I think this mineral deal is no longer about the war, but a way for Ukraine to barter for continued US involvement in the post-war rebuilding.

It's hard to predict what will happen to Ukraine if the US pulls the plug, even after a peace is signed, but it probably won't be pretty.

More on Mearsheimer's infallible predictions:

US President-elect Donald Trump won’t end the Ukraine war because he has appointed “a bunch of hawks” who suffer from “Russophobia in the extreme”, international relations scholar John Mearsheimer has claimed.

Mearsheimer argued the West and Ukraine must — but won’t — accept two conditions for Russian President Vladimir Putin to enter negotiations. First, “that Ukraine will never be in Nato”. Second, “that Crimea and the four Oblasts that the Russians have now annexed are permanently lost”. He continued: “I find it hard to imagine the US, even Trump, accepting those two conditions.”

https://unherd.com/newsroom/john-mearsheimer-trump-is-appointing-russophobic-hawks/

Whatever Trump agrees on with Putin about a new world order, it should be maintained under and possibly after Trump presidency (as long as it lasts) and after Putin. What might possibly ensure this?
Whatever Trump is ready to concede to Putin concerning this world order, implies that Putin must be ready to concede the same to Trump: e.g., if I'll break Western alliance to contain Russia, then Russia must break with its alliance (China, Iran, North Korea). If Russia occupies pieces of Ukraine or widens further its boarders, then the US (including Israel) can do the same. If Russia wants to sell oil to Europe, then the US will take Ukrainian resources (like rare earth).

(Don't mind the fact that is breaking international law and setting examples to others e.g. China with Taiwan)

It’s good that Trump wants peace. — Mikie

It's called peace by prostitution. If you are a European prepare your lubricant coz you are gonna be next... ah but you are not European but from the US? Tell us your dirtiest desires, master.

But the Trump chaos is being steered in a more deliberate direction this time. Both internally and externally the goal seems to be to use Trump to engineer a breakdown of existing structures.

Yes, I agree, I suspect there is Kompromat on Trump which is being leveraged to pull his strings. Indeed there did seem to be a tell (when responding to Zelenskyy) in his ramblings about the way Putin had been attacked with a so called Biden scam. Referring to the Hunter Biden laptop, where he emphasised something disgusting happening in Hunter’s bedroom. I read this as there is something on a laptop disgusting in a bedroom, but Trump was on the tape rather than Hunter.

I suspect there is Kompromat on Trump [...] — Punshhh

Nonsense. You're just being presented with the same Janus-faced nature the US has always shown, but people keep forgetting about.

Trump is being used as a patsy to carry through some harsh but necessary foreign policy decisions. An exit from Ukraine is one of them, just like Trump facilitated the ugly but much-needed exit from Afghanistan.

I see a lot of Americans putting all the blame on Trump, and then on Putin who must have blackmailed him, trying to exculpate their country from this utterly blatant act of Machiavallianism.

The next president will be able to claim "it was all Trump" and "things are back to normal again", after which the next lamb will be led to the slaughter.

When will it get through to you that what you're seeing now is the true face of the United States?

Yes the pragmatic solution is a ceasefire with the line drawn where the current frontline lies. With a new iron curtain erected. But we are a long way from that on both sides.
Ukraine can continue, with European support, even if the U.S. pulls out now. Also Trump is in a position to put considerable pressure on Putin, especially if he does a deal with Xi. This side of negotiations has not been reported on. I’m sure Xi would want a ceasefire now and this would be an opportunity to show strength on the global stage. Likewise if Trump forced Russia to end the war, the kudos would be enormous, something he would surely seek. But he is a petty two bit grifter, so probably can’t see that.

Trump has great power in this crisis, Putin is weak and on the ropes. Europe is ready to mobilise. The opportunities are enormous, but somehow I think Trump will make a mess of it. The biggest fail of all time.

If they wouldn't care, why then the hostility? No, really. Vance and Trump have absolutely no intension to be on the side of Ukraine... or on Western Europe. They want to cozy up with Russia and that's why the attack and the hostility. They are pressuring Ukraine to take what Russia wants, hence they are here doing Putin's bidding. — ssu

What's confusing me is that I don't see what either the tech-bros like Musk or the nativists like Bannon (I'm not really sure where Vance falls on this) are getting out of this.

I can understand Trump liking his ego stroked by Putin. But Russia seems an unlikely ally for any of the factions that make up Trumps power base (or pull his strings). It seems to me that Russia has little to offer to any political faction in the US. The US doesn't need the raw materials, the Russian consumer base is relatively small and Putin doesn't even have much diplomatic weight to throw around.

Yes, I agree, I suspect there is Kompromat on Trump which is being leveraged to pull his strings. Indeed there did seem to be a tell (when responding to Zelenskyy) in his ramblings about the way Putin had been attacked with a so called Biden scam. Referring to the Hunter Biden laptop, where he emphasised something disgusting happening in Hunter’s bedroom. I read this as there is something on a laptop disgusting in a bedroom, but Trump was on the tape rather than Hunter. — Punshhh

It could also just be basic psychology. Trump sees Putin as being like him (an image that Putin no doubt did everything to reinforce) and thus he projects his own frustrations on Putin.

There seem to be many plausible ways to explain Trump's behaviour on this issue. What puzzles me much more, as I have written above, is why everyone else in the Trump administration is behaving the way they are.

Yes the pragmatic solution is a ceasefire with the line drawn where the current frontline lies. With a new iron curtain erected. But we are a long way from that on both sides. — Punshhh

A new iron curtain would imply Ukraine is in NATO. I think the Ukrainians would be ready to accept that deal. But neither Russia or the current US administration would accept it.

What's confusing me is that I don't see what either the tech-bros like Musk or the nativists like Bannon (I'm not really sure where Vance falls on this) are getting out of this. — Echarmion

Tech-bros are getting EU laws/tax against American Big Tech down and prevent the formation of European big-tech competitors (keep an eye on AI and how AI will be integrated within military industry or how American crypto currencies will be injected into the European system). Bannon with his fascist-leaning mindset and propaganda aspires to be the guru of European far right movements (see Salvini in Italy who is waving between becoming a Putin's bitch and Trump's bitch, or both), so he helps steal the European far-right movements/propaganda from Russia. All three are helping each other.

This is the bit where you tell me why the President during a heated row in the Oval Office in front of the worlds media, starts rambling on about dodgy laptops in hotel rooms, where disgusting things happened and that it was all a Biden scam.

I’m under no illusions about the nature of the U.S. I’d just rather have U.S. hegemony than the alternatives atm.

What if Mearsheimer is part of the Blob?

His views on the Ukraine conflict:
- May deflect blame from other policy failures
- Justify continued engagement with a weaker Russia to contain a stronger China and maintain hegemonic supremacy
- Limiting the scope of public debate on foreign policy, while providing controlled opposition that gives the appearance of diverse viewpoints within foreign policy discourse.

When will it get through to you that what you're seeing now is the true face of the United States? — Tzeentch

you mean this?

It has been pointed out, that while Associated Press and Reuters have now been banned from White House briefings, that the official Russian state media had a reported in the Oval Office today, to conveniently broadcast Trump and Vances brow-beating of Zelenskyy to the whole Russian federation. How convenient for them.

It has been pointed out, that while Associated Press and Reuters have now been banned from White House briefings, that the official Russian state media had a reported in the Oval Office today, to conveniently broadcast Trump and Vances brow-beating of Zelenskyy to the whole Russian federation. How convenient for them. — Wayfarer

If it turns out that Trump is collaborating with Putin... remind me again, how does the west treat Russian spies who infiltrate positions of power?

Let’s not forget that just this week, the US refused to endorse a UN resolution condemning Russia’s invasion.

Trump is to all intents a Kremlin asset now. — Wayfarer

Yes he is. Putin likely has dangled deals of hundreds of billions to American corporations to Trump, likely with few billions to Trump to pocket himself. Somebody (I don't remember who) commented that likely the math involved here with the demands that Ukraine has to pay are in similar ball range (as Trump confuses these things). The priority here is the normalization of relations and Putin getting a deal that he wants: The peace Putin would be OK with are Russia getting also the parts of the Oblasts that aren't in Russian control, Ukraine not in NATO and without security guarantees. Perhaps "Euro-peacekeepers" that can be bullied around like peacekeepers are bullied (like actors like Israel), but no serious military capability for Ukraine. And of course Zelenskyi thrown a way and a possible Putin puppet to replace him.

