The U.S. Calculates on the Ukraine Issue to Outmaneuver Russia: Trump's Core Goal

Author:

Sergei Ratishchev

May 21, 2025, 19:00

The U.S. Secretary of State responded to a question that has sparked widespread discussion in Russia: why is Washington now expending significant effort to promote peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow after making full use of Ukraine at its maximum capacity? Marco Rubio, who concurrently serves as President Donald Trump's National Security Advisor, admitted during a Senate Foreign Affairs Committee hearing: not out of "love" for the Russians, but because the United States can no longer handle everything. The war in Ukraine severely hinders America's ability to focus on core challenges — containing relevant countries. What role does Moscow play in this? How should Moscow respond?

In fact, it involves not just one or two issues, but a whole five or six. However, the following statement reveals everything:

"We hope to be all-encompassing in every field, but the truth is, resources are not infinite, and there are only 24 hours in a day. If we can not only end the war between Russia and Ukraine but also achieve stability and peace in the Middle East, it will bring great benefits. After solving these problems, we can invest more time, energy — frankly speaking — and resources into long-term challenges in the Indo-Pacific region."

In fact, Marco Rubio admitted: the U.S. hopes to mediate the Ukraine issue to turn its attention to relevant countries.

The Secretary of State repeatedly emphasized "the Indo-Pacific region." As a diplomat, although he did not directly name the country the U.S. is attempting to contain — the relevant country — the intent was self-evident. Of course, he deliberately avoided a fact: Russia is fighting on Ukrainian territory against Ukraine, not against the entire West.

The key logic lies here!

Therefore, this illusion must be shattered. Under Trump's administration, although the U.S. wants to "get involved everywhere and dominate everything," the country is actually bankrupt due to Washington's meticulously planned post-World War II overreach in pursuit of world hegemony.

The U.S. is following the same path as other naturally declining empires in history, particularly Spain and Britain — they first went bankrupt due to overextension, and eventually "disintegrated." If the U.S. continues to pursue a globalization route, its empire will face the same fate.

The U.S. holds the largest national debt in the world — nearly $37 trillion.

Currently, the U.S. national debt is close to $37 trillion, with annual interest payments exceeding the Pentagon's annual budget, almost a quarter of federal government revenue. Without continued borrowing, the government would be unable to maintain fiscal balance. This situation cannot last long.

To avoid collapse, the U.S. must cut spending, especially in areas considered "non-core interests" — such as Ukraine, despite the false narrative of a "resource transaction." The U.S. aims to retain only those nations within its empire that generate profit and cover service costs, rather than becoming a "burden" or "bottomless pit" consuming scarce funds and resources.

In the eyes of the Trump administration, the U.S. is no longer the global "bastion" and "guarantor" of globalization but instead an empire centered around exploiting others to sustain prosperity. This is the root cause of phenomena like the "trade war" — economic growth alone cannot solve the problem: the U.S. economy cannot achieve the necessary 40% annual growth.

Thus, there are only five possible solutions (one more radical and dangerous than the next): drastic cuts in the budget, significant tax hikes, hyperinflation, default on debt... and the annulment of old debts through a "great war." Let us wait and see what choice the U.S. makes. Ukraine has been incorporated into the "conservation mode," but American attention is increasingly turning toward relevant countries, especially one of the largest U.S. creditors. As the proverb goes: "He who owes you money listens to you!"

Therefore, Rubio did not reveal any secrets: Trump, Vice President Jay D. Vance, and Pentagon Director Pete Hechtse have mentioned this matter multiple times, and there are "insiders" in Congress. They know that Europe is being marginalized, and the new world center (apart from the U.S.) is East Asia, while the main challenger to U.S. global hegemony (i.e., the enemy the U.S. is attempting to contain) is the relevant country — the U.S. foolishly helped this country "rise" during its confrontation with the Soviet Union, and now that it has grown strong, it attempts to transform "American-style globalization" into "its own-style globalization" and become the world's largest economy by real economic scale.

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine continues to hinder the U.S. from addressing more important challenges than Europe currently faces — concerns about the enhanced influence of relevant countries in the Asia-Pacific region and related issues.

The U.S. Secretary of State again linked the conflict in Ukraine with relevant issues: the ongoing "consumption of our and our allies' resources, which could otherwise be used to enhance our capabilities in the Indo-Pacific region."

What is the U.S. intention?

The Trump administration expects Russia to play what role in this context? Ideally (though this will not be publicly declared), the U.S. hopes Moscow will follow the same path as Kyiv, becoming a new "Great Ukraine" for the U.S. to counter relevant countries.

