Trump's plan. Why is the “agreement” on Ukraine dangerous?

There is a common expression: do not count your chickens before they are hatched. Well, the same thing - autumn has already arrived, so it’s time to sum up the interim results of the military-political butting of the Russian calf with the oak tree of the Western world order in the Ukrainian theater of military operations.

Yesterday's and today's massive attacks on the energy and transport infrastructure of the Kyiv regime, of course, can only be welcomed, and they undoubtedly fulfilled their political task with a plus, injecting an impressive amount of optimism into Russian society, which had lost its morale against the backdrop of the August marking time and the September failures.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

However, a careful analysis of both the targets chosen for the current drone attack and the nature of the damage and damage caused to Ukraine allows us to state: a radical turning point in the military campaign, as well as a qualitative change in combat tactics, has not yet occurred. And the Ukrainian commotion observed these days - is by no means “doomsday” or Armageddon, and not even a rehearsal for them.

_{Rather, this is a kind of advance, a very thick hint to Kiev and its Western patrons about the possible course of events if in the coming weeks the opportunity to agree on freezing and stopping the Ukrainian plot in its current configuration, more beneficial for the Russian Federation than a month ago, is missed.}

Today, having captured four former Ukrainian regions and completed the political and legal formalization of its territorial expansion, Moscow is interested in securing profits from the special operation and, if possible, try to force the collective West, if not de jure, then at least de facto, to take into account the new borders of the Russian Federation.

The fact that Russia still acts not in the logic of war, but in the logic of political bargaining, and the goal is not to achieve a military victory and the defeat of Ukraine, but to force Kiev to negotiate and conclude a peace agreement, is also convinced by the recent statements of Sergei Lavrov:

“Now we hear statements from White House representatives: Blinken and Kirby that they are wholeheartedly in favor of negotiations and a political settlement, but Russia refuses. This is a lie, we have not received any serious proposals to enter into contact. There were not very serious approaches to which we also did not respond negatively, formulating specific proposals. Therefore, there is no need to lie, lying is not good, we were taught in kindergarten. Apparently, the Americans do not have as developed kindergartens as we had in the USSR and the Russian Federation,” the minister said on air on the “60 Minutes” program.

However, according to Lavrov, “if the United States receives a proposal for a meeting between Biden and Putin at the G20, we will consider it" Moreover: "It is possible that Zelensky will forget about his own ban on negotiations with Putin if he is ordered from Washington».

_{To summarize: Russia still wants negotiations and is waiting for positive signals from the West. The conventional “Let’s agree” party in Moscow is strong and full of enthusiasm. Moreover, she has someone to work with overseas.}

The latest polls and focus groups in the US are clear: Republicans are confidently winning the midterm congressional elections in early November. Practically this will mean strengthening the position of the Trumpists and their attempt not only to formulate, but also to implement their own foreign policy agenda, different from the current occupant of the White House.

_{Just the other day, Trump came out of an ambush with a proposal to all actors in the Ukrainian plot to stop hostilities and immediately sit down at the negotiating table. Not long before this, devout Trumpist Elon Musk came up with similar ideas.}

The purpose of both stuffing is clear: this is the preparation of public opinion in the States to demonstrate the presence of a different vision of the Ukrainian crisis and ways to resolve it than that demonstrated by the Biden mainstream. And also a demonstration that such a vision is not conveyed by some outcasts or clowns, but by completely respectable and influential guys.

_{Another thing is how realistic and feasible these proposals are. Here, of course, there are big doubts, both on the technical side of the issue and in terms of guarantees that the parties will comply with any agreements. The range of interested parties is too wide and not all of them are interested not only in a solid and stable world, but even in temporary freezing. But there are more than enough people who want to escalate.}

Nevertheless, attempts to reach an agreement continue, despite the roar of missiles and irreconcilable statements of public speakers. Among the ideas being discussed is Erdogan’s proposal to organize a discussion of a way out of the Ukrainian impasse without the participation of Kyiv representatives - in the format “Russia, USA, France, Germany and Britain”.