It’s good that Trump wants peace. — Mikie

Unfortunately I think you are wrong.

This is the lie Trump tells to us, the window dressing of his dubious objectives. What Trump wants is money. And Putin likely has promised him money. Promises of money are enough for Trump. That's the only reason why Trump would so recklessly, so enthusiastically try to force everything down the throat of Zelenskyi. That would explain the ambush of Zelenskyi.

Anybody, including Trump, just wanting for the deaths to stop, wouldn't go on to attack one side of the negotiation the way that Trump did.

Russia will keep the territory they annexed and there will be a guarantee of no NATO membership — Mikie

Russia actually wants the Oblasts that it doesn't totally control. Remember that Russia has already annexed them, so for Putin they are already part of Russia. That territory isn't negotiable. Ukraine did push Russian out of the Western side on Dnipro (Dnieper), yet the oblasts that Russia has annexed are situated also on the Western side. This would be a huge defensive difficulties to a post-peace treaty Ukraine.

They’re not going to win even with US backing. — Mikie

Don't be a defeatist.

Russia lost in Afghanistan.
Russia lost to Poland.
Russia lost to Japan.

Russia can have these military defeats and has to back down. It has happened. With a true backing of Ukraine this could a possibility. Before it would happen, Russia would negotiate for peace.

Even puny Finland all alone without such backing as Ukraine has, could get a peace deal in the Winter War, because Stalin was nervous that he could face French and British troops in Finland. They were intended to come here (in the end they were used in Norway). And this is the reality one has to see here: Russian will negotiate of peace only if it's really preferable to continuing the war. Hence Ukraine, if it would get a peace negotiation, it should come from a position of strength. Ukraine isn't yet collapsing. But thanks to the help of Trump to Russia, it might in future.

think this mineral deal is no longer about the war, but a way for Ukraine to barter for continued US involvement in the post-war rebuilding. — Tzeentch

Certainly.

Putin is weak and on the ropes. — Punshhh

Nope.

What Trump wants is money. — ssu

I think it’s power and praise. A Nobel prize would be nice. Plus war is costly and unpopular. He’s driven by media, as well, and can read the writings on the wall. He likes money too, of course, but I don’t think that’s a major factor here.

I think it’s power and praise. A Nobel prize would be nice. Plus war is costly and unpopular. He’s driven by media, as well, and can read the writings on the wall. He likes money too, of course, but I don’t think that’s a major factor here. — Mikie

Well, think of Elon and Trump. Elon gave him a lot of money to his campaign. Without Elon, he likely wouldn't be in the White House. So how he behaves towards Elon shows how he bows for money.

Power has gone to his head. What else could you say about the Mar-a-Gaza idea or the annexation of Greenland (even if that was already floated in the first Trump administration).

Next thing might be that NATO dies. Now people would like to think that this might be an outburst like France leaving NATO for a while and then coming back. But the way Trump handles these issues, I'm not sure. It really might be the last days of NATO, as Stavridis here says.



Only if the Americans would wake up to what disasters Trump is making, but likely that won't happen. MAGA crowd will cheer as Trump dismantles the US.

Next we will have the trade wars. You can just guess how that trade war will reinforce the current break up.

Putin is weak and on the ropes.
— Punshhh

Nope.

I’m not going to labour the point, but is Putin so strong that he has ended up dug in, in eastern Ukraine. With Ukraine troops picking off his troops. Possibly up to 1,500 per day. Troops being one of Putin’s most scarce resources at the moment.

Tech-bros are getting EU laws/tax against American Big Tech down and prevent the formation of European big-tech competitors (keep an eye on AI and how AI will be integrated within military industry or how American crypto currencies will be injected into the European system). Bannon with his fascist-leaning mindset and propaganda aspires to be the guru of European far right movements (see Salvini in Italy who is waving between becoming a Putin's bitch and Trump's bitch, or both), so he helps steal the European far-right movements/propaganda from Russia. All three are helping each other. — neomac

Sure, Putin was a convenient figurehead to use for the right wing populists and their nativist, anti-EU and frequently Anti-American agenda.

But that was and is mostly political manoeuvring to appeal to voter blocks. It's hard for me to see why a Europe that was actually ruled by nationalist governments would be friendly to Russia. There is no constructive overlap of interests. The overlap is purely destructive: against the EU and NATO.

Similarly with US politics, I can see right wing populists using Putin as a sign of their opposition to the status quo. But now that they're actually in power, there seems little reason to care for Russia one way or another.

There must be something I'm not seeing.

Power has gone to his head. What else could you say about the Mar-a-Gaza idea or the annexation of Greenland (even if that was already floated in the first Trump administration). — ssu

Actually it now occurs to me that for those that want to radically rebuild the US into some cyberpunk dystopia, the entire Ukraine conflict might be just another smokescreen to keep both the public and Trump distracted while they go about their work.

It could also just be basic psychology. Trump sees Putin as being like him (an image that Putin no doubt did everything to reinforce) and thus he projects his own frustrations on Putin.

There seem to be many plausible ways to explain Trump's behaviour on this issue. What puzzles me much more, as I have written above, is why everyone else in the Trump administration is behaving the way they are.

Yes, maybe. The way I read it is that Putin has something disgusting on Trump and when he realised that he was going to have to push harder against Putin if he’s going to get a deal. He immediately went to the plausible deniability that it was a set up orchestrated by the Biden’s and that he isn’t as depraved as he appears in the video. He might even claim it’s a deepfake.

A new iron curtain would imply Ukraine is in NATO. I think the Ukrainians would be ready to accept that deal. But neither Russia or the current US administration would accept it.

Yes, but what alternative is there? The boundary has to be impermeable or Putin would infiltrate. Also the only way to guarantee Ukraine’s security is for her to be in NATO.
Putin might have no choice, there isn’t much he could do about it now. And the U.S. is trashing NATO and May even leave it. They can’t expect to dictate the direction of NATO in those circumstances.

The two sides are so far apart that it will require something this big to get anywhere near a deal.

There must be something I'm not seeing.

It might be quite simple really. That Trump wants to be a dictator like Trump, Xi, Kim Jong-un. That his administration is following the Orbanisation playbook asap so that he can prevent anymore elections.

Perhaps it's time to use Occam's razor.

Nope, nobody is creating this as another smokescreen to keep both the public and Trump distracted. It might become a dystopia, but nobody's building for it to be so.

This all is the doing of Trump's and Vance's erratic behavior when Trump is surrounded by yes-men who take at heart anything the Emperor thinks one day. The whole argument of there being "a method to the madness" and Trump playing a 4D-chess are just hopeful dreams that this would end in something better. It isn't. It's an old man with a short attention span thinking he can do nearly anything he wants.

Americans should really wake up to the enormous damage being done now by Trump. If you really cheer now for Europe to "take care of it's own security", you should understand that it means that you the alliance is breaking apart thanks to Trump. This isn't about "Europe paying it's share" because there isn't going to be an alliance. Trump has no intention of strengthening the alliance. He really doesn't need NATO. When your visionary vice-President argues that Putin's Russia isn't a threat to Europe, his ignorance is quite set (as is his defeatism). When they intervene in the elections of European countries and try to push political parties of their making, that is a sign of outright hostility. You cannot hide it.

For Trump and Vance their actual enemy is liberal Europe, all these countries that have thought about being allies of the US and in defense of a rules based international order. Not Russia. And since not every country is lead by Victor Orban and Bibi Netanyahu, there are many of these "allies" they actually hate. This hatred is quite evident to see, actually. For these it's "Freedom of speach" values hurled at them, for Russia it's the new "realpolitik" of never criticizing Putin and telling Kremlin lines/lies. And trying to negotiate a peace on behalf of Russia.

Americans really should wake up and notice where Trump is steering your country into.

