Trump’s decision to cancel the summit with Putin is linked to a series of strategic calculations and political pressures that influenced him. Officially, the White House claims that the possibility of a Trump–Putin summit remains open, yet it is evident that the momentum for such a development has now been lost.
(upd) The cancellation of the Budapest Summit by U.S. President Donald Trump, as well as the imposition of new sanctions on Russia, has become a serious and controversial event on the international political scene.
The announcement came after initial assessments suggested that the next Trump–Putin meeting could yield tangible results, given new mutual interests in reaching an agreement.
Instead, Trump chose to withdraw his proposal — a decision seemingly driven by a series of strategic calculations and political pressures.
While the White House officially maintains that a Trump–Putin summit remains possible, it is clear that the momentum for such a development has now dissipated.
Let’s examine the five main reasons behind this dramatic shift in Trump’s policy:
1. A hard-bargaining strategy to push Putin into concessions
Trump appears to be attempting to force the Russian president into making concessions without yielding to the wishes of Volodymyr Zelensky.
While Russia considers full control of the Donbass as the minimum condition for a “frozen” conflict, Trump believes he can compel Putin to accept a ceasefire without first securing that region.
His strategy, though aggressive, suggests that Trump seeks to extract the maximum possible concessions from Russia — something that remains non-negotiable for Putin.
However, Trump’s insistence may become a personal challenge to the Russian leader, fueling a fierce rivalry.
Putin has already warned of devastating retaliatory strikes should Russia be attacked deep within its territory by the U.S. or Ukraine.
2. The intervention of war Hawks changed Trump’s mind – The pivotal role of Rubio
Trump’s announcement came during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, indicating that “war hawks” such as Zelensky, Senator Lindsey Graham, and others continue to exert pressure on him.
The American president is known for his tendency to change his mind, especially when faced with persistent persuasion.
This characteristic inability to maintain firm positions makes him more vulnerable to external influences — a factor that can significantly affect U.S. foreign policy.
Behind the scenes, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio played a decisive role in this shift.
Rubio has made it clear that he supports strong military spending and ongoing investment in America’s defense technology.
Not only has he defended increases in the national defense budget, but he has also backed various weapons programs and contracts aimed at enhancing U.S. military capability.
This approach, however, benefits most from prolonging the war in Ukraine and maintaining European and NATO demand for U.S.-made weaponry.
It is no coincidence that the U.S. stance toward Russia hardened immediately after NATO approved the purchase of $2 billion worth of American arms to be sent to Ukraine.
3. Trump’s belief that escalation won’t spiral out of control
One of the most controversial aspects of Trump’s strategy is his belief that any escalation of tensions between the U.S. and Russia will remain under control.
He reportedly considers Russia strategically weaker than the U.S., and that sufficient pressure will eventually force Putin to back down.
This conviction, though risky, reflects Trump’s determination to pursue maximum leverage for American interests, notes geopolitical analyst Andrew Korybko.
While this assumption could prove dangerously wrong, Trump appears convinced that Putin will not risk a full-blown escalation.
However, this is where the deadly danger lies: Russia may abandon its characteristic strategic restraint and respond forcefully to any provocation.
Signals from Moscow are already deeply alarming, as the Kremlin views any U.S.-driven escalation as an act of war.
4. A divide-and-conquer strategy in Eurasia
Trump’s imposition of new sanctions on Russia seems to serve another strategic purpose: to fracture alliances in Eurasia, particularly the Russia–India–China (RIC) axis.
If Russia becomes unable to export oil to India due to the new sanctions, India could face serious difficulties, thereby weakening the RIC triangle.
On the other hand, Trump may believe that China will seek to exploit this situation to maintain its ties with Moscow, a move that could pressure the U.S. president to reconsider additional tariffs against Beijing.
5. Leveraging China’s non-compliance with sanctions
It is likely that Trump is calculating that China will not comply with the latest sanctions on Russia, as Beijing would have the opportunity to buy Russian oil at deeply discounted prices.
If that happens, Trump’s strategy of sanctioning China while demanding it cut ties with Moscow could backfire, further straining already tense relations with Beijing.
Nevertheless, Trump may see this as an opportunity to intensify his “Asia pivot” policy, aiming to curb China’s regional influence through a more aggressive diplomatic and economic stance.
Trump’s strategy of controlled escalation – The world on a tightrope
Trump’s decision to escalate U.S. policy toward Russia can be understood as part of a calculated strategy; one that assumes Putin will not allow tensions to spiral beyond control, even if he refuses to make major concessions.
At the same time, Washington may view India as the weak link in the emerging Russia–India–China coalition and could seek to pressure New Delhi to distance itself from Moscow, thereby undermining the BRICS alliance.
