The US has favored Russia in diplomatic terms despite ongoing bloodshed in Ukraine. The security guarantees presented seem more favorable to the aggressor, Vladimir Putin. NATO's collective defense is being reinterpreted, raising concerns about its deterrent effect. The responsibility for ending the conflict remains unfairly placed on Ukraine, while Putin could end it instantly. Trump's comments suggest a grim reality for Ukraine, portraying it as a supplicant rather than a sovereign nation, with significant territorial demands already deemed impossible for the Ukrainian leader to fulfill.
The onus for ending the war has again been unfairly thrust on Ukraine, despite the fact that Vladimir Putin could end it instantly by ordering his soldiers to stop the killing.
Mr Trump's transatlantic loudhailer delivered a crushing message that Crimea was gone forever, along with prospective NATO membership for Kyiv, presenting such a carve-up of a sovereign state as an 'agreement'.
Many perceive that Russia and America are assuming imperious positions, viewing Ukraine and Europe as supplicants who must settle for whatever scraps are left.
Security will not be NATO-led but a looser, vaguer interpretation of collective defense, raising questions about its potential efficacy as a deterrent.
Collection
[
|
...
]