Sure, Putin was a convenient figurehead to use for the right wing populists and their nativist, anti-EU and frequently Anti-American agenda.

But that was and is mostly political manoeuvring to appeal to voter blocks. It's hard for me to see why a Europe that was actually ruled by nationalist governments would be friendly to Russia. There is no constructive overlap of interests. The overlap is purely destructive: against the EU and NATO. — Echarmion

Precisely, for Russia the destruction of EU and NATO must be very much functional to weaken the grip of the US in Europe, which is the superpower against which Russia tries to define its hegemonic status.
Besides European nationalisms constrain one another, so it may be in the interest of superpowers (like Russia, but at this point also the US) to keep Europe divided. Dividing Europe may be convenient to avoid the emergence of a European superpower, but also to turn small nations into clients (or worse puppets) otherwise to thwart their exploitation by rival superpowers. In the case of Russia, nationalist Orban is serving Russia. And you shouldn’t discount the largest Russian minority in Europe which is hosted by East Germany and may have very much contributed to rise of AfD, the far right political movement (https://theconversation.com/how-russians-have-helped-fuel-the-rise-of-germanys-far-right-105551). Musk was trying to steal AfD from Putin and it seems he failed, at least for now.
European nationalists serve to keep Europe fragmented and turn them into US bootlickers or Russia bootlickers. Salvini is the prototype of far-right populist which Trump and Putin wish to have in all European countries in which political elites try to resist the US/Russia’s interference or refuse to complain with their demands.

Similarly with US politics, I can see right wing populists using Putin as a sign of their opposition to the status quo. But now that they're actually in power, there seems little reason to care for Russia one way or another. — Echarmion

If American nationalists wish to keep the US as the strongest superpower, which they most likely do, then Russia can be very much instrumental to contain China (and Iran to make Israel happy!). This likely includes the idea of keeping China and Europe separated. The idea of using Russia to counter China as the biggest competitor to the US supremacy is e.g. what Mearsheimer kept suggesting roughly since the beginning of this conflict.
On the other side it is unlikely that Russia is happy to turn into some dumb sidekick of China. Russia current economic, military and political weakness can be exploited by Trump to turn Russia into US’s sidekick (this move reminds me of Nixon's opening to Mao’s China against the Soviet Union). And to make this proposal of partnership credible to Russia, Trump needs to blame everything on Biden, Zelensky and European allies, make them pay for Russia’s aggression of Ukraine and make a good deal of concessions to Putin.

If American nationalists wish to keep the US as the strongest superpower, which they most likely do, then Russia can be very much instrumental to contain China (and Iran to make Israel happy!). This likely includes the idea of keeping China and Europe separated. The idea of using Russia to counter China as the biggest competitor to the US supremacy is e.g. what Mearsheimer kept suggesting roughly since the beginning of this conflict.
On the other side it is unlikely that Russia is happy to turn into some dumb sidekick of China. Russia current economic, military and political weakness can be exploited by Trump to turn Russia into US’s sidekick (this move reminds me of Nixon's opening to Mao’s China against the Soviet Union). And to make this proposal of partnership credible to Russia, Trump needs to blame everything on Biden, Zelensky and European allies, make them pay for Russia’s aggression of Ukraine and make a good deal of concessions to Putin. — neomac

But wouldn't the US aligning with Russia create a situation where a disgruntled Europe is now more open to Chinese influence?

If you could choose between retaining an alliance with Europe and gaining one with Russia, why would you choose Russia?

In 2019, President Trump tried to extort President Zelinsky by withholding Congressionally-mandated military aid to Ukraine, which was attacked and invaded by Russia, to coerce him to say he was opening an investigation into the Bidens. Zelensky showed his mettle and resisted; Trump was impeached.

Fast forward to yesterday, Trump (who could not handle the job alone and needed the assistance of a henchman) again sought to bend President Zelensky to his will to extort Ukraine out of its natural resources (and afterTrump conceded key negotiation points to Russia BEFORE negotiations even began). And once again, Zelensky resisted. But without any congressional repercussions for Trump.

