|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
Lavrov’s sweatshirt with the letters “CCCP” [USSR] written on it was a message that Americans understood only after the fact. They understood it after putin & Co. smashed the “art of Trump’s deal-making” face on the table of Soviet diplomacy. Soviet diplomacy had been honing its tactics of brutal blackmail and pressure for decades. Their approaches had not changed since the days of Gromyko, of whom Henry Kissinger said: “It was suicidal to negotiate with him without mastering the record,” former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Olena Zerkal writes.
This tactic is easy to understand from Gromyko’s own quote: “First. Demand everything to the maximum and do not be shy in your requests. Demand what never belonged to you. Second. Put forward ultimatums. Threaten war, do not spare threats, and, as a way out of the situation, offer negotiations. There will always be people in the West who will take the bait. Third. Having started negotiations, do not give in even a step. They themselves will offer you part of what you asked for. But even then, do not agree, but squeeze for more. They will go for it.”
It seems that this very tactic “multiplied by zero” Trump’s ultimatums and threats in front of the world live from Alaska. And the Trump team’s attempt to present this grandiose fuck-up as a victory only further highlights the inability of the modern White House to outwit the kremlin.
This inability is due to the peculiarities of Trump himself, who does not prepare for negotiations and despises experts on any issue. In addition, he does not like long and boring negotiations, and his inability to concentrate has long been known to the russians.
So, the result of the meeting in Alaska should definitely be studied by future diplomats. In particular, as an example of the application of the “Gromyko tactic” and the loss of the US strategic advantage and the political capital invested by Trump. For our negotiators, this example should also be a lesson in the fallacy of the tactic “you just have to look into the eyes”. Although, I hope that everyone already understands this. Just as it is understandable that there is a need to have positions with justifications for all the absurd accusations about the “original sources of the conflict”.
But in this consistency in the use of negotiation tactics, the predictability of the russians is also obvious. Their clichés and methods are known, although they cannot be treated lightly.
The main trap that Trump fell into is the framework imposed by putin. Tying it to a major peace agreement to end hostilities, which, according to putin, takes into account “a fair balance of European and global security.” Such a tie could mean that ending the war would now depend not only on concessions from Ukraine, but also on concessions that putin expects to receive from the West.
Thus, he makes Ukraine hostage to the resolution of all his other concerns: from “NATO expansion” to “non-interference in political processes in the countries of the former USSR.” You can also add a non-proliferation treaty to this, and then he can safely drag out the negotiation process indefinitely without stopping hostilities.
The only thing that the “master of deal-making” has managed to do is to refrain from concluding a “deal” and not discuss the trade until the agreement on Ukraine has not yet been reached. And this is good news for us, because Trump is not constrained by anything, and with his inherent ease can change his views and promises.
Will Trump change his rhetoric again after today’s meeting with European leaders? Will they be able to “re-enchant” him and reformat the frame imposed by putin?
There is a chance.
I think that after the meeting in Alaska, we can already give Trump the coveted Nobel Peace Prize, if only he would not meet with putin again and agree to continue supplying weapons in exchange for “wonderful” European checks. For us, as for the Europeans, this would be the best development.
They will not be against it, in fact. Israeli leaders Levi Eshkol in 1967 and Benjamin Netanyahu in 2025 did the same thing – they listened to the outcries from the White House, but conducted negotiations and wars in their own way. None of them destroyed the “transatlantic unity.”
At the same time, the worst option is to hold a trilateral meeting with Zelensky, Trump and putin at this stage. This is a trap with no way out and, I hope, it is not only me who understands this. Such a format is possible only when everything is already agreed, when there are texts of agreements, when before that, united teams work on the agreements on our part.
Negotiations with the russians should be conducted by a united Europe – where each ally has its own knowledge of how to outflank russian tactics. We have something, the French have something, the British have something.
It is difficult to imagine, but it will be even more difficult to go through with it and achieve peace. Peace not on putin’s terms, but peace with which we will be able to live and advance Ukraine.
