Frankly Speaking: What a Trump foreign policy might look like

Short Url
Updated 11 November 2024
Follow

Frankly Speaking: What a Trump foreign policy might look like

Frankly Speaking: What a Trump foreign policy might look like
  • Former US ambassador and current senior fellow at the Middle East Institute outlined his expectations for the Middle East and beyond
  • Robert Ford appeared on the “Frankly Speaking” show as Republican President-elect Donald Trump prepared to take the reins of power

DUBAI: Donald Trump’s imminent return to the White House after a resounding victory in the Nov. 5 election is set to reshape America’s foreign policy. Since it comes at a time of unprecedented tension and uncertainty in the Middle East, regional actors are closely watching for signs of how a new Republican administration might wield influence and power.

In a wide-ranging interview, Robert Ford, a veteran American diplomat with extensive Arab region experience, outlined his expectations for the Middle East and beyond, indicating that it is important to set expectations for what can be achieved. 

Middle East conflicts, especially those in Gaza and Lebanon, have dominated the international conversation since a deadly Hamas-led attack on Israel on Oct. 7 last year sparked a devastating Israeli military retaliation. “With respect to President-elect Trump’s promises to end wars, I don’t think he can end a war in a day,” Ford said on “Frankly Speaking,” the weekly Arab News current affairs show.

“I don’t think he can end a war in a week, but he can push for negotiations on the Ukraine war. And with respect to the war in Gaza and the war in Lebanon, he has an ability to influence events. (But) I am not sure he will use that ability.”

Ford noted that there is little support within the Republican Party for a two-state solution to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, making it unlikely that the incoming Trump administration will pressure Israel on this issue. 




Robert Ford, a veteran American diplomat with extensive Middle East experience, outlined to Frankly Speaking host Katie Jensen his expectations for the Middle East and beyond following the election of Donald Trump as US President. (AN Photo)

“The American Republican Party, in particular, has evinced little support for the establishment of a Palestinian state over the past 15 years. There is no (faction) in the Republican Party exerting pressure for that,” he said. 

In fact, he pointed out, “there are many in the Republican Party who back harder line Israeli politicians who reject the establishment of a Palestinian state.” 

In the current political climate, when there is strong Arab-Islamic unity over the Israeli invasion of Gaza and the consequent high civilian death toll, recognition of a Palestinian state has become a matter of priority for regional actors. Saudi Arabia has been leading efforts to boost international cooperation to reach a two-state solution. In September, the Kingdom’s government formed a global alliance to lead efforts aimed at establishing a Palestinian state.

Ford, who is a current senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington, believes that any push for progress on this issue will likely come from Gulf leaders. “The only people who will have influence with President Trump personally on this are in fact leaders in the Gulf. And if they make Palestine a priority, perhaps he will reconsider, and I emphasize the word ‘perhaps’,” he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is keen on normalizing ties with Saudi Arabia, but the Kingdom has made it very clear that normalization will be off the table unless it sees the recognition of a Palestinian state.

“The first thing is I would imagine that the incoming Trump administration will ask the Saudi government whether or not it is still insistent on a Palestinian state — or at least concrete measures toward a Palestinian state — as part of a package deal involving a US-Saudi defense agreement,” Ford told Katie Jensen, the host of “Frankly Speaking.”

“I think the Trump people would rather not have any kind of Saudi conditionality regarding Palestine as part of that agreement, because, in large part, the Israelis won’t accept it.” 

The US has long been the largest arms supplier to Israel. Last year, after Israel began its assault on Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups, it asked the US for $10 billion in emergency military aid, according to a New York Times report. The Council on Foreign Relations, an independent US-based think tank, estimates that the US has provided at least $12.5 billion in military aid to Israel since last October.

Trump has reportedly told Netanyahu that he wants the war in Gaza, which so far has claimed more than 43,400 Palestinian lives, most of them civilians, to finish by the time he takes office in January. Does that mean a Trump administration will put pressure on the Israeli leader to wrap up the war?