Instead, we are now an international pariah. — Andrew Wiesemann

And let's, at this point, remember the episode which made Zelenskyy an internationally-respected figure, when the US Embassy offered to helicopter him out of Kiev, in February 2022, and he responded:

I don't need a ride, I need ammo

Before proceeding to bleed the invaders of half a million attackers.

He's the kind of leader America could use.

But wouldn't the US aligning with Russia create a situation where a disgruntled Europe is now more open to Chinese influence?

If you could choose between retaining an alliance with Europe and gaining one with Russia, why would you choose Russia?

It’s a distopian Oligarchian nightmare which would usher in our demise due to climate change.

But wouldn't the US aligning with Russia create a situation where a disgruntled Europe is now more open to Chinese influence? — Echarmion

Sure, Europeans will be compelled to look for new alliances, like China, if the US is turning into its enemy.
However the first 2 related problems that come to mind to me are the following:
1. China is pretty faraway from Europe and all routes for commercial and security support are mostly under the control of Russia and the US, one way or the other.
2. Europe is not really ONE political subject. It’s many, and they are unable to strongly converge on many security and economic issues (local nationalism contributes to keeping divided, without the interference of foreign powers). And the US strategy is to avoid to overstretch but still preserve an affordable/sustainable sphere of influence over the part of Europe that will submit to its demands for business and/or security and shut up (“How can the U.S. get trading and security partners to agree to such a deal? First, there is the stick of tariffs. Second, there is the carrot of the defense umbrella and the risk of losing it.”), because they are unable to do otherwise under the pressure of the Russian threat, economic recessions, islamic immigration, corrupt politicians, climate change, gender equality, you name it.

If you could choose between retaining an alliance with Europe and gaining one with Russia, why would you choose Russia? — Echarmion

My understanding is that on one side, the pivot to Asia, namely the incumbency of competing superpower like China, has been a strategic concern for the US politics for a good decade. So an economically/military weak Russia, subordinate to China (which is also eroding Russian influence on its eastern flank), in desperate need to regain its superpower status (like at the end of the Second World War) can be instrumental to the US in exchange for a strategic partnership. On the other side, Europe has spent 30 years of globalisation enriching themselves and the US enemies (Russia and China) at the expense of the US, instead of taking a greater responsibility in opening its market to the US, and defending the West through soft-power (instead of spinning populist anti-Americanism, complacency toward anti-Western sentiments in the Rest), and also by military means.
It’s really baffling to hear, even in this thread, Europeans complaining about the US as the Great Satan or as the most powerful and dangerous country in the World, and yet at the same thinking that the best strategy for Europe is to poke the US in the eye by being complacent with Russia (which has invaded Europe more than the US has, even prior the existence of the US) and China, and spin anti-American propaganda.
As Russia and China are using populist nationalism against the transatlantic alliance, the US will be using European populist nationalism to turn their countries into a submissive client status, because they are incapable of turning into strong allies (like Israel). They just acted as US parasites, so they will be treated as such.

for Russia the destruction of EU and NATO must be very much functional to weaken the grip of the US in Europe, which is the superpower against which Russia tries to define its hegemonic status. — neomac

This is exactly their agenda. Why the US doesn't see this a hostile intent is beyond me. But I guess too much of "culture war" and too much of the idea that the "Deep State" in the US is the real enemy blurs people from seeing those who really have hostile intent.

If American nationalists wish to keep the US as the strongest superpower, which they most likely do, then Russia can be very much instrumental to contain China (and Iran to make Israel happy!). This likely includes the idea of keeping China and Europe separated. The idea of using Russia to counter China as the biggest competitor to the US supremacy is e.g. what Mearsheimer kept suggesting roughly since the beginning of this conflict. — neomac

And this is so the real insanity, which just show the extreme hubris and utter ignorance and delusions of these "American nationalists".

Perhaps they in their fantasies think of an "Kissinger moment" when Nixon went to China and the Americans enjoyed that "they" had breached the Communist states. Well, that breach happened because Mao was Stalinist and Soviet Union moved away from Stalinism with the two countries even having a border war.

