including from potential sanctions, and from those hundred percent of duties, and with a shadow fleet - with everything that we all discussed many times.

But so far Trump remains. I have the feeling that now he will meet Zelensky and say: either I help you to conclude a long -term truce, we will discuss the conditions for a long time and painfully, it will break away, but this will be a truce once and forever, as we now see in Armenia and Azerbaijan; Or I wash my hands, I don’t help you anymore, you are left alone with European leaders. And here the President of Ukraine will have to decide.

- And what does it mean "I do not help you"? The USA has ceased to give weapons to Ukraine free of charge, Europe now pays, and it seems to not refuse, but rather increases expenses. Can Trump finally eliminate this war and not sell weapons for Ukraine at all and not even provide intelligence?

- It's hard to say what trend will win inside the White House. Once the United States has already stopped supplying weapons on the initiative of Trump. Then, when the US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegset canceled the supply of weapons to Ukraine, transferring it to Israel, what did Trump say? He said that this was done without his knowledge. And now hegset is in disgrace. At least in temporary. Therefore, we cannot predict which option will choose Trump. Perhaps it will leave the option-minimum: intelligence to transfer, but no more funding. Although it is already obvious, and it will no longer happen, no one will vote for this, before the elections of 2026 it would be suicidal. In the United States, economics issues always prevail over foreign policy issues.

Sales of weapons Trump too, it seems to me, can suspend because he does not want to participate in this conflict. Trump, as he said two weeks ago, has a task: the United States should get out of this conflict in order not to participate in it. And if he decides to do this, that is, the script and with the refusal to supply weapons.

-Why did Trump and Putin decide not to talk one on one? Which of them was not confident enough?

- It seems to me that they immediately decided to discuss the moments on which they could agree. I think Ushakov and Lavrov made initiatives about this. Probably, Lavrov justified this with the “Trump language”, from the point of view of Realpolitik: we have so many people, such and such resources, such money, in the territories the alignment of such and such. Here is a prognostic model that shows: conditionally in a year and eight months we will have such a promotion. Such models really exist. That is, apparently, the Russian side wanted to bring some big data as an evidence base, and this required the presence of all three.

Plus, look at who was present: President’s assistant Yuri Ushakov and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. That is, it was precisely the discussion of the international agenda and how to agree on it was immediately assumed. This means that it was important for both sides to understand how implants look at each other's foreign policy, at the regional blocks that have developed around these countries and in the world as a whole.

- But it was assumed that then there would be a meeting of five by five, otherwise why was Siluanov and Dmitrieva to be taken to Alaska. Почему у них до экономической повестки дело не дошло?

— Если бы состоялась и встреча «пять на пять», это означало бы обсуждение еще и экономического сотрудничества. Но мы видим, что Трамп отменил этот формат. Он-то думал, планируя встречу, что во время делового обеда они уже будут обсуждать детали сделки, какие-то ее пункты.

Напомню вам, что и с Зеленским в Белом доме Трамп тоже решил отменить обсуждение деловых вопросов, хотя уже лежали ручки для подписания сделки по редкоземельным металлам. Здесь то же самое: мы видим, что Трамп продолжает челночную дипломатию. Он добился договоренностей с Украиной, отстаивая американские интересы, он пытался проделать то же самое и с Россией. Но у России совершенно другая ситуация. России важно решить этот конфликт так, чтобы через двадцать или сорок лет он не всплыл.

— А что значит «конфликт не всплыл»? Он и сейчас не «всплывал», Россия начала эту войну. Не будет начинать — он и не «всплывет».

— У России перед глазами пример Карабаха: замирились стороны в 1990-х, а теперь это всплыло.

— Путин боится, что через десяток-другой лет Украина отвоюет то, что у нее сейчас оттяпали?

— Он хочет, чтобы вопрос о территориях не стоял в перспективе 50 или 100 лет, чтобы он был решен навсегда, чтобы страны подписали договор.

— И в нынешней ситуации это возможно?

— Я думаю, что Россия и Украина сразу не подпишут такой договор. Возможно, они подпишут декларацию, как это было в случае с Арменией и Азербайджаном, а спустя какое-то время уже может быть подписано соглашение. Пока, как мне кажется, всё может остановиться на декларации. Для этого не надо признавать или не признавать территории, достаточно признать приостановку конфликта и контингент войск на линии соприкосновения. Это менее взрывоопасно с точки зрения внутренней политики обеих стран, это более рационально, и это оставляет почву для последующего соглашения, например, между будущими правительствами этих стран.

Ирина Стрельникова , специально для «Ветра»