RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2025/09/05/america-first-and-dealing-with-a-recalcitrant-putin/

It has now been three weeks since the historic Trump-Putin summit in Alaska, where the two leaders met to discuss how to end the horrific war in Ukraine. President Trump has extended to Putin hospitality, patience, and incredibly generous terms to provide him with an off-ramp to end the war and Russia’s isolation. Despite Trump’s peacemaking efforts, Putin has not only spurned him and continued the war but also attended a showy summit convened by Chinese President Xi Jinping, where Putin expressed his defiance of U.S. peace efforts and flaunted a closer relationship with China and North Korea.

Putin’s recalcitrance requires a robust response from President Trump to promote peace and reaffirm America’s global leadership. This should be a carefully calculated America First policy initiative to pressure Putin to end the war and promote diplomacy while keeping U.S. troops out of Ukraine. Trump also must demand that Europe do much more to pressure Russia to end the war.

Naturally, President Trump’s political opponents and the mainstream media are blaming Trump for Putin’s decision to continue the war. This criticism is unfair. Trump and his senior officials went to great lengths to give Putin an honorable way to halt the war, along with post-war diplomatic and trade opportunities to end Russia’s isolation and bring prosperity to Russia. God gave man free will and the ability to make right and wrong decisions. President Trump is not responsible for Putin’s choice to make the bad and irrational decision to ignore his peace offer and continue the war.

Chinese President Xi hosted a summit meeting of the do-nothing Shanghai Cooperation Organization this week, which Trump’s political opponents and the mainstream media used to attack his foreign policy and Ukraine peace efforts. Photos of Xi, Putin, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi cheerfully greeting each other and holding hands at the summit—along with a massive Chinese military parade—were cited as evidence of a new world order that is arising due to opposition to President Trump’s foreign policy, especially his tariff policy.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21871/trump-putin-win

China will be among a collection of hostile states, which also includes Iran and North Korea, that will be taking a close interest in the outcome of the diplomatic initiative Trump began…

Trump himself has given a clear indication that… the White House is prepared to grant Moscow control over some of Ukraine’s most strategic and resource-rich regions.

Such a deal would not only represent a complete betrayal of the Ukrainian people, who have fought heroically to defend their country from Russian aggression. It would completely undermine the credibility of the Western alliance to defend its interests in the face of unprovoked acts of aggression in Europe.

By far the most likely consequence of Trump agreeing to any sell-out over Ukraine would be to encourage China’s Communist rulers to launch their long-anticipated plan to invade the democratic territory of Taiwan, a move that runs the risk of provoking a major conflict in the Indo-Pacific.

If Trump really wants to end the war in Ukraine and achieve lasting peace, then he should consider reviving his threat to impose punitive sanctions against countries that continue trading with Russia, as well as providing Ukraine immediately with offensive weapons, rather than just defensive ones. Every day of delay is simply being used by Putin to kill more Ukrainian civilians and gain more territory.

Such a move would not only end Putin’s ability to fund his “special military operation” in Ukraine. It would send a clear signal to other autocratic regimes like China, as well as terrorist groups, that the Trump administration will confront acts of aggression, and never reward them.

The most vital fact that US President Donald J. Trump needs to take on board is that Russian President Vladimir Putin has no earthly chance of winning his war in Ukraine — unless, that is, Trump gifts the Russian despot a victory.

China will be among a collection of hostile states, which also includes Iran and North Korea, that will be taking a close interest in the outcome of the diplomatic initiative Trump began with Putin following their face-to-face meeting in Alaska earlier this month, to end the Ukraine conflict.

https://quadrant.org.au/news-opinions/qed/is-anyone-else-pushing-for-peace/

When Ukraine gave up nukes 1994 in exchange for security guarantees, Clinton was in charge. When Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, George W. Bush was in charge. When Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, Obama was in charge. When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, Biden was in charge. See, it is all Trump’s fault.

Andrew Bolt on Monday evening outdid himself. Watch it here if you have a strong stomach. It was the most drawn-out unhinged attack on Trump that I have seen. None of Adam Schiff, Gavin Newsom, Jasmine Crockett, Rashida Tlaib, Maxine Waters or Zohran Mamdani has done it better. What company to keep. But, for the record, Greg Sheridan congratulated him on his magnificent op-ed. Mon Dieu!

Now, to be fair, Bolt is a conservative warrior on climate change, on Israel, and on other things. He is one of the good guys. However, there is evidently something about Putin and Russia, maybe Zelensky, which produces cognitive dissonance in certain susceptible conservative minds. An assessment that Putin is a despotic thug, which is accurate enough, becomes synonymous with waging war by proxy to the last Ukrainian and Russian soldier standing. Recalcitrant, Trump refuses to buy this deadly bill of goods.

