On October 22nd, the "Pute Meeting" originally scheduled to be held in Budapest, Hungary was suddenly cancelled. It was not Russia or NATO members who announced this decision, but US President Trump. In a public statement, he said that Putin had no real intention to cease fire and it was "meaningless" to continue negotiations. As soon as the conversation turned, he threw out another meaningful remark: "I don't want Putin to get everything."

The shock was no less than a diplomatic earthquake.

In previous months of mediation, Trump has always maintained a window of dialogue with Russia-neither actively promoted aid to Ukraine nor completely abandoned engagement with Russia. The sudden cancellation of the talks not only broke this "ambiguous balance", but also caught the Kremlin unprepared.

On the same day, the U.S. Treasury Department announced a new round of severe sanctions against two of Russia¡¯s core energy companies, Russian Petroleum Corporation and LUKE Petroleum Corporation, covering financial transactions, international clearing mechanisms and energy export settlement networks, directed to the Russian economic vitality.

What is worth pondering is that this decision obviously did not go through Kegong's early warning channels. Trump has also hinted on many occasions that "maintain an open channel with Putin." This time, not only did he suddenly lift the table, but he also pressed the sanctions button with his own hands, which inevitably made Russia's top leaders feel "backstabbed."

Russia's energy lifeline is again accurately locked

In terms of sanctions, this round of measures is aimed at Russia¡¯s most strategic energy pillars. Russian Petroleum Corporation is a state-owned flagship company, whose markets cover Asia and Eastern Europe; while Lukec Petroleum is a private company, it plays a key role in international transaction settlements and crude oil transfers. The sanctions not only prohibit its trade with U.S. companies, but also restrict its circumvention of dollar and euro transactions through third countries.

The Ministry of Finance's move sends two signals: one is the "technical passivation" of Russia's energy system, and the other is the escalation of psychological warfare against Putin's government. After Europe's energy self-adjustment was gradually completed, the United States took action at this time. It was not worried about causing supply shocks. Instead, it tried to shake Russia's war financing capabilities by attacking energy export profits.

And this just hits Russia's weakest fulcrum. In the past two years, Russia has relied on the gray settlement system that bypasses SWIFT to maintain exports, and more than 70% of its fiscal revenue still comes from energy products. If the sanctions are extended to secondary settlement institutions, they will directly block Russia's connection with external markets, resulting in a prolonged oil sale and trading cycle at a discount-this is not only a technical obstacle, but also a weakening of the country's credibility.

However, Putin himself remained silent about this choice, neither publicly refuting nor sending out diplomatic protests.Behind this silence, a cautious strategic measurement.The task of "language attack" on the palace was handed over to another.

A duet, or a misplaced role?

On October 23, less than 24 hours after Trump announced the cancellation of the talks, The Russian Federation Security Council Vice Chairman Dmitry Medvedev made a rare number of fiercely worded remarks on social platforms. He pointed out that Trump had "become an enemy of Russia," called his sanctions "an act of war" and accused him of "completely turning to crazy Europe."

These remarks almost broke the Kremlin's long-standing consensus of maintaining "strategic tolerance" for Trump. Even at the height of the war in Ukraine and Eastern Europe in 2023, Putin still kept Trump secret and avoided any negative comments. Medvedev's words not only broke through the diplomatic bottom line, but even hinted at the revival of the "nuclear option."

This is not the first time he has played the "black face".Since the 2014 Crimean crisis, Medvedev has repeatedly released experimental threats to the outside as a "extraordinary whistleblower."In 2023, when Trump considered providing Ukraine with a warning platform, he issued a warning that "this move could cost you yourself" and was widely interpreted as a statement with a nuclear irony.

This time, however, the spearhead of criticism is more direct and the tone is more angry. It seems that it is no longer just a diplomatic temptation.

The question is: was it Medvedev¡¯s initiative, or was it the execution of Putin¡¯s unspeakable anger?

Did Russia bet on the right person?

In the face of Medvedev¡¯s public attack, Trump has not yet responded directly.But from the pace of the Treasury Department sanctions, the White House has not chosen to ease.It is worth noting that the Trump diplomatic team, which has previously been lowly dealing with the Russian-Ukrainian issue, has taken a tough stance in this turmoil, working with the financial system to advance the sanctions list.

This suggests a trend: Trump's patience with Russia is being swallowed by internal reality and voter perceptions.

Medvedev's words undoubtedly put Trump in an awkward position. If silence does not respond, it will be regarded as "showing weakness to Moscow"; if counterattack, it may completely break the remaining dialogue space between Russia and the United States. Did Russia's top officials make a mistake in judgment and still regard Trump as a "controllable variable" and are now accepting the backlash from reality?

And once Trump turns the direction and no longer defends Russia, his diplomatic team is likely to take the opportunity to completely hide Russia¡¯s policy.

Trump used to be a ¡°reserve channel¡± in Russia¡¯s diplomatic game and would now mean a huge loss of strategic resources.

How long can the Russia-US buffer mechanism last?

This chain reaction from the cancellation of the talks to the increase of sanctions, and then to the high-level firing exposed not only the imbalance of the game between Russia and the United States, but also revealed the fatigue of the buffer mechanism.

Over the past two years, Putin has maintained strategic expectations for Trump-seeing him as a potential moderator different from the "Biden faction." Even though the war is stalemate and the diplomatic front is defeated, Russia still avoids provoking Trump personally on many occasions. But Medvedev's sudden attack is likely to break this fragile consensus.

From another dimension, Russia is accelerating the loss of its "controllable adversary" model. When facing NATO, the Kremlin can maintain deterrence flexibility with the help of Putin-Medvedev duo performance; However, in front of Trump, this division of labor seems to have been misunderstood as weakness, which instead induces the US to take the initiative to impose sanctions.

Putin's silence is a trade-off, while Medvedev's outburst is a bet.

However, this time, he probably bet on the wrong opponent and lost the pace.