Trump waves as he walks with former first lady Melania Trump at an election night watch party at the Palm Beach Convention Center, Wednesday, Nov. 6. (AP)

Ford ruled out the possibility of a reduction in US supply of weapons to Israel. “It’s extremely unlikely that, especially in 2025, President Trump and his team will impose an arms embargo on Israel,” he said. 

Ford expects Trump’s well-known disdain for foreign aid to affect US assistance for Israel in the long term, but without the use of reductions as a threat. 

“I do think that President Trump does not particularly like foreign aid. He views foreign aid as an expenditure of American money and resources that he would rather keep in the US,” he said. 

“So, over the long term, and I stress the word ‘long term,’ I could imagine that President Trump might look for ways to begin to reduce the annual American assistance to Israel, which is over $4 billion in total. 

“But I don’t think he would do that in a way that is used as a threat against Israel. It’s much more likely it would be part of a Trump measure to reduce foreign aid to a lot of countries, not only Israel.”

The Middle East’s second major conflict, between Israel and Hezbollah, has been raging for 13 months now in Lebanon, taking a toll of 3,000 lives, including combatants, and displacing 1.2 million people from the country’s south. In Israel, 72 people, including 30 soldiers, have been killed by Hezbollah attacks and 60,000 people have been displaced during the same period.

The war shows no signs of ending: Israel says it is carrying out new operations targeting Hezbollah infrastructure across Lebanon and in parts of Syria, while Hezbollah continues to launch dozens of rockets into northern Israel.

Ford sees potential for early US involvement in discussions on Lebanon “fairly early in the administration,” adding that the engagement would begin through a family connection between Trump and Lebanon.

Although he does not think Lebanon is high on the incoming administration’s agenda, he finds “it is interesting that there is a family connection between President-elect Trump and Lebanon.”

“The husband of one of his daughters is connected to Lebanon, and his daughter’s father-in-law,” Ford, said referring to Massad Boulos, a Lebanese-American businessman whose son Michael married Tiffany Trump two years ago and who acted as a Trump emissary to the Arab American community during the election campaign.

“Because Trump operates very much with family, and we saw that in the first administration — first Trump administration — supposedly this Lebanese American gentleman, businessman, may be involved in some discussions.”

Ford also noted that “Israeli success against Hezbollah and against Iran has made the Hezbollah and Iranian side more flexible in their positions,” adding that “it might be easier to reach an agreement on ending the war in Lebanon than, for example, it will be in Gaza.” 

Moving on to Syria, Ford, who served as the US ambassador in Damascus from 2011 to 2014, said while the country “is very low on President Trump’s priority list,” Trump might pull the remaining American troops out.

The US is reported to have a military presence of approximately 900 personnel in eastern Syria and 2,500 in Iraq as part of the international coalition against Daesh. The troops in Syria serve various purposes: helping prevent the resurgence of Daesh, supporting Washington’s Kurdish allies and containing the influence of Iran and Russia — both of which also have a military presence in Syria.

“I think it more likely than not that President Trump will withdraw the remaining American forces in Syria, which numbers somewhere around 1,000,” Ford said, adding that the president-elect might also “withdraw the American forces that are now in Iraq as part of the international coalition against Daesh.” 

He added that Trump “may, perhaps, accept a bilateral relationship, military relationship with Iraq afterward,” but Syria remains “low on his priority list.”

Ford also thinks it is “impossible” for Syrian President Bashar Assad to abandon his alliance with Iran, against which the new Trump administration is expected to reapply “maximum pressure.” 

“The Iranians really saved him (Assad) from the Syrian armed opposition in 2013 and 2014 and 2015,” he said. “There is no alternative for President Assad to a continued close military relationship with Iran.”

He added: “I’m sure President Assad is uncomfortable with some of the things which Iran is doing in Syria and which are triggering substantial Israeli airstrikes. But to abandon Iran? No, that’s difficult for me to imagine.”

He said to expect the Syrian leader to trust Gulf Arab governments more than he would trust the Iranians would be “a big ask.”