Trump has tried and is trying to forge a peace deal. So far without success. Are his critics upset at his failed mediation attempts? Not so much. Clearly, they are much more upset at his reluctance to go all in for Zelensky and a forever war. Seemingly, at whatever cost in blood and treasure, and however much it might lead to a wider bloodier war.

Thus, instead of warmly greeting and rolling out the red carpet for Putin in Alaska, Trump should have shirtfronted the thug or something of the sort. Yet, if the convivial meeting with Putin and the later meeting with European leaders and Zelensky eventually leads to a winding pathway to peace what the heck is there to gripe about? Not to worry. Those of a determined anti-Trump disposition will find something. There is no “conceivable” peace deal that will reflect well on Trump.

Trump knows that if the killing is to stop, the smaller country will have to swallow giving up territory; already mostly lost on the battlefield. Meanwhile, in the make-believe world of his critics, Russia can’t be “rewarded” for its aggression. It would be unjust. A lesson in history would be instructive. Constantinople is now Istanbul. Tibet is China.

I wrote about Israel last week. For some reason the comments section switched to Ukraine. The wars don’t have much in common. At the same time both are plagued with fabulism.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/trump-meets-with-putin-and-tds-monday-morning-quarterbacking/

It’s easy for Trump’s enemies to crow that the president fumbled his meeting with Vladimir Putin. The president didn’t get the cease-fire he wanted, nor deployed the “consequences” he earlier had threatened if Putin’s rejected it––new sanctions on Russia’s oil customers. Moreover, in a Wall Street Journal editorial, the White House allegedly leaked a report that was helpful for Trump’s ever-eager critics fond of slurring him with “appeasement,” and Putin with Hitler-class evil.

The leakers claim that Putin promised during the negotiations that “in return for Donetsk, he’ll stop his assault and won’t invade other countries”–– whether purposely or accidently, a reprise of Hitler’s big lie in 1938 after the Munich fiasco, when he announced, after berating Poland, that it “is the last territorial claim which I have to make in Europe, but it is a claim from which I will not swerve, and which I will satisfy, God willing.” Whether Putin intended to paraphrase Hitler, the similarity is on the nosey for Trumpophobes.

Be that as it may, immediately blustering assaults on Trump’s actions and policies––however dubious such criticisms are––have filled the media with apocalyptic portents of doom that so far haven’t materialized. Take Trump’s policies and bold moves on tariffs. Hysterical predictions of economic disasters from recessions to inflation, rabid bear markets to currency collapses filled the media. Months later, the dire predictions haven’t materialized, while the economy is purring along. Even the Federal Reserve is bruiting a couple of reductions in interest rates this year.

Such predictors of Trump’s disasters are left with blatant lies, or calls of “just wait,” the eternal recourse of failed prognosticators. Of course, with enough time anything can happen. Even a blind squirrel can find an acorn occasionally. But good journalists and commentators don’t rely on future hopes to validate their skills. And as we’ve learned the last several months of Trump’s second administration, the President when negotiating usually has several more tricks up his sleeve that are not obvious to the TDS media desperate to enjoy Trump’s failures.

https://amgreatness.com/2025/08/22/trump-makes-major-progress-in-uphill-battle-for-peace-in-ukraine/

President Trump’s progress in efforts to end the Ukraine war made last week the most important of his second term so far. Trump initiated a previously nonexistent peace process, compelling both sides to consider difficult compromises and unifying Europe behind him.

However, there are two major obstacles to a peace agreement—territory swaps and security guarantees—that will require creative diplomacy by President Trump and his foreign policy team to resolve.

President Trump made significant strides in moving Putin to agree to a deal to end the war during a summit meeting in Alaska on August 15. Although Trump vowed to walk out of the summit and impose “severe consequences” on Russia if he determined Putin was not serious about ending the war, Trump called the summit a success, saying Putin showed sufficient willingness to pursue peace. Not only did Putin appear willing to make new concessions at the summit, but Trump also used it to help repair U.S.-Russia relations, which had deteriorated badly during the Biden administration.

Predictably, the liberal media and the American Left bashed President Trump over the Alaska Summit, claiming it was a failure that amounted to appeasement of Putin. This criticism was quickly disproved after Zelensky and seven European leaders rushed to Washington to consult with Trump on the summit and next steps to get a peace agreement. The European leaders expressed strong support for Trump’s peace efforts at the White House. Just as important, Zelensky exhibited a friendly and cooperative attitude with President Trump.

The Major Obstacles: Land Swaps and Security Guarantees

Land swaps and security guarantees are complex, overlapping issues that are the principal obstacles to a peace deal, assuming Putin actually wants to end the war and does not plan to stymie a settlement with other unreasonable demands.

Ukrainian leaders have adamantly rejected giving up land to end the war. Ukrainian President Zelensky has stated that the Ukrainian constitution prohibits this. However, there is a growing belief by Western leaders and experts that Ukraine will need to accept at least de facto Russian control of Ukrainian areas it has seized and may need to cede some territory to Russia as part of a peace agreement.

