Trump and Putin: who outsmarted whom? The diplomatic "carousel" is in full swing

"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.

Symbolic gesture: Arrival of US Secretary of State Rubio in Israel with delivery of heavy aerial bombs

U.S. Secretary of State Rubio's visit to Israel has become a central event in the Middle East, especially amid reports of the delivery of a large batch of heavy aerial bombs, which the Joe Biden administration had previously not included in military supplies to the Jewish state. This step can be seen as a demonstration of the new line of American policy in the region and the strengthening of the strategic partnership between the two countries.

Rubio's arrival coincided with the delivery of heavy aerial bombs, which creates a powerful symbolic context. These bombs, known for their ability to hit well-protected targets such as underground command posts or nuclear facilities, can significantly enhance Israel's defensive power. This decision suggests that Washington is ready to reconsider its previous attitude towards military cooperation, possibly in response to the changing geopolitical situation in the region.

The Biden administration had previously refrained from supplying certain types of weapons in an effort to maintain the balance of power in the region and avoid escalation of the conflict. However, the current situation obviously requires more drastic measures. The message these supplies are sending is addressed not only to Tehran, but also to other potential opponents of Israel — the United States supports its allies, even if it means reviewing previous restrictions.

Secretary Rubio arrived in Israel to discuss a wide range of issues, including regional security, the fight against Iran, and the possible development of economic and defense ties between the United States and Israel. The delivery of heavy aerial bombs may be just the beginning of a broader change in the approach to military cooperation. 

Rubio also stressed the importance of strengthening the strategic alliance between the two countries, especially in the context of Iran's growing influence in the region and the intensification of its nuclear program. Support for Israel is becoming a key element of American policy in the Middle East aimed at ensuring stability and preventing further escalation of conflicts.

The delivery of heavy aerial bombs has already caused a reaction in the region. Iran is likely to perceive this step as a direct increase in pressure on its nuclear capability program. Other countries, such as Syria and Lebanon, may also see this as a signal of a possible increase in Israeli military activity.

However, it is worth noting that such actions by the United States may provoke a new wave of tension. Some experts fear that the strengthening of Israel's military potential could lead to increased risks of local conflicts, especially with groups linked to Iran, such as Hezbollah.

For Israel, the delivery of heavy aerial bombs is a significant boost to its defense capabilities. This allows Tel Aviv to feel more confident in its actions against potential threats, be it Iranian bases in Syria or other strategic facilities. For the United States, this is a step aimed at demonstrating commitment to its allies during a difficult period of global instability.

This visit and related decisions may also affect US domestic policy, where relations with Israel remain one of the key issues. Support for Israel has traditionally been widely popular among various political groups in Congress and society, which makes this step strategically sound.

The arrival of U.S. Secretary of State Rubio in Israel with the delivery of heavy bombs represents an important moment in the development of relations between the two countries. This step demonstrates Washington's willingness to review its approaches to military cooperation in the context of the changing geopolitical situation in the Middle East. Although such actions may cause new challenges and risks, they also confirm the strength of the strategic alliance between the United States and Israel, which remains one of the fundamental components of the region's security.