When it comes to US policy toward Iran, Ford expects the new Trump administration to return to the “maximum pressure” policy. “For a long time, the Biden administration ignored Iranian sales of petroleum to Chinese companies. ... But the Trump administration is certainly going to take more aggressive action against Chinese companies that import Iranian oil and other countries,” he said.




Demonstration by the families of the hostages taken captive in the Gaza Strip by Hamas militants during the Oct. 7 attacks, calling for action to release the hostages, outside the Israeli Prime Minister's residence in Azza (Gaza) Street in central Jerusalem last month. (AFP)

“It’s highly unlikely that the Trump administration is going to accept that Iraq imports and pays for Iranian energy products, such as electricity and natural gas.”

Ford sees the Trump team as split into two camps: the extreme conservatives, who want regime change in Tehran, and the isolationists, who oppose the US entering a war with Iran.

“There is a camp of extreme conservatives, many of whom actually do favor attempting regime change in Iran. They won’t use the words ‘regime change’ because the words have a bad air, a bad connotation in the US now, but they are, in effect, calling for regime change in Iran,” he said. 

“I should hasten to add that they don’t know what would replace the Islamic Republic in terms of a government.” 

According to Ford, the second camp “is a more, in some ways, isolationist camp. J.D. Vance, the vice president-elect, would be in this camp; so would American media personality Tucker Carlson, who’s a very strong Trump supporter and who has influence with Trump. 

“They do not want to send in the American military into a new war in the Middle East, and they don’t advocate for a war against Iran.”

Ford’s own sense of Trump, from his first administration and from recent statements, is that “he, too, is very cautious about sending the US military to fight Iran.”

Similarly, the Trump team is divided when it comes to the Ukraine war, according to Ford, so it will take some time “for Trump himself to make a definitive policy decision.”

“There are some, such as former Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, who are very firm supporters of the Ukrainian effort against Russia. Others, like Vance, are not.”

The second reality regarding Ukraine, Ford said, is that Trump himself is skeptical about the value of NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

“I cannot imagine that he will be enthusiastic in any way about Ukraine joining NATO. That will at least address one of Moscow’s big concerns,” he said. “The third point I would make: The Americans may propose ideas. But the American ideas about, for example, an autonomous region in eastern Ukraine or freezing the battle lines.”

He added: “I’m not sure that (Ukrainian President Volodymyr) Zelensky is going to be enthusiastic about accepting them. I’m not sure the Europeans will be enthusiastic about accepting them. And therefore, again, the negotiation process could take a long time.”

On who might advise Trump on Middle East policy after he moves into the White House in January, now that Jared Kushner, the former senior adviser and Trump’s son-in-law, has announced he does not plan to join the administration this time, Ford said Trump places a very high regard on loyalty to him personally.

“People such as Richard Grenell, who was his acting director of national intelligence, and Pompeo pass that kind of loyalty test,” he said. (On Sunday, Trump announced he would not ask Pompeo or former primary opponent Nikki Haley to join his second administration.)

“Trump’s agenda this time is massive change in the Washington federal departments among the employees. And he will trust loyalists … to implement those deep changes — the firing of thousands of employees,” Ford said. “We will see a very different kind of Trump foreign policy establishment by the time we arrive in the year 2026-2027.”

 

 

 


Trump says some white South Africans are oppressed, could be resettled in the US. They say no thanks

Trump says some white South Africans are oppressed, could be resettled in the US. They say no thanks
Updated 09 February 2025
Follow

Trump says some white South Africans are oppressed, could be resettled in the US. They say no thanks

Trump says some white South Africans are oppressed, could be resettled in the US. They say no thanks
  • Trump administration accused the South African government of allowing violent attacks on white Afrikaner farmers and introducing a land expropriation law targetting minority farmers
  • President Ramaphosa’s government denied claims of concerted attacks on white farmers, says Trump’s description of the new land law is full of misinformation and distortions
  • Afrikaner lobby group AfriForum, representing some of the Africaners, thanked Trump but rejected the offer, saying, “We don’t want to move elsewhere”

