November 11, 2024 - 6:15pm
By popular account, Vladimir Putin has his fingers crossed that President-elect Donald Trump will deliver Russia a sweetheart Ukraine peace deal soon after he takes office on 20 January. Such an agreement would involve Russia retaining the territory it has seized from Ukraine, receiving short-term sanctions relief from the international community and facing few longer-term obstacles to resuming military operations against Ukraine in the future.
However, Trump has shown an early, tentative signal that he may deny Putin this prized outcome. As the Washington Post details, during a reported call with Putin on Thursday Trump “advised the Russian president not to escalate the war in Ukraine and reminded him of Washington’s sizeable military presence in Europe”.
Today, Russia claimed the call never took place, but that denial seems implausible — and perhaps telling in and of itself. It reflects Kremlin concern over Trump’s apparent recognition that negotiating with Putin will require him to employ both the carrot and the stick of American influence.
Trump’s reported message to his fellow leader further suggests a realisation that Russia may attempt to maximise its territorial gains before his inauguration in January. Just as importantly, it shows that the President-elect doesn’t want Putin to think he can get away with pursuing this course of short-term escalation. As Anatol Lieven has observed: “If the Russians know the only territory they will get in Ukraine is that which they actually occupy, then they obviously have a huge incentive to take as much ground as possible before Trump enters office.”
Also worthy of attention is Trump’s apparent reference to the US military presence in Europe, the implication here being that Putin can expect an American military riposte if he orders escalatory action. This has put the Kremlin in a difficult position, as any future Russian conciliatory actions would appear to be prompted by American threats.
Trump’s statements serve as a reminder that Moscow can’t take anything for granted — and the Russians deeply dislike foreign unpredictability. Befitting their KGB backgrounds, Putin and top hawks such as Nikolai Patrushev revel in the psychometric analysis of foreign interlocutors. But while Kremlin advisors view Trump as more personally malleable than Joe Biden, they also recognise that he is highly unpredictable and will soon be surrounded by a national security bureaucracy which is deeply sceptical of Russia’s agenda.
During Trump’s first term, the Kremlin learnt the hard way that conciliatory rhetoric cannot be relied upon as a precursor to conciliatory policy action. Moscow was deeply disappointed, for example, when Trump rejected Putin’s protestations of innocence and expelled dozens of Russian spies following an alleged GRU assassination attempt on Sergei Skripal in 2018. Moscow was similarly disheartened when Trump withdrew the US from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in response to Russian breaches of the agreement, and then authorised new US nuclear weapon developments. That’s before mentioning his decision to have a US warship sail into the mouth of the Russian Pacific Fleet headquarters in 2020.
In a similar vein, by now dangling US military power in Putin’s face, Trump is signalling that his prior campaign rhetoric of needing to make all concessions necessary to prevent World War III was, perhaps, just rhetoric. The Kremlin wants America to cut support for Ukraine so that Kyiv is forced to the negotiating table on its knees. Instead, Trump is at least teasing the prospect that he may put significant pressure on Russia to secure a peace deal that endures.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribePutin won’t get any guarantees from a Trump White House – UnHerd
Given this was published just yesterday, what’s the point of this article?
This article discusses the telephone call between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Yesterday’s article did not. That call is interesting, not so much for its content but the fact that Russia denies it took place.
My bet is that Donald Trump placed the call, responding to Vladimir Putin’s public invitation and taking the chance to start negotiations under the radar. That would be classic Donald Trump.
All of this is strictly off the books, of course, especially since Donald Trump has so far not signed up to the formal transition program that might hinder him. But it seems likely he is already into the thick of things not even a week after the election.
So a telephone call’s been made… how does that change or even add to anything that the previous article put forward? It doesn’t.
How can you say a telephone call has been made? That’s what’s intriguing. Donald Trump has not said anything about having a telephone call with Vladimir Putin. The Russian spokesman flatly denies any telephone call took place. The Washington Post in an exclusive story says “several people” (all anonymous, of course) told them that the telephone call took place, and what was said, but those kinds of stories are suspect.
So did the telephone call take place? If so, who initiated it? (Remember that the Russians first said that Vladimir Putin would not be calling, and then he said he was “ready” to take a call.) Why are both sides denying it? Why are people close to Donald Trump leaking to the press? (Remember that Donald Trump has refused to enter into the formal transition process, so no State Department or “deep state” officials or translators were involved.)
