Trump’s new stance on Putin doesn’t mean he fully supports Zelenskyy - The Times
For US President Donald Trump, demonstrative, flamboyant gestures are more a way to achieve his own political goals than a sincere desire to help Ukraine or NATO.
According to Censor.NET, The Times writes about this.
The publication notes that there are at least three reasons to believe that there is much less behind Trump's alleged reversal than meets the eye. The first is his own fickleness. Only a very brave person would place bets based on any particular statement by Trump - and then only in the short term.
"One careless word from Zelenskyy could change his position again. Trump's decision is also influenced by domestic political circumstances: his sympathy for Putin has never been widely supported among Americans, so abandoning it is a winning move. But Ukraine is not a priority in US policy, and it cannot be assumed that the president's current position will continue," the article says.
Secondly, the military aid announced by Trump will be channelled through European allies, allowing him to avoid accusations of breaking his own promise not to continue his predecessor's arms supply policy. In addition, the amount is so small that it cannot be considered a significant increase in Western support for Ukraine.
"A few Patriot missiles provided immediately and a commitment to a very long supply through European allies will not change the military balance in a time frame that could meet Ukraine's urgent needs," The Times writes.
Thirdly, this decision should be seen in the context of Trump's main goal of ending the fighting as soon as possible. It is about doing what Trump believes, on the advice of his military and diplomatic advisers, is necessary to get Putin to finally agree to US demands for a ceasefire.
In the first four months of his second term, Trump sought to achieve this goal by sharply changing his rhetoric - moving away from support for Kyiv and closer to Moscow. He sincerely believed that his friendly relations with Putin - almost unprecedented in American politics - would allay the Russian leader's suspicions about US intentions. According to the interlocutors, Trump even expressed understanding of Russian claims that Ukraine had been used as a tool by NATO to further invade Russia's borders.
According to advisers close to Trump, his change of course this week was a direct result of Putin's refusal to accept the generous US offer. The full details are unknown, but it was likely in line with Trump's previous position that Moscow could keep almost all of the territory it had seized, as well as receive a guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO.
In this interpretation, Trump does not look like a leader of a great power who has clearly chosen a side in the war, but rather a negotiator who is only interested in a quick settlement and cessation of hostilities on any terms - and who manoeuvres between the parties to encourage each to make concessions.
The paradox of such diplomacy is that the very fact that Putin is aware of Trump's strategy significantly reduces the chances of its success. In fact, the main risk for Trump is that his latest reversal only underscores it: The US does not consider Ukraine to be an area of key national interest.
Despite the recent improvement in rhetoric towards European allies, the Trump team still views the war in Ukraine as a predominantly European problem. And it continues to believe - not without reason - that Europe is not capable, either economically or morally, of providing the resources and sacrifices that would force Russia to give up the territories it has seized and agree to a lasting peace.
"The scepticism of Trump's top advisers about supporting Ukraine was based on the belief that an alliance that wants to end the war but is not prepared to provide the necessary resources is doomed to an asymmetrical struggle that cannot be won. His alleged change of position this week does not change this reality," the newspaper notes.