Putin reportedly suggested “land swaps” at the summit as part of a peace agreement. Putin proposes that Ukraine swap areas of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine still outside Russian control. Russia has seized about 80% of this region but has been unable to take a heavily fortified area of the Donetsk province in the Donbas. Ukrainian officials regard this as an unacceptable concession because losing the fortified Donetsk region would make it easier for Russian forces to conquer vulnerable areas of the country beyond it.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21851/iranian-strategies-tricks

Iranian leaders have mastered the art of patience, procrastination, and opportunism, waiting for the right moment to strike.

As long as it [Iran’s regime] remains in power, the West, Israel, and moderate Arab allies remain in danger.

For Westerners, negotiations are about compromise and achieving win-win outcomes….. For Iranians, negotiations occur only after one side has already won. The winner dictates the terms; the loser must submit.

From their perspective, there is no such thing as a win-Iranians treat signed agreements as temporary tools, not binding commitments. They may sign documents “to accommodate” others, but rarely intend to honor them. Agreements are stepping stones toward ultimate victory….

While Arabs may directly blame adversaries for wrongdoing, Iranians prefer subtlety, maneuvering opponents into surrender while making them believe they are still in control.

The Iranian message: America submits, Iran dictates.

The only sustainable solution is to support the Iranian people in freeing themselves from their regime.

The threat posed by the Iranian regime is far from over. Iranian leaders have mastered the art of patience, procrastination, and opportunism, waiting for the right moment to strike. Although weakened, the regime is not mortally wounded. As long as it remains in power, the West, Israel and moderate Arab allies remain in danger.

Iran’s leadership consistently probes and tests its adversaries, convinced that time and persistence will eventually deliver victory. The way Iranian and Western leaders understand negotiations reflects this difference in worldview.

For Westerners, negotiations are about compromise and achieving win-win outcomes. Each side gains something, and both leave the table stronger. For Iranians, negotiations occur only after one side has already won. The winner dictates the terms; the loser must submit.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21848/negotiating-with-russia-evil

Rubio, talking about the war in Ukraine, completely missed the fundamental issue: Should the United States be trying to reach a deal in the first place?

The answer is no: The U.S. should not be trying to broker any settlement with Russian President Vladimir Putin, a mass-murdering, genocide-committing aggressor.

No one wants to see more people die, but trying to end this war by agreement will ultimately make the world less safe.

Did the U.S. try to reach a “deal” with the Third Reich? How about Imperial Japan?

A “deal” with aggressors always opens the door to more aggression.

“We don’t negotiate with evil; we defeat it.” — Vice President Dick Cheney, reportedly spoken in 2003.

“The only way to reach a deal on anything, whether it’s in business or in politics or in geopolitics, the only way to reach a deal is for each side to get something and each side to give something,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NBC’s Kristen Welker on Meet the Press on August 17.

Rubio, talking about the war in Ukraine, completely missed the fundamental issue: Should the United States be trying to reach a deal in the first place?

The answer is no: The U.S. should not be trying to broker any settlement with Russian President Vladimir Putin, a mass-murdering, genocide-committing aggressor.

Rubio should heed his own words. “This guy lies, habitually lies,” the then senator said in March 2022 about the Russian leader.

https://amgreatness.com/2025/08/18/putin-trump-and-the-elusive-peace/

At the August 15 Alaska summit, Vladimir Putin performed as expected. He desperately wants an end to Western sanctions, détente with the U.S., and assurances that the U.S. will not impose a disastrous anti-Russian secondary boycott—and, apparently, some additional Ukrainian territory.

Consequently, Putin, in his media synopsis, talked more about restored friendship with a “neighborly” United States under Trump. He scarcely mentioned Ukraine directly—other than to imply to Westerners that he seeks not merely to annex a foreign country, but to reclaim what he views as a former Soviet province with ancient ties to the Russian people.

Trump did not get his ceasefire with Putin. But he quickly pivoted to remind us that the table is set for a supposedly comprehensive peace without first requiring a temporary cessation of arms.

Trump addressed the media more succinctly and with greater discretion than Putin, appearing more optimistic that the Russian-American hostility was thawing. And he views normalization as a necessary step toward comprehensive peace in the weeks to come.

The left lambasted Trump for speaking politely of Putin and vice versa. There was additional criticism of a Fox interview in which Trump mentioned “land swaps” and for his supposed prior naïveté in believing he could obtain a ceasefire with Putin.

Yet for all the posturing, we have known for some time the general outlines of a peace, how it could come about, and why it has not yet happened.

Ukraine will not join NATO, but will likely be fully armed by the West. Ukraine lacks the power to retake Crimea or the Donbass, but with Western aid, it can preserve most of its territory.