However, both external pressures and Trump’s internal volatility make American foreign policy highly unpredictable and fraught with uncertainty.
His strategy is not without risks, and the entire Eurasian region remains balanced on a knife’s edge.
www.bankingnews.gr
The announcement came after initial assessments suggested that the next Trump–Putin meeting could yield tangible results, given new mutual interests in reaching an agreement.
Instead, Trump chose to withdraw his proposal — a decision seemingly driven by a series of strategic calculations and political pressures.
While the White House officially maintains that a Trump–Putin summit remains possible, it is clear that the momentum for such a development has now dissipated.
Let’s examine the five main reasons behind this dramatic shift in Trump’s policy:
1. A hard-bargaining strategy to push Putin into concessions
Trump appears to be attempting to force the Russian president into making concessions without yielding to the wishes of Volodymyr Zelensky.
While Russia considers full control of the Donbass as the minimum condition for a “frozen” conflict, Trump believes he can compel Putin to accept a ceasefire without first securing that region.
His strategy, though aggressive, suggests that Trump seeks to extract the maximum possible concessions from Russia — something that remains non-negotiable for Putin.
However, Trump’s insistence may become a personal challenge to the Russian leader, fueling a fierce rivalry.
Putin has already warned of devastating retaliatory strikes should Russia be attacked deep within its territory by the U.S. or Ukraine.
2. The intervention of war Hawks changed Trump’s mind – The pivotal role of Rubio
Trump’s announcement came during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, indicating that “war hawks” such as Zelensky, Senator Lindsey Graham, and others continue to exert pressure on him.
The American president is known for his tendency to change his mind, especially when faced with persistent persuasion.
This characteristic inability to maintain firm positions makes him more vulnerable to external influences — a factor that can significantly affect U.S. foreign policy.
Behind the scenes, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio played a decisive role in this shift.
Rubio has made it clear that he supports strong military spending and ongoing investment in America’s defense technology.
Not only has he defended increases in the national defense budget, but he has also backed various weapons programs and contracts aimed at enhancing U.S. military capability.
This approach, however, benefits most from prolonging the war in Ukraine and maintaining European and NATO demand for U.S.-made weaponry.
It is no coincidence that the U.S. stance toward Russia hardened immediately after NATO approved the purchase of $2 billion worth of American arms to be sent to Ukraine.
3. Trump’s belief that escalation won’t spiral out of control
One of the most controversial aspects of Trump’s strategy is his belief that any escalation of tensions between the U.S. and Russia will remain under control.
He reportedly considers Russia strategically weaker than the U.S., and that sufficient pressure will eventually force Putin to back down.
This conviction, though risky, reflects Trump’s determination to pursue maximum leverage for American interests, notes geopolitical analyst Andrew Korybko.
While this assumption could prove dangerously wrong, Trump appears convinced that Putin will not risk a full-blown escalation.
However, this is where the deadly danger lies: Russia may abandon its characteristic strategic restraint and respond forcefully to any provocation.
Signals from Moscow are already deeply alarming, as the Kremlin views any U.S.-driven escalation as an act of war.
4. A divide-and-conquer strategy in Eurasia
Trump’s imposition of new sanctions on Russia seems to serve another strategic purpose: to fracture alliances in Eurasia, particularly the Russia–India–China (RIC) axis.
If Russia becomes unable to export oil to India due to the new sanctions, India could face serious difficulties, thereby weakening the RIC triangle.
On the other hand, Trump may believe that China will seek to exploit this situation to maintain its ties with Moscow, a move that could pressure the U.S. president to reconsider additional tariffs against Beijing.
5. Leveraging China’s non-compliance with sanctions
It is likely that Trump is calculating that China will not comply with the latest sanctions on Russia, as Beijing would have the opportunity to buy Russian oil at deeply discounted prices.
If that happens, Trump’s strategy of sanctioning China while demanding it cut ties with Moscow could backfire, further straining already tense relations with Beijing.
Nevertheless, Trump may see this as an opportunity to intensify his “Asia pivot” policy, aiming to curb China’s regional influence through a more aggressive diplomatic and economic stance.
Trump’s strategy of controlled escalation – The world on a tightrope
Trump’s decision to escalate U.S. policy toward Russia can be understood as part of a calculated strategy; one that assumes Putin will not allow tensions to spiral beyond control, even if he refuses to make major concessions.
At the same time, Washington may view India as the weak link in the emerging Russia–India–China coalition and could seek to pressure New Delhi to distance itself from Moscow, thereby undermining the BRICS alliance.
However, both external pressures and Trump’s internal volatility make American foreign policy highly unpredictable and fraught with uncertainty.
His strategy is not without risks, and the entire Eurasian region remains balanced on a knife’s edge.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών