Russia and particularly Vladimir Putin appear to be undermining the “strong” Donald Trump image, as the American president looks weak in the face of Moscow’s objections regarding security guarantees and the prospect of a Putin-Zelensky meeting, notes Sky News in its analysis.
The American president’s meetings with his Ukrainian counterpart and seven European leaders at the White House last Monday were significant, as Donald Trump appeared to be convinced not to abandon Europe and committed to “security guarantees” for Kyiv, signaling a 180-degree turn on Ukraine, which he had insisted for months was “Europe’s problem.”
However, as Mark Stone, the British network’s correspondent in the US, notes in his analysis, it was always clear that Vladimir Putin’s Russia would have a problem with this.
The language used by Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff last weekend, arguing that the Russian president had consented to Europe providing NATO “Article 5-type” guarantees to Ukraine, left many questions unanswered.
Lavrov’s message and Russia’s first cold shower over Ukraine security guarantees – “Trump looks weak,” according to Sky News
But the Kremlin quickly clarified its position. Throughout this week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov predictably undermined the entire effort, emphasizing that Moscow would never accept a peace plan that included the presence of European or NATO troops in Ukraine.
“The presence of foreign troops in Ukraine is completely unacceptable to Russia,” the Russian Foreign Minister declared yesterday, echoing the Kremlin’s long-standing position, which had used NATO’s “eastward” expansion among other things to justify the “special military operation,” as it dubbed the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
“All this makes Trump look rather weak,” Sky News says, noting that Moscow carefully chose language that doesn’t openly provoke the American president but mocks European leaders.
Moscow’s asterisks for the Putin-Zelensky meeting
As for the bilateral meeting between Putin and Zelensky, which Trump announced Monday had been agreed upon and was imminent – “within two weeks” – it seems far from certain that it will actually take place.
Perhaps that’s why Trump agreed to Putin’s proposal for a bilateral meeting first, without the White House occupant’s participation, since “it’s easier for the American president to blame someone else if it’s not his meeting and it doesn’t happen,” the British network says.
European sources who participated in Wednesday’s meeting of NATO member states’ chiefs of general staff on how security guarantees for Ukraine would work – which Moscow doesn’t accept – commented that it was crowned with great success. One of them, referring to the Russian Foreign Minister’s statement, emphasized: “It’s not up to Lavrov to decide on security guarantees. It’s not up to the threatener to decide how to prevent the threat!” The argument is that it’s not realistic for Russia to dictate which countries Ukraine can and cannot host troops from.
Will Trump threaten to use force?
As the British network notes, the problem lies in the fact that if Europe and Washington want Moscow to sign some form of peace agreement, then all parties’ consent will be required regarding security guarantees.
Another way to force Russia to consent would be with an overwhelming threat of force, an explicit statement from Trump like: “Vladimir, look what I did to Iran…” But of course, Iran is not a nuclear power.
The basic concept of “security guarantees” is an unwavering commitment to defend Ukraine in the future. Future guarantees would require treaties, not just a vague commitment. But as the British network’s Washington correspondent notes, he doesn’t see “Trump’s America actually signing anything that would obligate it to do anything.”
Another option is a multi-layered security guarantee built over time, but from Moscow’s side it would likely end up being a repetition of history and give it yet another “justification” to react.
