Showing posts with label Ukraine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ukraine. Show all posts

Monday, December 01, 2025

Three key US negotiators have no foreign policy background

President Trump has three negotiators in the foreign policy for various purposes: special envoy Steve Witkoff, army secretary Dan Driscoll and his son-in-law Jared Kushner.

None of them has a background in foreign policy or diplomacy. Witkoff is a close friend of Trump's from their real estate days. Driscoll served briefly in the military before working in investment banking and venture capital. Kushner is a businessman who helps his father in law in sundry matters.

Witkoff has been active in respect of Ukraine and earlier was involved in talks with Israel about Gaza. Driscoll has recently been pressed into service in respect of Ukraine, as has Kushner.

Does it matter that we have three businesmen handling  negotiations and not career diplomats?  Not really. Because not one of the three persons is setting foreign policy. They are merely implementing policy set by Trump. They are out to cut deals based on directions that Trump gives- and who better than businessmen to make deals?

 

Thursday, September 25, 2025

U-turn on Ukraine?

President Trump stunned everybody with his remarks on Truth Social following his meeting with Ukrainian president Zelenskyy.

Trump wrote: 

Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form…With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option. Why not?”.

Trump also called Russia a "paper tiger".

These remarks seem to mark a U-turn from his position after the Alaska Summit with President Putin last month. Trump had said at the time that Ukraine would have to accept loss of territory to Russia as part of any peace settlement.

Trump also said Nato was free to shoot down Russian planes that introduced into Nato airspace.

So, what's cooking?

Well, the key point is that Trump refuses to commit any American support for Ukraine's war with Russia. The Europeans are free to purchase arms from the US and give these to Ukraine- no more freebies from the US. The US will not be directly involved in the conflict. Moreoever, Trump refused to commit any support to Nato if it shot down Russia aircraft- any American intervention would depend on the circumstances.

We need to connect these positions with Trump's earlier exhortation to Europe to impose tariffs of 50 to 100 per cent on Chinese exports to the EU and to stop purchasing Russian oil and gas altogether. There's no way the Europeans can do that- their economies would be wrecked. Similarly, there's no way the Nato allies can wage war on Russia on their own. 

The Europeans have been urging Trump to get tough with Russia, impose more sanctions and to step up support for Ukraine. Trump is now telling them: if you think you can this war, go right ahead and fight the Russians, I'm not going to join you.

Trump's remarks amount to a dare and a taunt to Europe. As he made clear in his address to the UN earlier this week, he has very little regard for Europeans- he knows they will chicken out of a confronation with Russia sans American involvement. 

Tuesday, August 20, 2024

Ukraine's push into Kursk: what exactly does it mean?

Ukraine stunned Russia- and the world- with its surprise thrust into Kursk close to the Northern part of Ukraine. The people of Ukraine exult in the fact that Ukraine has captured over 1000 sq kms of Russian territory in a matter of few days when it took more than a year for Russia to capture similar ground in Ukraine and at a much bigger cost in human lives.

Several interpretations of the move have been made. One, President Zelensky wants to use captured Russian territory as a bargaining chip in any future peace negotiations. Two, Ukraine wanted to assure the West that it retains its fighting capability and can put Russia on the back foot after more than a year of being on the defensive. Three, Ukraine hopes that its push into Kursk will force Russia to divert troops from the Donbas region and slow down Russia's year-long offensive in that region.

The Institute for the Study of War, based in Washington, offers a cautious view:

The Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast and Russian offensive operations in eastern Ukraine are not in themselves decisive military operations that will win the war. Both Russian and Ukrainian forces lack the capability to conduct individual decisive war-winning operations and must instead conduct multiple successive operations with limited operational objectives that are far short of victory, but that in aggregate can achieve strategic objectives. It is too early to assess the outcomes and operational significance of the Ukrainian incursion into Russia and the ongoing Russian offensive effort in eastern Ukraine. The significance of these operations will not emerge in isolation, moreover, but they will matter in so far as they relate to a series of subsequent Russian and Ukrainian campaigns over time.

FT worries about whether the transfer of large number of troops from the East to the Kursk front will make it easier for Russia to make gains in the Donetsk region that is the focus of its efforts. Crucially, Ukraine has not yet succeeded in getting Russia to divert forces away from the Donetsk region and to Kursk:

Russian soldiers are still grinding their way through Ukrainian defences, capturing villages and towns and bringing Moscow closer to its stated goal of complete control of the Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine. On Monday, Russian troops appeared to have captured nearly all of the town of Niu-York, entered nearby Toretsk and were encroaching on the logistical hub of Pokrovsk. One Ukrainian artillery brigade commander in eastern Ukraine told the Financial Times that part of the reason for the Russian advance was Kyiv moving its scarce resources north.....

....Ukrainian soldiers and military analysts tracking the war said there had been no clear indication that Russia was moving a consequential amount of forces from the hottest area on the frontline in its east. “Despite the successes of the defenders in the Kursk region, the Russians have not yet transferred their troops en masse from here,” said Ukraine’s 47th Mechanised Brigade. “Its main strike force remains.”

The Economist, which has been for long hawkish on Russia's operations in Ukraine and a cheer-leader, for Ukraine offers a surprisingly downbeat assessment. It sees Ukraine's drive into Kursk as a desperate move to save the career of Ukraine's army chief, General Oleksandr Syrsky. It also sees worrying signs of Russia getting its response to the Kursk threat right:

The plan to invade part of Russia did not come from a happy place. In early July, General Syrsky, Ukraine’s newly appointed top commander, was under pressure. For months he had been grappling with a less-than-ideal inheritance from his predecessor, Valery Zaluzhny, and the army’s leadership was at odds with the president over mobilisation policies, leading to significant manpower shortages. In America Congress had delayed support. Avdiivka, a stronghold north of Donetsk, had consequently fallen. Front lines in the Donetsk region were crumbling, most especially around the logistical hub of Pokrovsk. Rumours circulated that General Syrsky was on the verge of being dismissed....

.....Evidence of an intensifying response inside Kursk is now clear. Ukrainian soldiers on the ground inside Russia say they are already beginning to see a different level of resistance. Losses are increasing. The Russians have reinforced with better trained units, including marines and special forces. They had studied the area.

Finally, Moon of Alabama, a military blog, offers the startling view that it was Britain, not the US, which knew about Ukraine's plans for Kursk and provided the necessary backing:

Britain, in a bipartisan move, wants to prolong the war in Ukraine. It suggested to and helped Ukraine to invade Russia even as it knew that this would interrupt peace talks in Qatar. It also promised to press its allies  for long range attack permission against Russia. But the U.S. and Germany are still blocking such attacks. Zelensky now complains that Britain failed to deliver on its promise.

The U.S., miffed about the British involvement in a likely useless Ukrainian attack on Russia, is leaking about the Ukrainian/Russian negotiations in Qatar. 

The above is largely based on the U.S. claims that it was not really involved in the planing of the Kursk incursion.

Whatever the long-term significance of the Ukrainian move, there is little doubt that is at the moment a PR coup for Ukraine and a massive blow to President Putin. Ukraine crows that Putin's red lines for the West are just bluff;  Russia does not have the capacity to retaliate massively and Ukraine has in itself to hand Russia a military defeat.

Whether Putin can prove this narrative wrong or not may well determine not just the outcome of this conflict but Putin's own future.