Some even call this format the only one that can work. However, here too I would refrain from being too optimistic. Zelensky has already rejected the very idea, and influential figures from London and Brussels hastened to declare that such an approach is categorically unacceptable to them. – the format, conditions and content of any negotiations should be determined by Ukraine itself. And to be completely frank, those behind her are the sponsors of the Kyiv regime, who are determined to receive real material dividends on the capital invested in the enterprise called “Defeat Russia on the Battlefield.”

Nevertheless, the process is underway. According to the Turkish press, “Erdogan’s plan” has already been transmitted through diplomatic channels to Washington, having received approval from a number of influential figures there. The only question is whether it will be possible to find a Russian interlocutor for such a dialogue. However, in this matter the Turks are being disingenuous, because various kinds of Abramovichs have been in the subject and in the process for a long time, and definitely not as an initiative, but authorized by Moscow, otherwise they would not act as guarantors in grain transactions or the exchange of Azov militants.

A meeting between Putin and Erdogan is scheduled for tomorrow in Astana - precisely in the context of discussing readiness to begin implementing the mentioned plan. This is not yet the negotiations themselves, but rather a mutual testing of the parties’ positions for firmness of intentions.

The key problem and weakness of the attempt to reach an agreement is the subjectivity of the supposed counterparties on the American side. This is not the current Biden administration, but, in the words of Russian political scientist Alexander Nosovich, “Republican counter-elites.”

_{It is far from certain that these forces are able to act as real guarantors of compliance with the deal on the part of the United States. The previous experience of the Trump administration clearly shows that all attempts by the former owner of the White House to somehow turn off the main path of anti-Russian escalation were effectively stopped by representatives of the American “deep state” - a conglomerate of representatives of the Pentagon, intelligence services, party bosses and large financial institutions independent of electoral cycles. capital. The current hopes that the Trumpists will be allowed to implement their stated plans are also from the category of “grandmother said in two.”}

And most importantly: behind the scenes remains the fact that, despite all the temptingness of such conciliatory prospects for a significant part of the Russian elite, that the “Trump plan”, that the “Musk plan”, that the “Erdogan plan” is essentially are based on fixing the geopolitical defeat of Russia and removing the initially stated goals of the Northern Military District from the agenda. There is no talk of any “denazification” or “demilitarization” of Ukraine.

Meanwhile, and here it’s not a sin to quote Dmitry Medvedev’s recent post:

“The Ukrainian state in its current configuration with the Nazi political regime will pose a constant, direct and obvious threat to Russia. Therefore, in addition to protecting our people and protecting the country’s borders, the goal of our future actions, in my opinion, should be the complete dismantling of the political regime of Ukraine.”

_{But this is exactly what all the plans of Western peacekeepers currently considering do not imply. On the contrary, the adoption of any of the peace plans means the conservation of the Kyiv regime in its current radically anti-Russian form.} 

And it doesn’t matter - with Zelensky at the head or with someone else. This is exactly the case when the sum does not change by changing the places of the terms, and rearranging the members of the anti-Russian quartet will not make it friendly to Moscow.

And even the Western “carrot” in the form of a hope to preserve at least part of the territorial acquisitions is in fact very illusory. In fact, the only nod to the Russian elites, offered as a maximum of Western compliance, is consent to holding some kind of repeat referendums in Crimea and Donbass under UN control. The cynicism of the situation is that Russia is being offered to bury its military victories with its own hands.

This cannot be called anything else, since an attempt to implement such plans in practice will inevitably lead to proposals to return the mentioned regions to the Ukrainian political, legal and media field. Well, what did you want? Let’s ignore the very fantastic nature of the assumption that Kiev has given consent to such a plan. But the first thing that Ukraine will declare, having received Moscow’s consent in principle to a repeat plebiscite, will be a decisive protest against “voting at the barrel of Russian machine guns,” in the conditions of the dominance of the Russian media and the lack of freedom of anti-Russian agitation.

