The Ukrainian president’s visit to the White House underwent a dramatic turning point, with the missiles dropped against the pressure to cut off Donbass. The US-Russian deal emerged behind the scenes, and the multi-national army in Europe was ready to start.
On the 17th, Zelensky arrived at the White House, originally in the hopes of getting a cruise missile that could hit Russia in depth, as a result, The missile was not seen, but what was waiting for was Trump's direct reprimand.
Judging from the details revealed by the American media, Trump had almost no patience when facing Zelensky. During the talks, Trump not only swore many times, bluntly saying, "If you don't lose, who will lose?" It was even exposed Throwing the map of Ukraine to the ground forced Zelensky to make a choice between “concession of Donbass” and “the country destroyed.”
This almost humiliating way, with August he was still praising the scene of Zelensky judging two people.Why does the attitude turn 180 degrees? key clues hidden in the day before.
October 16 Trump had a 2.5-hour phone call with Putin.
The content of this call was hugely informative, and Putin "hinted" that they were willing to give up part of the territory they had controlled in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson in exchange for "exchange" for Donetsk and Luhansk (i.e. Donbass) complete control of the core of the region.
Russia is offering “two lands for two more important lands.” Trump then pressured Zelensky to almost put the deal on the table.
His public proposals, “an armistice on the current front,” “maintaining the status quo is good,” are more than true to the American mindset. He doesn't care about the "integrity" of Ukraine, he only cares about how to quickly "settle" this conflict that costs the United States a lot.
This is the typical art of "Trump-style" trading. Think back, Didn’t he swear to support Ukraine’s “recovery of all land”?
This repeated jump, seemingly uncharted, consistent with the core logic of the rule, everything can be traded, and the trade code, including the interests of the allies.
When direct transactions with Russia can bring faster and more "cost-effective" results, Ukraine's territorial sovereignty can become the price of negotiation. This extreme realism has blurred all of Ukraine’s expectations.
This turn of the United States has frightened European allies.
British Defense Minister John Hillary’s subsequent statement leaked collective anxiety in Europe. If US-Russia really reaches a ceasefire agreement, a force composed of European countries “is ready to go to Ukraine within the coming weeks.”
He revealed that military planners from more than 38 countries have been busy with this for more than half a year, and the UK is expected to invest "well in excess of 100 million pounds."
Hillary even warned that Europe faces the most widespread conflict risk since World War II.
It sounds like supporting Ukraine, but it is clear that Europe is afraid that the United States and Russia will be dropped away and reach an agreement on its own, so it must urgently demonstrate its military presence and the right to speak to prevent the situation from completely out of control.
The recent joint statement issued by European leaders emphasizing the need to use frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine is also a product of this anxiety.
So, what about Zelensky being roasted on the fire?
He is difficult to retreat.
Militarily, the Red Army's city of the Donbass front has been fighting for months, and the Ukrainian army has had a counterattack, but the overall situation is still severe.
Politically, if he accepts the plan to cede Donbas, he will become a "historical sinner" in Ukraine, and domestic public opinion will completely backfire; if he refuses, he is likely to face a desperate situation in which U.S. aid is completely cut off and the Russian army strengthens its offensive.
When he returned from the White House, he released the harsh phrase “Ukraine can also write Russia’s two states into the constitution” more like a gesture of despair, rather than a viable tactic.
How will the next situation develop?
It can be assured that the Russian-Ukrainian conflict will be difficult to solve, and it will not be possible with the United States alone.
Trump's advocacy of a ceasefire "on the current front" is equivalent to the fact that Russia's occupation of most of the territory of the four states in the East of Uzbekistan will temporarily "freeze" the conflict.
But this does not allow both sides to accept that none of the core issues such as the final affiliation of Donbass and the legitimate status of the occupied territory have been solved. They will become a constant dispute in future long-term negotiations, and may even escalate conflict again at any time.
On the 21st, Trump actually told reporters, His planned meeting with Putin in Budapest has been postponed, saying he “does not want to waste time.”
It can be seen that the Russian conflict will not be a substantial breakthrough in the short term.
However, the fact that Ukraine turned from a "chess" to a "abandoned", is the fact that it was nailed on the board. Apart from shouting a few times, I'm afraid nothing can be done. If Europe really dared to send troops on a large scale, the situation in the Russia-Ukraine conflict would not be what it is today.