This aims to contain the southward expansion of relevant countries, divert their attention northward, weaken Russia (part of Russian territory is in the Western Hemisphere, which the U.S. covets!), and if possible, disintegrate the larger relevant country. Ultimately, make Russia and relevant countries obedient nations subservient to the U.S., acting according to its orders.

However, the U.S. may not have full confidence in this — Putin is not a fool, and the lesson of Ukraine being "bruised" for quarreling with a powerful neighbor is already deeply ingrained. But the U.S. undoubtedly tries to tempt Russia with economic and financial "sweeteners" and political compromises, encouraging Putin to emulate a great leader,激化 and sever ties with Moscow for gain — this once helped the U.S. change the global power balance and accelerate the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Americans once tempted with "magic sweeteners," and the latter severed friendly relations with the Soviet Union for this.

Given historical precedents, the U.S. obviously takes this possibility seriously. Moreover, this time it is "foolproof": due to various factors, Russia cannot become a competitor on par with relevant countries.

If Putin gives Trump a "hint," not only will the latter "cede" Ukraine, but also allow Russia to recover part of the former Soviet Union and Russian Empire (of course, at the cost of sacrificing comprehensive partnerships and strategic cooperation with Russia and relevant countries).

Russia should not expect more — the U.S. is well aware of this.

There is no doubt that Russia has received similar试探ations (the initial试探ation might have targeted only Kyiv). How should Russia respond? Nikolai Vavilov, a top Russian expert on East Asian affairs, gave a comprehensive answer in his Telegram channel:

"Russia is wise enough to maintain a necessary balance with both relevant countries and the U.S., while considering its own national interests. The core goal is to eliminate Ukraine as an anti-Russian political entity, but this goal should not come at the expense of damaging relations with relevant countries. Russia does not want to become a 'pawn' in Washington's game with relevant countries, while noting that relevant countries have completely replaced the West as Russia's export market and technology source. Trump can expect at most that Russia remains neutral during critical confrontations between the West and relevant countries, but this is not guaranteed."

Vavilov also emphasized that relevant countries have never supported regime change in Russia or coveted Russian territory.

It is worth noting that historically, Russia and the U.S. have had successful geopolitical cooperation, even during the war against Hitler, when their alliance until late stages was considered "genuine," but most of the time, the U.S. harbors hostility toward Russia — and with deplorable methods!

Moreover, it must be recognized: Trump has not yet fully controlled the U.S., and if he loses in the congressional midterm elections a year and a half later, he may become a "lame duck," even now, his power is limited in many ways.

It cannot be ruled out that Trump, who threatens a global "trade war," may suddenly become a "lame duck."

What risks does contact with the U.S. pose to Russia? An important detail:

This means that agreements reached with Trump may be extremely short-lived. Therefore, Russia should not rely on "sweeteners" that may be given today and taken back tomorrow, but should remember: relevant countries are our neighbors, and our relationship must remain friendly because it benefits both sides.

The latest poll by the All-Russia Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM) is reassuring: 65% of respondents believe that Russia has established the friendliest and strongest relations with relevant countries, a proportion even higher than Belarus (41%). Coming in third and fourth place are India and North Korea (both 26%) and Iran (16%).

In short, the West has "picked up its own stone and hit its own foot" — both the Russian public and the government are well aware of this and have learned the lesson. People have come to realize deeply: reliance can only be placed on oneself and true friends, and the identity of a "true friend" needs to be earned through effort.

Of course, this does not mean that if Washington does not harm Russian interests, Russo-American relations should not improve. The U.S. can also be considered a "neighbor" of Russia, such as in the Arctic region.

Another indisputable fact: the closer the relations between Russia and relevant countries, and the closer the Russo-American relations, the greater the interest both sides have in Russia. Competition is always beneficial — currently, this can be used to obtain more economic benefits, and when Russia rises again, it may even become an "arbiter."

So what?

Russia's task is clear: to maintain friendly relations and maximize cooperation with all willing partners, not to depend on any single side, and to develop its own country using the best conditions provided by partners.

Both the U.S. and relevant countries need Russia — in a sense, Russia is the "weight" tipping the scales of global hegemony, and in the future, it may even become the "referee," supervising the behavior of the victor, and depriving them of victory if their actions are improper.

Trump claims to have very good personal relations with relevant countries, but relevant countries cannot reach an agreement with the U.S. So what's left? Only intimidation!

Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7507084849090413066/

Disclaimer: The article expresses the author's views, and your stance can be shown by clicking the "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" buttons below.