CAPE TOWN, South Africa: Groups representing some of South Africa’s white minority responded Saturday to a plan by President Donald Trump to offer them refugee status and resettlement in the United States by saying: thanks, but no thanks.
The plan was detailed in an executive order Trump signed Friday that stopped all aid and financial assistance to South Africa as punishment for what the Trump administration said were “rights violations” by the government against some of its white citizens.
The Trump administration accused the South African government of allowing violent attacks on white Afrikaner farmers and introducing a land expropriation law that enables it to “seize ethnic minority Afrikaners’ agricultural property without compensation.”
The South African government has denied there are any concerted attacks on white farmers and has said that Trump’s description of the new land law is full of misinformation and distortions.
Afrikaners are descended from mainly Dutch, but also French and German colonial settlers who first arrived in South Africa more than 300 years ago. They speak Afrikaans, a language derived from Dutch that developed in South Africa, and are distinct from other white South Africans who come from British or other backgrounds.
Together, whites make up around 7 percent of South Africa’s population of 62 million.
‘We are not going anywhere’
On Saturday, two of the most prominent groups representing Afrikaners said they would not be taking up Trump’s offer of resettlement in the US.
“Our members work here, and want to stay here, and they are going to stay here,” said Dirk Hermann, chief executive of the Afrikaner trade union Solidarity, which says it represents around 2 million people. “We are committed to build a future here. We are not going anywhere.”
At the same press conference, Kallie Kriel, the CEO of the Afrikaner lobby group AfriForum, said: “We have to state categorically: We don’t want to move elsewhere.”
Trump’s move to sanction South Africa, a key US trading partner in Africa, came after he and his South African-born adviser Elon Musk have accused its Black leadership of having an anti-white stance. But the portrayal of Afrikaners as a downtrodden group that needed to be saved would surprise most South Africans.
“It is ironic that the executive order makes provision for refugee status in the US for a group in South Africa that remains among the most economically privileged,” South Africa’s Foreign Ministry said. It also criticized the Trump administration’s own policies, saying the focus on Afrikaners came “while vulnerable people in the US from other parts of the world are being deported and denied asylum despite real hardship.”
There was “a campaign of misinformation and propaganda” aimed at South Africa, the ministry said.
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa’s spokesperson said: “South Africa is a constitutional democracy. We value all South Africans, Black and white. The assertion that Afrikaners face arbitrary deprivation and, therefore, need to flee the country of their birth is an assertion devoid of all truth.”
Whites in South Africa still generally have a much better standard of living than Blacks more than 30 years after the end of the apartheid system of white minority rule in 1994. Despite being a small minority, whites own around 70 percent of South Africa’s private farmland. A study in 2021 by the South Africa Human Rights Commission said 1 percent of whites were living in poverty compared to 64 percent of Blacks.
Redressing the wrongs of colonialism
Sithabile Ngidi, a market trader in Johannesburg, said she hadn’t seen white people being mistreated in South Africa.
“He (Trump) should have actually come from America to South Africa to try and see what was happening for himself and not just take the word of an Elon Musk, who hasn’t lived in this country for the longest of time, who doesn’t even relate to South Africans,” Ngidi said.
But Trump’s action against South Africa has given international attention to a sentiment among some white South Africans that they are being discriminated against as a form of payback for apartheid. The leaders of the apartheid government were Afrikaners.
Solidarity, AfriForum and others are strongly opposed to the new land expropriation law, saying it will target land owned by whites who have worked to develop that land for years. They also say an equally contentious language law that’s recently been passed seeks to remove or limit their Afrikaans language in schools, while they have often criticized South Africa’s affirmative action policies in business that promote the interests of Blacks as racist laws.
“This government is allowing a certain section of the population to be targeted,” said AfriForum’s Kriel, who thanked Trump for raising the case of Afrikaners. But Kriel said Afrikaners were committed to South Africa.
The South African government says the laws that have been criticized are aimed at the difficult task of redressing the wrongs of colonialism and then nearly a half-century of apartheid, when Blacks were stripped of their land and almost all their rights.
 


