The upcoming US-Russia summit in Riyadh will address vital geopolitical issues, including Ukraine, Iran’s nuclear program, and Middle East peace. Notably absent are key stakeholders like the European Union. Trump appears to seek strategic gains through negotiations that might affect global dynamics significantly, but there are apprehensions about potential agreements sidelining Ukraine and benefitting Russia.
The forthcoming US-Russia summit in Riyadh is poised to herald significant geopolitical shifts. The discussions will encompass various critical matters, extending beyond the Ukrainian situation to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, where Russia wields considerable influence. Furthermore, they will delve into the Middle East peace process amidst Syria’s Bashar al-Assad’s regime’s decline, economic factors, security matters, China’s presence in the Gulf, and global trade routes.
A noteworthy point is the summit’s exclusion of influential parties impacted by the Ukraine conflict, such as the European Union and Canada. For President Donald Trump, this occasion represents a chance to achieve multifaceted strategic wins without conferring with other stakeholders he regards as mere pawns in this geopolitical framework. Even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky seems to be leveraged within Trump’s broader strategy.
Trump’s approach ostensibly seeks to negotiate numerous elements, such as monopolizing a portion of Ukraine’s rare earth minerals and redefining regional influences favorably toward Russia, potentially at China’s expense. He is also open to teaming up with Putin to revitalize Arctic shipping routes, offering substantial reductions in transit duration for commercial freight among Southeast Asia, the US, and Europe. However, this tactical maneuvering raises alarms in Europe and Ukraine regarding the implications of US-Russia negotiations occurring without Kyiv’s involvement.
Throughout his campaigns and presidency, Trump has continually proclaimed, “When I reach the White House, I will end the war in one day. ” Recently, Keith Kellogg, a former national security advisor, developed a peace framework with ex-CIA analyst Fred Fleitz. This plan proposed halting US military aid unless Ukraine sought peace talks, cautioning that a lack of negotiation would result in increased US support for Ukraine’s military.
Months later, as president-elect, Trump named Kellogg as a special envoy for Ukraine and Russia. Kellogg emphasized that it is time to contain the conflict; however, Russian officials dismissed these proposals, asserting they lacked further interest, indicating a general unwillingness to compromise. Putin appears resolute in achieving Russian dominance in Ukraine, seeking terms unacceptable to its allies.
Putin’s list of demands includes Ukraine’s permanent neutrality, recognition of occupied territories, the lifting of sanctions, and acknowledgment of Russia’s influence in the region. Such stipulations alarm Ukraine and its European partners, leading to pushback from Indo-Pacific nations wary that a perceived Russian victory may embolden China’s aggression towards Taiwan. Key Republican figures in the US also express strong dissent against any deal that augments an authoritarian coalition involving China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia.
Although Trump’s aspiration for a peace agreement with Putin is commendable, genuine negotiations necessitate real concessions, not a superficial ceasefire. It is paramount for the US to strengthen its negotiating position through increased pressure on Russia, which Trump appears poised to implement, reminiscent of his prior sanctions approach to Iran.
His previous stringent sanctions on Iran considerably weakened its military financing capacities. Trump’s administration could leverage a similar strategy against Russia to encourage negotiations, but it is debatable whether such measures would compel Russia to engage meaningfully.
Unlike Iran, which succumbed to economic duress, Russia has proven resilient, adapting successfully to sanctions while maintaining oil revenues due to OPEC+ arrangements. Despite substantial strains, the Russian economy continues to thrive, supported by its vast resource wealth and military capabilities, thus complicating the prospects of economic sanctions alone achieving a beneficial outcome.
Ultimately, Trump may need to focus not solely on sanctions but on his aptitude for fostering agreements that enable Russia to claim limited victories while safeguarding Ukraine’s neutrality. An effective framework for peace must involve long-term strategies that restrict Russia from setting the terms of any accord.
Achieving a favorable resolution would carry profound implications, conveying to adversaries and the global community that the United States is reestablishing its influential role in world affairs, particularly in the face of rising global turmoil and instability.
In summary, the high-stakes US-Russia summit in Riyadh is pivotal with far-reaching implications for global geopolitics. With discussions covering Ukraine, Iran, and regional dynamics, the outcome could reshape US-Russian relations and influence the responses of key global players. As Trump prepares to negotiate, the need for a robust strategy that prevents Russia from dominating peace terms remains vital for preserving U.S. interests and promoting lasting global stability.
Original Source: www.dailynewsegypt.com
