Wednesday night brought a grim return to Russia’s form: one of the heaviest air raids on Kyiv since the full-scale invasion began. Moscow eased off its strikes on major cities in the run-up to the Alaska summit, and it held off its attack on the Ukrainian capital until Keith Kellogg, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine, had finished his visit there. However, within hours of his departure, at least 18 people, including several children, were dead in an attack on a residential block, and the EU mission had been severely damaged.
Trump periodically suggests that he is drawing a line for Russian President Vladimir Putin. However, each time Trump appears to set a limit, Putin breezes through it. The Kyiv attack shows that it is Putin who is testing the US president. Trump threatened “severe consequences” if Moscow did not immediately agree to a ceasefire — but in Anchorage, Alaska, was quickly persuaded by Putin that there was no need for one prior to a peace deal.
“I think in many ways he’s there,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday, but Russia’s diplomatic stalling, allowing it to continue to grind away on the battlefield, is transparent. The lethal strike on civilians in Kyiv shows exactly what it thinks of peace talks.
As Trump also remarked: “Every conversation I have with [Putin] is a good conversation, and then unfortunately, a bomb is loaded up into Kyiv or someplace, and then I get very angry about it.”
The US president appears unable to draw the obvious conclusion, and his anger has yet to convert into action. He continues to cast blame on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy — “not exactly innocent either” — for Russia’s unprovoked invasion. Trump floated the idea of sanctions again, but only when pressed. His one concrete move — doubling the tariff on most Indian goods to 50 percent — was billed as punishment for New Delhi’s Russian oil imports.
In fact, those imports had been quietly encouraged by Washington to steady world markets, and European countries have bought oil from India once it has been refined. The real trigger was India’s refusal to scrap farm protections, an issue for Trump’s base. This was domestic politics rebadged as Russia policy and a headache for New Delhi, not for Moscow.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen accused Moscow of targeting the EU in its Wednesday night strike. That is unlikely to worry the White House. European leaders know that their ability to shape its worldview is restricted and intermittent. The result might last only until Trump’s next conversation, or next glimpse of a talking head on Fox News.
They continue to make maximal efforts and compromises for limited returns. The US has reportedly stopped sharing information on any potential Ukraine-Russia deal even with the members of the anglophone Five Eyes intelligence-sharing community.
Given that, European governments are unlikely to get carried away by the reported willingness of the US to contribute intelligence and air support to a postwar force in Ukraine. Whether the posited reassurance force would actually materialize, and if so in what form, remains to be seen. However, in the absence of the ceasefire that would have to precede it, Europe must make clear that it would not waver in its support for Kyiv. In probing Trump’s intentions, Putin is also probing Europe’s resolve. It cannot afford to fail this test.
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS