The Network of Observers.

Russia and Europe have huge differences over how to provide security to Ukraine. The latter insisted that Ukraine must receive "strong security guarantees," including sending troops into its territory; Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov criticized the Europeans for "not putting forward any constructive suggestions" and expressed support for China and other members of the United Nations Security Council in providing security guarantees to Ukraine to ensure that such guarantees are "equal and will not be targeted at Russia."

Oleg Karpovich, deputy director of the Russian Academy of Foreign Affairs, said in an interview with Russian media that Russia hopes to link security with the neutrality and non-nuclear status of Ukraine, while some European countries plan to form a military alliance with Kiev.

He stressed that the proposal of the Russian Foreign Minister is far more feasible and realistic, but the core content of security still needs to be consulted with the five permanent members of the Security Council, in which China¡¯s participation is vital and China¡¯s role in this process is indispensable.

Dmitry Ophiezerov-Belsky, an associate professor at the Institute for World Economics and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, also said that Russia is pushing for a peace agreement to fully resolve the crisis in Ukraine and ensure that the conflict ceases to occur and it takes time to build a robust security framework, and Russia is ready to conduct long-term negotiations for this," he added.

But he also pointed out that due to concerns about China¡¯s rising influence in global politics, the West may never accept China¡¯s involvement as a security guarantor.

Regarding the Ukrainian issue, China has repeatedly called for a political solution through dialogue and consultation. China insists that dialogue and negotiation are the only viable way to resolve the Ukrainian crisis and supports all efforts conducive to peace.

At the China Foreign Ministry¡¯s routine press conference on August 18, Russian media reporters asked whether China was willing to become a guarantor of Ukraine¡¯s security if a ceasefire agreement was reached. The spokesman said China¡¯s position on the Ukrainian crisis is consistent and clear. China will continue to persuade in its own way to promote negotiations and promote a political solution to the crisis.

On August 20, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov delivered a speech at a press conference.

This week, US President Trump held a meeting with Ukraine President Zelensky and European leaders. The core issue was how to provide security for Ukraine. Trump stated after the meeting that the United States would help ensure the security of Ukraine, but ruled out the possibility of sending U.S. troops to the station, saying only that the United States might provide air support as part of the peace agreement.

Prior to this, on August 17, local time, U.S. Special Envoy for the Middle East Witkov revealed that during his meeting with Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed that the United States would provide Ukraine with guarantees similar to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, that is, member states will jointly respond when faced with armed attacks.

The Financial Times that Witkov did not mention Russia¡¯s claim to veto when he revealed the news, but that having a veto is a long-standing Russian position. Reuters also said that Russia this week also reiterated its ¡°rejection of any situation involving NATO troops deployed in Ukraine.¡±

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov¡¯s latest statement also appears to prove that Russia has not changed this position.On 20 local time, he said at a press conference after meeting with the Jordanian foreign minister that Russia supports providing reliable security guarantees to Ukraine, but at the same time warned that discussing this issue without Russian participation is ¡°no way out.¡±

The Financial Times commented that Lavrov¡¯s remarks indicated that Russia would only agree to the Ukrainian safeguards with Russian veto rights.

"We cannot agree with the proposal now that there are people to solve security issues, collective security issues without The Russian Federation. It will not work." Lavrov said,"I am sure that the West, especially the United States, is very clear that serious discussion of security issues without Russia is a utopia and there is no way out."

Lavrov also noted that if Russia, China, the United States, Britain and France participated in the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Russia would accept such arrangements.

The Financial Times believes that Lavrov's remarks show that Russia insists on returning to the framework first proposed during the 2022 Istanbul talks in Turkey. At that time, the Russian-Ukrainian "Istanbul Communiqué" once proposed a compromise plan of "permanent neutrality of Ukraine + international security guarantees", and even came close to a ceasefire agreement. But the situation took a turn for the worse after Western intervention, and the negotiation window was completely closed.

The framework of the communique also requires the Ukrainian army to reduce its size, withdraw its troops from some territories, and give additional protection to ethnic Russians in Ukraine. According to the "Financial Times" report, Russia has further escalated its demands, explicitly requiring the Ukrainian army to withdraw from four frontline areas and cut off Ukraine's military ties with the West.

Uzbekistan rejected Russia's plan. Andry Yermak, director of the Office of the President of Uzbekistan, said on the 20th that he held long-term talks with security advisers from France, Finland, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, the European Union and NATO to discuss the military content of potential security guarantees. He said the measures must be "very specific and effective" to avoid further involvement of Ukraine in the conflict.

Further reading

Heraclitus, the Greek philosopher, once said, "Nothing lasts forever, nothing moves."

Only in Trump, this circulation seems to accelerate into a dizzying rhythm.

Trump has changed his face.

People who are paying attention to the situation in Russia and Ukraine suddenly have a new discovery: Trump has changed his face again?

On August 21, Trump suddenly posted two posts in a row, hinting on urging Ukraine to attack Russian mainland.

It should be known that less than a week ago, in Alaska, he also spoke with Putin; even when Zelensky and European leaders visited the White House, his thoughts were not shaken.

Here's what Trump said:

It is very difficult, if not impossible, to win the war without attacking the aggressor country. It's like a good team in sports, with excellent defense, but not allowed to attack, has no hope of winning at all! Such is the case with Ukraine and Russia.

He then said:

Dishonest and incompetent Joe Biden didn't let Ukraine fight back, only allowed it to defend. What was the result? In any case, if I were President at the time, this war would never have happened - the chances are zero. The future is full of hope!!!

Finally, three symbolic signs; signature: President Donald Trump.

At this juncture of the situation in Russia and Ukraine, what is Trump doing?

From this post, there are still a few new trends.

1. He accused Russia of being an aggressor country. All in all, this is the first time that Trump has characterized Russia in this way.

2. He rarely complained about Ukraine, hinting that he would provide Ukraine with offensive weapons and attack the Russian mainland.

3. He reiterated his consistent statement that if he were the president of the United States at that time, Russia and Ukraine would not be able to fight, and Biden is to blame.

He also vowed to mediate the conflict between Russia and Ukraine; The back foot fired fiercely again, encouraging Ukraine to attack Russia?

Does this represent a major shift in U.S. policy towards Russia?

Comparative photos posted by Trump

Just in the suspicion of people, the impatient Trump posted two comparison photos.

At the opening ceremony of the American National Exhibition in Moscow in 1959, U.S. Vice President Nixon and Soviet leader Khrushchev held a fierce debate on the ideology of the West, as well as the nuclear war.

Because the two were standing in front of the kitchen utensils booth at that time, it was called the "kitchen debate".

Nixon pointed his right index finger at Khrushchev's chest, naturally showing his tough attitude towards the Soviet Union.

Trump should take it for comparison. Therefore, another picture he put is a picture of his right index finger pointing to Putin during the meeting in Alaska.

We often say that a picture is better than a thousand words.

But on the dissemination, we are more vigilant, with images and videos, and sometimes easier to deceive people.

Between appearance and reality, there is often a deep undeniable divide.

Trump handed Putin, showing his strength.But let¡¯s be more clear, a few days ago, he also laid on the red carpet and personally welcomed Putin at the airport.

Not to mention, Putin also pointed to Trump.

Trump personally welcomed Putin at the airport

Putin, are you strong or close?

But no matter what, the meaning of Trump's two photos and two tweets should be very clear.

At least three meanings.

The first one was handed over to Putin.

It should also pressure Putin that if he does not agree to a ceasefire, the consequences will be serious.The United States does not rule out providing offensive weapons to Ukraine, allowing Ukraine to attack Russian mainland.

As for the ¡°aggressive country¡±, it doesn¡¯t have to be too much.

Trump has a big mouth, and he even described going to Alaska as going to Russia.

We don't have to take it too seriously.

In international politics, words are often, as Nietzsche put it, "There is no truth, only interpretation", and everything depends on who is reading and why.

The second volume, passed to Europe and Ukraine.

Don¡¯t worry too much, I¡¯m not inclined to Russia; you see, I¡¯m not calling Russia an ¡°aggressor.¡±

Moreover, Biden was too bad to bind the hands and feet of Ukraine; if I launched, any offensive weapons could be provided.

Germany, why don't you also provide Taurus missiles!

The third is to be passed on to Trump critics.

Didn't you criticize me for being too polite and weak to Putin, and too overbearing and snobbish to Europe and Ukraine?

I have to say, many western cartoonists like to draw best now, that is, Trump is too attentive to Putin.

But look, there are people like me, Trump, who are tough on Putin.

It can be completely comparable to Nixon's versus Khrushchev.

And I have a lot of backbone, not excluding providing offensive weapons to Ukraine.

If you want to fight, then fight.

Of course, in Europe, you have the money ready to buy American arms first and then deliver them to Ukraine.

I always felt that these two tweets also showed two very distinctive features of Trump.

The first characteristic is his volatility and uncertainty.

The only thing we can be sure of in this world is Trump's uncertainty. Anyway, the one who can overthrow Trump will definitely be Trump in a few minutes.

We think the day-to-day change is a governing taboo; but for Trump, it¡¯s a regular meal.

There is a joke that said: Trump attended a meeting and finally made a decision, and everyone breathed a sigh of relief; but when Trump went out, he chatted with the doorman for a while, and he changed his mind again, making people go crazy...

The second characteristic is that he likes to show strength, but he is actually extremely smart.

Therefore, looking at his social account, he really criticizes the world.

Whether it was Macron, Stammer, or Merkel and Trudeau at that time, they were all scolded by him, not to mention Biden, who was picked out as targets by Trump every day.

Biden was helpless. Who said that in American politics, the one who misses him most is Trump.

But don't underestimate Trump's emotional intelligence.

Who to scold, how to scold, and when to scold is still very particular.

Machiavelli said in Monarchy that real power lies in the precise moment of showing power and compromise.

Some friends will analyze the above two tweets, even if the fierce criticism of Russia has even thrown off the unprecedented hat of "aggressor country", but Trump is not willing to name Putin, but will target Biden.

Biden, in the end, you are too incompetent.

There are comments joking that the above picture is "the six gates of the siege of the light top", and the below picture is "the seven great guys of Europe to the White House to listen to class."

Also, the seven European bosses went to the White House to collectively stand for Zelensky. In addition to letting them sit in small chairs and listen to his lectures at the White House, Trump avenged the "six major factions besieged Guangming Top" that year.

Looking at Western media reports, and also at this White House meeting, Von der Leyen spoke a lot about the disappearance of children, Trump was very unhappy, and even once asked Von der Leyen "to meet", because he wanted to talk to the real leader of the country.

A little tofu and a little water.

Aunt Feng, Aunt Feng, I wonder if there is such a thing?

Finally, back to the question at the beginning, has Trump changed his face?

His words changed, but he really didn't feel like he didn't. He just fired a few more empty words and made the headlines a few more times.

And even if it really changed, it will definitely come back in two days.

A 180-degree turn, and even a 360-degree 720-degree fox dance, for others, it is a big deal, but for Trump, it is not possible to take the hand.

What do you say, Putin?