African leaders urge direct talks with rebels to resolve DR Congo conflict

African leaders urge direct talks with rebels to resolve DR Congo conflict
Updated 09 February 2025
Follow

African leaders urge direct talks with rebels to resolve DR Congo conflict

African leaders urge direct talks with rebels to resolve DR Congo conflict
  • communique at the end of talks urged the resumption of “direct negotiations and dialogue with all state and non-state parties'
  • Rwanda has blamed the deployment of SADC peacekeepers for worsening the conflict in North Kivu, a mineral-rich province in eastern Congo that’s now controlled by M23

KAMPALA, Uganda: Leaders from eastern and southern Africa on Saturday called for an immediate ceasefire in eastern Congo, where rebels are threatening to overthrow the Congolese government, but also urged Congo’s president to directly negotiate with them.
Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi, who attended the summit in the Tanzanian city of Dar es Salaam by videoconference, has previously said he would never talk to the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels he sees as driven to exploit his country’s vast mineral wealth.
A communique at the end of talks urged the resumption of “direct negotiations and dialogue with all state and non-state parties,” including M23. The rebels seized Goma, the biggest city in eastern Congo, following fighting that left nearly 3,000 dead and hundreds of thousands of displaced, according to the UN
The unprecedented joint summit included leaders from the East African Community bloc, of which both Rwanda and Congo are members, and those from the Southern African Development Community, or SADC, which includes countries ranging from Congo to South Africa.
Rwandan President Paul Kagame attended the summit along with his South African counterpart, Cyril Ramaphosa, who has angered the Rwandans by deploying South African troops in eastern Congo under the banner of SADC to fight M23.
Rwanda has blamed the deployment of SADC peacekeepers for worsening the conflict in North Kivu, a mineral-rich province in eastern Congo that’s now controlled by M23. Kagame insists SADC troops were not peacekeepers because they were fighting alongside Congolese forces to defeat the rebels.
The rebels are backed by some 4,000 troops from neighboring Rwanda, according to UN experts, while Congolese government forces are backed by regional peacekeepers, UN forces, allied militias and troops from neighboring Burundi. They’re now focused on preventing the rebels from taking Bukavu, the capital of South Kivu province.
Dialogue ‘is not a sign of weakness’
The M23 rebellion stems partly from Rwanda’s decades-long concern that rebels opposed to Kagame’s government have been allowed by Congo’s military to be active in largely lawless parts of eastern Congo. Kagame also charges that Tshisekedi has overlooked the legitimate concerns of Congolese Tutsis who face discrimination.
Kenyan President William Ruto told the summit that “the lives of millions depend on our ability to navigate this complex and challenging situation with wisdom, clarity of mind, empathy.”
Dialogue “is not a sign of weakness,” said Ruto, the current chair of the East African Community. “It is in this spirit that we must encourage all parties to put aside their differences and mobilize for engagements in constructive dialogue.”
The M23 advance echoed the rebels’ previous capture of Goma over a decade ago and shattered a 2024 ceasefire, brokered by Angola, between Rwanda and Congo.
Some regional analysts fear that the rebels’ latest offensive is more potent because they are linking their fight to wider agitation for better governance and have vowed to go all the way to the capital, Kinshasa, 1,600 kilometers (1,000 miles) west of Goma.
Rebels face pressure to pull out of Goma
The Congo River Alliance, a coalition of rebel groups including M23, said in an open letter to the summit that they are fighting a Congolese regime that “flouted republican norms” and is “becoming an appalling danger for the Congolese people.”
“Those who are fighting against Mr. Tshisekedi are indeed sons of the country, nationals of all the provinces,” it said. “Since our revolution is national, it encompasses people of all ethnic and community backgrounds, including Congolese citizens who speak the Kinyarwanda language.”
The letter, signed by Corneille Nangaa, a leader of the rebel alliance, said the group was “open for a direct dialogue” with the Congolese government.
But the rebels and their allies also face pressure to pull out of Goma.
In addition to calling for the immediate reopening of the airport in Goma, the summit in Dar es Salaam also called for the drawing of “modalities for withdrawal of uninvited foreign armed groups” from Congolese territory.
A meeting in Equatorial Guinea Friday of another regional bloc, the Economic Community of Central African States, also called for the immediate withdrawal of Rwandan troops from Congo as well as the airport’s reopening to facilitate access to humanitarian aid.
 


