"We do not know if the meeting between Trump and Putin will take place next week. It all depends on how far the negotiations can go," said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. He sounds cautious, as if he's still in the fog. But if you look closely, there is a whole drama behind these words. And it seems that the main director of this drama is Vladimir Putin.
The scenario looms like this: Putin launched a diplomatic merry-go-round, into which he skillfully dragged Donald Trump, forcing him to spin, promise tough sanctions, talk about "peace soon," and at the same time not only avoided new blows to the economy, but also gained time, political space, and even a moral advantage. If everything turns out that way, it won't just be a move. It will be a masterpiece of high diplomacy. Or, as they say, a master class on twirling around a finger.
What Rubio said: between the lines
Rubio made a number of statements that are now being analyzed as ciphers. Here are the key phrases — and our analysis, without embellishment:
1. "The United States is closer to ending the war in Ukraine than it was before"
— Sounds cool. But in fact — nothing. Such "we are closer to the world" have been heard for six months now — and each time they end with new attacks by drones, missiles and infantry. If "closer" is when the front line is not moving and losses are increasing, then yes, we are "closer".
2. "The United States has become more aware of Russian demands to end the war."
— So now we are carefully listening to what the aggressor wants? Seriously? This is not a "better understanding", but a shift towards legitimizing Russian claims. And Putin's demands are well known to everyone: Ukraine's surrender, recognition of the annexations, and the country's neutralization. And now this is the "path to peace"?
3. "Territorial issues will become key in the settlement"
— Well, finally! Captain Obvious announced the main thing. Of course, the territory is key. Did you think the weather would be negotiated? The problem is that the word "return" is no longer in this sentence. Only "questions". And "questions" are already a space for bargaining. That is, "Maybe you won't return everything? Can we come to an agreement?"
4. "A cease-fire may be required at a certain stage of the settlement."
— Yeah, "it may be necessary." As if that's not an obvious goal starting in 2022. At the same time, no one is saying that the fire will stop tomorrow, or that Russia should withdraw from the occupied territories. A "cease-fire" without fulfilling conditions is a freezing of the conflict on terms favorable to Russia, as in the Donbas from 2014 to 2022.
Conclusion: who wins?
Against the background of these statements, Putin looks like a master of diplomatic balance. He:
- Does not make loud concessions.
- It does not cancel the annexation.
- Continues military operations.
- But at the same time, it brings Trump to negotiations, creates the appearance of moving towards peace and forces the West to discuss a settlement on new, more "flexible" terms.
And Trump? Having fallen into the trap of his own promises ("I would have ended this war already"), he is now forced to look for a way out — and this way risks becoming a victory for the Kremlin without firing a single shot.
Today is not about peace. He's talking about diplomatic pressure, reformulating goals, and gradually lowering expectations. Ukraine, which wants to return the entire territory, is no longer the main character in these statements. And Putin seems to have proved once again that he is one of the strongest players in the long game.
If this is the way to peace, then the price may be too high.
No comments:
Post a Comment