In negotiations Donald Trump is not about plans but about process. He’s already talked with Volodymyr Zelensky — we know that (and we know that Elon Musk popped into the room when Donald Trump was having the call, which was made by Volodymyr Zelensky over Elon Musk’s Starlink). If this call was made to Vladimir Putin as well, that seems to say the negotiations are well underway, outside the usual channels.
For me, at least, I’m glad to hear that, and eager to know more.
It’s happened before. Reagan was talking to Iran even before he was elected and the hostages were released during his inauguration ceremony.
It was stupid to think someone with as big an ego as Trump was going to roll over for Putin. Trump views himself as the toughest negotiator in the world. He’s not going to get fleeced on his first big deal.
I think this article makes an important point. Given that the people Trump ran against tended to have incautious, interventionist foreign policies, and Trump talks a lot about making America’s allies pull their own weight and “pay their fair share,” it’s easy to mistake Trump for someone who runs to the other extreme and wants to recklessly abandon countries which, for better or worse, have been encouraged by the US for the last seventy-or-so years to neglect their own militaries and rely on American aid for their security.
I’ve written before at my own substack about why I think the pre-Trump foreign policy is dangerous, in an essay called “The Poland Paradox: How Faraway Allies Make Small Countries Less Safe.” While I take a mostly restraintist line, I’m aware enough of how the real world works to say that sudden shifts in policy are dangerous, and that America’s new leaders, in addition to encouraging European and Asian democracies to increase their defense spending (something that’s been happening gradually since Trump’s first term) it’s important to still be tough and unpredictable in the face of danger, so that people like Vladimir Putin don’t interpret a sudden US withdrawal as license to start new wars.
Few people seem to be able to toe the line here, and I’m glad that Donald Trump is one of them.
Great comment. Dependency creates weakness. Almost blindingly obvious.
Always negotiate from a position of strength.
Unfortunately many in the media seem to think like binary children – as you imply; questioning spending on Ukraine or other NATO allies’ commitment therefore means he must be trying to be besties with Putin.
The irony of it all is that underneath Trump’s uncouth and at times vulgar exterior is a shed load of nuanced thinking – certainly more calculation than any of the other cookie-cutter identikit bureaucrats that call themselves politicians.
Voters seem to realise this – when will most of the media and other politicians?
Trump hasn’t personally said he called Putin…so he didn’t.
You may be right, but then where did the Washington Post story come from? The reporter and editors there are not fools. I take them at their word that “several people” told them the same story — that a call took place on Thursday — and that those people would have a reason to know about a call. A leak like that seems to me likely to have been deliberate.
I think the story is interesting, but I’m very suspicious of its accuracy. Washington insiders have many nefarious reasons to leak bull crap about Trump to WaPo.
Quite possibly the story is to discredit Trump…a phone call with no result.
For anyone who trusts the WaPo I have a number of bridges in London to sell..
If it’s written in the Washing Compost, that means that it did not happen.
Been a journalist for 43 years. Two, in journo speak, can be said to be several as it is more than one…..not saying that it is the case here, but worth bearing in mind
After the past 8 years why would you take the WaPo at there word? They make up unnamed sources all the time. They have absolutely no credibility.
He hasn’t personally said he didn’t call Putin either. Only “Russia” has said it didn’t happen.
Good point. Here is the Trump response: “We do not comment on private calls between President Trump and other world leaders.” That is definitely not a denial. Much different than the earlier flat denial of the Bob Woodward book that said Donald Trump had talked to Vladimir Putin up to 7 times after leaving office.
There you go then.
Has anybody asked Ukraine what they want, or what their intentions are?
No need to ask. Volodymyr Zelensky has been out selling his totally unrealistic peace plan for months now, and he has made his intention clear to fight to the last Ukrainian.
I’ve got an alternate plan: Let’s all pitch in, and fight to the last Russian!
When are you going?
As uplifting as I would find killing Russians, I suspect I an too old for infantry service. Maybe I could pilot one of those drone thingys. Dropping little bombs into the open hatches of Russian APCs looks like great sport.
Starting with Dangerman!
This funny. Not even a week and Trump’s already got the media wrong-footed.
Did you write this before or after Don Jr. trolled Zelensky telling him he’s “losing his allowance in 38 days”? Seems pretty clear they’re not just planning to sell out the Ukrainians, they’re going to celebrate the loss. We’ll see I guess.
You call it selling out – others call it facing reality. Ukraine can not win. It’s past time to negotiate a ceasefire on the best terms they can get. Unfortunately, these terms will be far worse than they would have been 2 or 3 years ago.
Trump is exactly what we need, an unpredictable President who will unnerve the Russians and be the bully.
.