Trump says he wants to negotiate about Ukraine. It’s not clear if Putin really does

Trump says he wants to negotiate about Ukraine. It’s not clear if Putin really does
Updated 09 February 2025
Follow

Trump says he wants to negotiate about Ukraine. It’s not clear if Putin really does

Trump says he wants to negotiate about Ukraine. It’s not clear if Putin really does
  • Trump boasts of his deal-making prowess, called Putin “smart” and threatened Russia with tariffs and oil price cuts unless it comes to the negotiating table
  • But with little incentive to come to the negotiating table, Putin will not easily surrender what he considers Russia’s ancestral lands in Ukraine

Nearly three years after President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, his troops are making steady progress on the battlefield. Kyiv is grappling with shortages of men and weapons. And the new US president could soon halt Ukraine’s massive supply of military aid.
Putin is closer than ever to achieving his objectives in the battle-weary country, with little incentive to come to the negotiating table, no matter how much US President Donald Trump might cajole or threaten him, according to Russian and Western experts interviewed by The Associated Press.
Both are signaling discussions on Ukraine -– by phone or in person -– using flattery and threats.
Putin said Trump was “clever and pragmatic,” and even parroted his false claims of having won the 2020 election. Trump’s opening gambit was to call Putin “smart” and to threaten Russia with tariffs and oil price cuts, which the Kremlin brushed off.
Trump boasted during the campaign he could end the war in 24 hours, which later became six months. He’s indicated the US is talking to Russia about Ukraine without Kyiv’s input, saying his administration already had “very serious” discussions.
He suggested he and Putin could soon take “significant” action toward ending the war, in which Russia is suffering heavy casualties daily while its economy endures stiff Western sanctions, inflation and a serious labor shortage.
But the economy has not collapsed, and because Putin has unleashed the harshest crackdown on dissent since Soviet times, he faces no domestic pressure to end the war.
“In the West, the idea came from somewhere that it’s important to Putin to reach an agreement and end things. This is not the case,” said Fyodor Lukyanov, who hosted a forum with Putin in November and heads Moscow’s Council for Foreign and Defense policies.
Talks on Ukraine without Ukraine
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky says Putin wants to deal directly with Trump, cutting out Kyiv. That runs counter to the Biden administration’s position that echoed Zelensky’s call of “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.”
“We cannot let someone decide something for us,” Zelensky told AP, saying Russia wants the “destruction of Ukrainian freedom and independence.”
He suggested any such peace deal would send the dangerous signal that adventurism pays to authoritarian leaders in China, North Korea and Iran.
Putin appears to expect Trump to undermine European resolve on Ukraine. Likening Europe’s leaders to Trump’s lapdogs, he said Sunday they will soon be “sitting obediently at their master’s feet and sweetly wagging their tails” as the US president quickly brings order with his ”character and persistence.”
Trump boasts of his deal-making prowess but Putin will not easily surrender what he considers Russia’s ancestral lands in Ukraine or squander a chance to punish the West and undermine its alliances and security by forcing Kyiv into a policy of neutrality.
Trump may want a legacy as a peacemaker, but “history won’t look kindly on him if he’s the man who gives this all away,” said Sir Kim Darroch, British ambassador to the US from 2016-19. Former NATO spokesperson Oana Lungescu said a deal favoring Moscow would send a message of “American weakness.”
Echoes of Helsinki
Trump and Putin last met in Helsinki in 2018 when there was “mutual respect” between them, said former Finnish President Sauli Niinistö, the summit host. But they are “not very similar,” he added, with Putin a “systematic” thinker while Trump acts like a businessman making “prompt” decisions.
That could cause a clash because Trump wants a quick resolution to the war while Putin seeks a slower one that strengthens his military position and weakens both Kyiv and the West’s political will.