What this friending of Russia, in order to "separate China", will do is for the US just loose it's largest and most trustworthy ally. Allies that really have designed their armed forces to be part of NATO. The trust has already been breached by Trump. Trump has through his actions made it totally clear that it won't stand with Europe and Europe has to go it's own way. The "Europe having to pay" for it's share of the common defense is now only a fig leaf that certainly the Europeans will repeat diplomatically. But they do understand that Trump and Vance don't give a shit about Ukraine and don't give shit about the Transatlantic alliance. Far too liberal in their view. Biden and Obama were liked in Europe, so fuck those people. So the real division here done is an effort to break up the Atlanticism. The US is already an untrustworthy ally.

Besides, these "American nationalists" seem to be totally incapable of seeing this from the Russian perspective. Why on Earth would Russia be against China here? What benefit would have to have hostile relations with it's largest trade partner and a country that is shares a very long border? It's China who has helped Russia here, not the US.

Putin will happily lure these suckers into breaking up their own alliances with empty promises.

Here's a great interview from Gabrielus Landsbergis, a former Latvian foreign minister, who clearly tells the situation as it is now. He gives insight just why some countries (like France) is against the using of Russia's frozen assets to help Ukraine. The reason is that China and Saudi Arabia are against this, which itself is understandable as for these countries such a precedent would be bad. Also the Landsbergis compares of just how little the aid to Ukraine has been compared to how costly the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were. The assistance to Ukraine is counted in few hundred billion, those wars in the Global War Against Terror cost is in the trillions both.

I see a lot of Americans putting all the blame on Trump, and then on Putin who must have blackmailed him, trying to exculpate their country from this utterly blatant act of Machiavallianism.

The next president will be able to claim "it was all Trump" and "things are back to normal again", after which the next lamb will be led to the slaughter. — Tzeentch

Well it depends. If Trump's strategy fails, the next US administration may blame it on Trump, but if it succeeds. They will preserve it. Democrats were complaining about Trump's withdrawing from JCPOA agreements, but then they kept it. Democrats were complaining about first Trump's administration's tariff policies turning the US market more protectionist, but then Biden kept this approach. Democrats (Since Obama) started taking seriously the pivot to Asia, Trump is doing the same but more coherently than the Democrats since the Democrats were more committed to globalization which led the US to overstretch. Overstretching would be a problem for the US in any case (not only for the US geopolitical power but also for domestic political stability). Besides the situation looks particularly favorable to the US now, Trump has amassed lots of power within his country and lots of leverage against Russia and the EU. And the more he succeeds in pursuing his goals, the greater is the chance that Americans want to keep Trump in power or whomever he blesses to be his successor.

My understanding is that on one side, the pivot to Asia, namely the incumbency of competing superpower like China, has been a strategic concern for the US politics for a good decade. So an economically/military weak Russia, subordinate to China (which is also eroding Russian influence on its eastern flank), in desperate need to regain its superpower status (like at the end of the Second World War) can be instrumental to the US in exchange for a strategic partnership. On the other side, Europe has spent 30 years of globalisation enriching themselves and the US enemies (Russia and China) at the expense of the US, instead of taking a greater responsibility in opening its market to the US, and defending the West through soft-power (instead of spinning populist anti-Americanism, complacency toward anti-Western sentiments in the Rest), and also by military means.

The Trump administration has fxcked up big time. By cutting USAID they have fallen at the first hurdle. The biggest threat from China over the last few decades has been their aid and investment strategies around the third world(amongst others). Now the influence the U.S. had in these arenas has been handed to China on a plate. While Russia is following China’s example in the African continent and we have the rise of BRICS.
Secondly they have misunderstood the motives in Europe. The failure of the TTIP negotiations wasn’t a failure on the part of the EU, it was them not falling over and becoming an economic vassal block via U.S. litigation which would be imported along with the goods. A colonisation through the economic back door. Also the deleterious effects the U.S. experienced as a result of globalisation were also felt by European countries. It affected all Western countries and is the primary reason why the EU is struggling economically at this time.
They will fall at the next hurdle if they alienate Europe and find they have no friends anymore. How sad, although, they will have Putin’s shoulder to cry on I suppose.