Putin’s Preemptive Moves and Trump’s Transactional Diplomacy
A Critical Week Ahead
As we enter a pivotal week, with a potential meeting between Putin and Trump on the horizon—an expectation openly signaled by both the Kremlin and the White House—it’s essential to scrutinize the strategic “information bombs” hitting the public sphere. This includes the Ukrainian resources deal and the “Krasnov leak.” Beyond the obvious maneuvering with classified intelligence, the leak may serve another purpose: a preemptive move by Putin, ahead of the talks, to remind Trump of his vulnerabilities and nudge him into aligning with Russian interests before negotiations even begin.
Trump’s alleged intelligence ties have been the subject of numerous investigations since his first term. By now, even if any compromising material exists, he appears untouchable—he effectively controls the U.S. institutions that could investigate him. Any potential leverage Putin might have is, at best, diminished.
This so-called “leak” should be viewed with caution. It may well be a carefully manipulated half-truth—enough to send a message, but not enough to inflict real damage on Trump.
Ukraine’s Deal: No Security, Just a Transaction
I highly doubt that by striking a deal with the U.S. over its natural resources, Zelensky will secure any real commitments or guarantees for peace and security from Trump—especially if the deal lacks “hooks,” meaning conditions tied to concrete, favorable outcomes for Kyiv.
Think about it: Trump is not offering peacekeepers, weapons, or diplomatic pressure to push Russia toward a viable agreement. His proposal—while inflating U.S. aid numbers—is essentially a scheme for Ukraine to repay past costs, not a plan for its future security.
A U.S. Obligation, Not a Favor
From a moral standpoint, Europe’s role is irrelevant here. This issue falls squarely on the U.S.-Ukraine axis. Under the Budapest Memorandum, the U.S. is Ukraine’s guarantor and has an obligation to intervene, given Russia’s blatant violation of the treaty and its attack on a denuclearized Ukraine. Had Kyiv not relied on U.S. and U.K. assurances, Putin would never have dared to attack a nuclear-armed state. In this sense, Trump’s attempt to frame U.S. support as something Ukraine must “repay” is, to put it mildly, deeply hypocritical.
Support Independent Analysis
Help us keep delivering free, unbiased, and in-depth insights by supporting our work. Your donation ensures we stay independent, transparent, and accessible to all. Join us in preserving thoughtful analysis—donate today!
Trump’s Real Play: Bargaining with Putin, Not Helping Kyiv
From a purely transactional perspective—Trump’s signature approach to diplomacy—securing a deal over Ukraine’s resources is unlikely to guarantee Kyiv anything. Instead, it will likely serve as a bargaining chip for Trump to extract concessions from Putin, not for Ukraine’s benefit, but for his own.
The Problem of Credibility
The real issue here is credibility. It doesn’t matter what Marco Rubio, Waltz, or Kellogg say. America’s stance isn’t being shaped by experienced diplomats, military leaders, or policymakers—it’s being dictated by Trump. And he is more aligned with MAGA influencers and Elon Musk than with the traditional institutions of governance or even the Republican Party. These informal channels of influence play a far greater role, both by reinforcing Trump’s instincts and by keeping him trapped within the ideological and informational bubble in which he operates.
A Fracturing West
In less than a month since taking office, Trump has managed to erode fundamental trust—not just in the United States as a reliable global leader, but in NATO and the very cohesion of the West. His erratic statements, transactional approach to alliances, and open hostility toward traditional partners have sown doubt among allies and emboldened adversaries. What was once a cornerstone of global stability—the steadfast U.S. commitment to its allies—now appears alarmingly uncertain, raising serious questions about America’s ability to lead, unite, and uphold the values that have long defined the Western world.
“Trust, But Verify”
Trusting Trump and agreeing to an unconditional deal would be reckless, if not outright suicidal. As Reagan famously said: “Trust, but verify.” Without conditions and safeguards, Zelensky should sign nothing.
Ilian Vassilev