Zelensky told AP that Putin “does not want to negotiate. He will sabotage it.” Indeed, Putin has already raised obstacles, including legal hurdles and claimed Zelensky has lost his legitimacy as president.
Putin hopes Trump will “get bored” or distracted with another issue, said Boris Bondarev, a former Russian diplomat in Geneva who quit his post after the invasion.
Russian experts point to Trump’s first term when they said Putin realized such meetings achieved little.
One was a public relations victory for Moscow in Helsinki where Trump sided with Putin instead of his own intelligence agencies on whether Russia meddled in the 2016 election. Another was in Singapore in 2019 with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un when he failed to reach a deal to halt Pyongyang’s nuclear program.
Previous peace talks
The Kremlin last year said a draft peace agreement that Russia and Ukraine negotiated in Istanbul early in the conflict — but which Kyiv rejected — could be the basis for talks.
It demanded Ukraine’s neutrality, stipulated NATO deny it membership, put limits on Kyiv’s armed forces and delayed talks on the status of four Russian-occupied regions that Moscow later annexed illegally. Moscow also dismissed demands to withdraw its troops, pay compensation to Ukraine and face an international tribunal for its action.
Putin hasn’t indicated he will budge but said “if there is a desire to negotiate and find a compromise solution, let anyone conduct these negotiations.”
“Engagement is not the same as negotiation,” said Sir Laurie Bristow, British ambassador to Russia from 2016-20, describing Russia’s strategy as “what’s mine is mine. And what’s yours is up for negotiation.”
Bondarev also said Putin sees negotiations only as a vehicle “to deliver him whatever he wants,” adding it’s “astonishing” that Western leaders still don’t understand Kremlin tactics.
That means Putin is likely to welcome any meeting with Trump, since it promotes Russia as a global force and plays well domestically, but he will offer little in return.
What Trump can and can’t do
Trump said Zelensky should have made a deal with Putin to avoid war, adding he wouldn’t have allowed the conflict to start if he had been in office.
Trump has threatened Russia with more tariffs, sanctions and oil price cuts, but there is no economic “wonder weapon” that can end the war, said Richard Connolly, a Russian military and economic expert at London’s Royal United Services Institute.
And the Kremlin is brushing off the threats, likely because the West already has heavily sanctioned Russia.
Trump also can’t guarantee Ukraine would never join NATO, nor can he lift all Western sanctions, easily force Europe to resume importing Russian energy or get the International Criminal Court to rescind its war crimes arrest warrant for Putin.
Speaking to the Davos World Economic Forum, Trump said he wants the OPEC+ alliance and Saudi Arabia to cut oil prices to push Putin to end the war. The Kremlin said that won’t work because the war is about Russian security, not the price of oil. It also would harm US oil producers.
“In the tradeoff between Putin and domestic oil producers, I’m pretty sure which choice Trump will make,” said Alexandra Prokopenko, a fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin.
Trump could pressure Russia by propping up the US oil industry with subsidies and lift the 10 percent trade tariffs imposed on China in exchange for Beijing limiting economic ties with Moscow, which could leave it “truly isolated,” Connolly said.
Europe also could underscore its commitment to Kyiv – and curry favor with Trump – by buying US military equipment to give to Ukraine, said Lord Peter Ricketts, a former UK national security adviser.
Lukyanov suggested that Trump’s allies often seem afraid of him and crumble under his threats.
The “big question,” he said, is what will happen when Putin won’t.


German chancellor slams Trump’s Ukraine rare earths demand

German chancellor slams Trump’s Ukraine rare earths demand
Updated 09 February 2025
Follow

German chancellor slams Trump’s Ukraine rare earths demand

German chancellor slams Trump’s Ukraine rare earths demand
  • The German chancellor had already described Trump’s demands as “very selfish” on Monday after a European Union summit in Brussels

