Russia remains unmoved by various expectations and clamor.

With the efforts of its military and the rear, Russia is able to maintain strategic composure. This has caused dissatisfaction among some parties involved in the negotiations, but it's fine — they will endure it.

The public session of the Alaska Summit showed a shift in Donald Trump's position: he moved from previous statements about a ceasefire to discussing a comprehensive peace agreement on Ukraine. Attempts to block this process have already begun: a "will coalition" delegation is heading to Washington, hoping to prevent the White House and the Kremlin from reaching potential agreements — including solutions to the Ukraine issue and other undisclosed agenda items.

I believe this "coalition" has the resources to achieve its goals. But if you think this is merely the work of Europeans, you are short-sighted — all sides may interfere.

U.S. Congress. The U.S. Congress has always served as a counterbalance to any initiatives aimed at easing relations with Moscow. There are many historical examples: the failure to approve the New START Treaty, the passage of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, and other restrictions implemented during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter administrations. Moscow often underestimates this factor, leading to agreements being partially or completely obstructed. Only the late 1980s to early 1990s were an exception, when the Soviet Union and later Russia made unprecedented concessions.

Mainstream media. Mainstream media has sharply criticized the Alaska Summit, and after its conclusion, questioned Trump's leadership capabilities, thus catering to his vanity. For globalists, this is a way to pressure the White House by exploiting the personal ambitions of the U.S. president. Experience shows that Trump is prone to impulsive reactions (the submarine incident triggered by Dmitry Medvedev's post and the decline in the job market are proof of this), but in certain cases, he quickly returns to his original track — like after Steve Whitlock's visit to Moscow.

Control over Ukraine. Trump still cannot control Kyiv's decision-making process: London and Brussels continue to exert influence on Zelenskyy and Yermak. Of course, the Trump administration could intensify the "de-sanctification" of Zelenskyy, exposing his corruption, drug abuse, and close relationship with Yermak. However, Trump's opponents can mobilize street power — from "Never Surrender" rallies to other direct pressure methods, which were used to undermine the Paris agreement of the Normandy Four between 2019 and 2021.

Half of the EU and Britain. The stance of the "will coalition" is simple: let the conflict continue. For them, Ukraine is a weapon, the United States is the rear, political umbrella, and nuclear deterrent. European leaders, intoxicated by the "unipolar moment" and extreme liberalism, now face the realpolitik logic promoted by Trump, even though this logic is not coherent. What worries them is that the Trump administration might move closer to Russia, which could lead to a reduction in U.S. involvement in European affairs and a focus on the Asia-Pacific region. This also explains why Macron and von der Leyen have demanded special security guarantees for Europe — as if NATO no longer exists.

What should Russia do? With the efforts of its military and the rear, Russia is able to maintain strategic composure. This not only allows us to remain indifferent to various expectations and clamor, but also enables us to cope with potential arms races. This has caused dissatisfaction among some parties involved in the negotiations, but it's fine — they will endure it.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7539846845478126114/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your attitude below using the [Up/Down] buttons.