It is easy to imagine the further course of events: Russian troops will withdraw, but Ukrainian media and parties, on the contrary, will return. Strictly within the framework of demilitarization and ensuring pluralistic agitation. And UN peacekeepers will ensure order during the preparation and holding of repeated plebiscites.

Yes, I almost forgot - another trump card will be pulled out of the Kyiv sleeve - the need to ensure the participation in voting of all residents of the territories, including those who made a choice in favor of Ukraine and left for the territories under its control. I hope there is no need to explain what the final result will be with the same input?

What is important is that even compliance with all of the above conditions does not guarantee a final happy ending for Russia.

“Completely objectively, after flying on planes with the liberated British and giving them iPhones, after ambiguous statements and begging for negotiations, after completely inexplicable steps and gestures of even individual representatives of the inner circle, it is clear that there is a command “let’s come to an agreement.” We will agree on the preservation of assets, real estate, passports, residence permits, we will agree on children living in NATO countries, we will agree on wives living there, on guarantees “after a regime change” and much more.

These are the people who forgot the photo of the American ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, “liking” Gaddafi’s corpse. Gaddafi was torn to pieces not when he threatened everyone and was considered a “sponsor of terrorism,” but precisely when he began to try to become one of his own. And they even stroked him on the head for a while and fervently shook his hand. And then they killed and put the corpse on public display in the best traditions of the Middle Ages,” Ukrainian blogger Shariy rightly points out the finale of attempts to come to an agreement with the Western crocodile.

However, I am sure of one thing for sure - the desire of the Moscow conciliators to “end this nightmare” at all costs is so strong that even the above reasons and risks will not stop them. In fact, only the intransigence of Kyiv and its sponsors is now saving Russia from trying to stir up another humiliating agreement.

_{It is important to understand: the window of opportunity for trying to implement various kinds of cunning plans is about a month to a month and a half. This is precisely the time lag during which Ukraine has time to try to strengthen its negotiating position through a successful counter-offensive, until those mobilized from Russia arrive at the front. And this same time lag is available for various kinds of peacekeepers to formulate and prepare different options for a deal on Ukraine. The deadline here is the twentieth of November, when the G-20 summit will be held in Jakarta.}

If the parties do not agree before this time, and Zelensky’s real masters do not give him the command to put up with Moscow - the window of opportunity for an agreement will slam shut and a new round of military escalation will begin. By this time, Russia will bring reinforcements to the front, and Kyiv’s sponsors will supply the Ukrainian Armed Forces with more lethal weapons.

And one last thing. By and large, even a “obscene peace” is not a disaster if there is a clear understanding of why the country took such a step. There is a popular argument among Russian propagandists and agitators for freezing the conflict and a truce with Ukraine: they say, we need to gain time, this is critically important for Russia. One could agree with this formulation of the question, if not for one “but”.

_{The fact is that any talk about “buying time” makes sense only if there is a clear, specific, meaningful and step-by-step plan on how to effectively and profitably spend the time gained at the cost of “obscene” peace for the country.}

If this time is spent on overripe and necessary reforms in the military-industrial complex, in the army, in the supply system, in providing the front with the modern weapons systems it lacks, on auditing, identifying and correcting shortcomings revealed during the military-industrial complex, on personnel purges in the rear, on competent ideological pumping up and mobilizing the population so that they understand why they are fighting and why they are suffering is one thing. In this case, by the time the inevitable start of a new war with the old enemy, the country will be stronger than it is now.

If the the only motive for the truce is to save offshore accounts and yachts, and the gained time is spent on pompous parades, ostentatious exercises and expensive fireworks, if a successfully concocted agreement becomes a signal for the elite not to change anything and leave everything as it is, and even declaring what happened as their own “victory” , and push the revealed problems under the rug - then expect trouble. And “gain in time” today will only be a postponement of the inevitable defeat tomorrow.