BERLIN: German chancellor Olaf Scholz slammed as “selfish and self-serving” Donald Trump’s demands for Ukrainian rare earths in exchange for US military aid, in an interview published on Saturday.
Rare earths group metals used to transform power into motion in a vast array of things ranging from electric vehicles to missiles and there is no substitute for them.
“Ukraine is under attack and we are helping it, without asking to be paid in return. This should be everyone’s position,” Scholz told the RND media group, when asked about Trump’s demands for a possible quid pro quo for US aid.
The German chancellor had already described Trump’s demands as “very selfish” on Monday after a European Union summit in Brussels.
He had said Ukraine’s resources should be used to finance everything needed after the war, such as reconstruction and maintaining a strong army.
“It would be very selfish, very self-serving” to demand something from Ukraine in exchange for aid, he said.
Trump had said he wanted “equalization” from Ukraine for Washington financial support, adding: “We’re telling Ukraine they have very valuable rare earths. We’re looking to do a deal with Ukraine where they’re going to secure what we’re giving them with their rare earths and other things.”
He added: “I want to have security of rare earth. We’re putting in hundreds of billions of dollars. They have great rare earth. And I want security of the rare earth, and they’re willing to do it.”
On Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Washington and Kyiv were planning “meetings and talks,” after Trump raised a possible meeting with him next week.
Zelensky said on Tuesday that Ukraine was ready to receive investment from US firms in its rare earths — or metals widely used in electronics.
In a peace plan unveiled in October, Zelensky had, without specifically mentioning rare earths, proposed a “special agreement” with his country’s partners, allowing for “common protection” and “joint exploitation” of strategic resources.
He had cited as examples “uranium, titanium, lithium, graphite and other strategic resources of great value.”


Kosovo heads to election clouded by tensions with Serbia

Kosovo heads to election clouded by tensions with Serbia
Updated 09 February 2025
Follow

Kosovo heads to election clouded by tensions with Serbia

Kosovo heads to election clouded by tensions with Serbia
  • A drop below 50 percent of the votes for Kurti’s party could potentially prompt coalition talks after the election

PRISTINA: Kosovo votes on Sunday after a combative election campaign in which opposition candidates clashed with Prime Minister Albin Kurti over the economy, corruption and relations with the country’s old foe and neighbor Serbia.
Kurti, a leftist and Albanian nationalist, came to power in the small Balkan country in 2021 when a coalition run by his Vetevendosje party received more than 50 percent of votes and secured a seven-seat majority in the 120-seat parliament.
Political analysts say his popularity has been bolstered by moves to extend government control in Kosovo’s ethnic Serb-majority north. But critics say he has failed to deliver on education and health, and his policies in the north have distanced the country from its traditional allies, the European Union and the United States.
The EU placed economic curbs on the country in 2023 for its role in stoking tensions with ethnic Serbs, cutting at least 150 million euros ($155 million) in funding, Reuters has found.
A drop below 50 percent of the votes for Kurti’s party could potentially prompt coalition talks after the election.
Leading opposition parties include the center-right Democratic League of Kosovo which has campaigned on restoring relations with the United States and the EU, and joining NATO; and the Democratic Party of Kosovo, also center-right, which was founded by former guerilla fighters of Kosovo Liberation Army.
Nearly two million voters are registered in Kosovo. Voting starts at 7 a.m. (0600 GMT) and ends at 7 p.m. Exit polls are expected soon after, and results later into the night.
KURTI’S DIVISIVE RHETORIC IN FOCUS
Kurti’s government has overseen some gains. Unemployment has shrunk from 30 percent to around 10 percent, the minimum wage is up and last year the economy grew faster than the Western Balkans average.
He says his policies in the north, which include reducing the long-held autonomy of Serbs living in Kosovo, are helping to bring ethnic Serbs and Albanians together under one system of government. But his rhetoric worries centrist politicians.
“When you have a bad neighbor, then you have to keep your morale high and your rifle full,” he said in a campaign speech near the Serbian border this week.
Differences of opinion have contributed to a bitter war of words with the opposition. The Elections Complaints and Appeals Panel, which monitors party and candidates’ complaints, has issued more than 650,000 euros in fines to parties this election season, three times the 2021 tally, data from NGO Democracy in Action show.
Kosovo, Europe’s newest country, gained independence from Serbia in 2008 with backing from the United States, which included a 1999 bombing campaign against Serbian forces.