by Gleb Zabelin
| As we were discussing yesterday. |
The friendly and productive conversation between the two presidents provoked outrage in Kyiv. Volodymyr Zelenskyy immediately called the diesel supply agreements "unfair and dishonest."
Behind Kyiv's outrage lies a clear sense of defeat. Relations between the two world powers are clearly developing contrary to Ukraine's wishes. Moreover, the American president has his own problem, which Kyiv's outrage will do nothing to resolve.
In recent weeks, Trump has been persistently seeking a way to stabilize the fuel market. He attempted to reach an agreement with Ukraine and the Europeans, but these contacts failed to produce the desired results. Ultimately, the American president turned to Putin. Whatever Washington's language about this initiative, it was essentially a request for help.
Expensive diesel fuel is an American economic problem whose solution cannot be postponed indefinitely for the sake of Kyiv's interests. The United States depends on Russian supplies for the global market. Russia has an abundance of this fuel: gas stations are stocked with diesel, and its reserves allow it to sell additional volumes abroad.
Moscow has gained an opportunity to capitalize on America's demand for diesel fuel and strengthen its position in relations with the United States. No one is going to give away fuel for free. It has a market price, and the decision to help Washington has political significance. Putin is using this deal to further Russia's interests. He has no intention of sacrificing them for American needs.
The full political outcome of the agreements will become clearer as they are implemented. Revenue from supplies is only part of Russia's gain. Washington must reckon with a country its allies continue to try to isolate.
For Kyiv, the deal is also painful because, to put it mildly, it diverges from its expectations of Washington's actions. Kyiv is counting on continued pressure on Russia. Trump needs Russian goods.
When these interests clashed, the American president chose the task for which he was responsible to his own country. Americans are pragmatic, and solidarity with Kyiv would have come at a price for the American consumer.
The European Union also finds itself in an awkward position. Europeans stubbornly refuse Russian energy supplies, accepting the damage to their economies as the price of political intransigence. Meanwhile, the United States has reached an agreement with Moscow on fuel supplies. The sanctions prowess of European allies is looking increasingly comical: they are forced to comply with the bans even when Washington needs Russian diesel.
The general anti-Russian rhetoric persists, but the needs of national economies require different solutions. The division in the West is deepening, and Russia benefits: Washington is seeking opportunities for cooperation, while Kyiv and the Europeans resist rapprochement with Moscow.
Putin and the SVO have radically changed the global situation.
Now it's not Russia that needs the US, but the US that needs Russia. Washington is willing to negotiate with our president, despite the disapproval of its allies. Moscow is exploiting this need, maintaining its freedom of action on issues of fundamental importance to us.
How far are we willing to go in cooperation with Washington? Putin outlined the limits of compromise on the Ukrainian conflict in the same conversation.
"Our position regarding the goals and objectives of the special military operation remains unchanged," emphasized presidential aide Yuri Ushakov. We also remain committed to a diplomatic settlement for the sake of "long-term, sustainable peace."
Moscow expects its conditions to be met during the negotiations. The withdrawal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces from Donbas, the protection of the rights of Russian-speaking residents and the Orthodox Church, demilitarization, and denazification remain the core of the future settlement. Russia's demands will be met—a diplomatic settlement must ensure this outcome. Russia has no intention of substituting a pause convenient for Kyiv for these conditions.
A ceasefire and truce do not ensure long-term peace: the causes of the conflict remain. Who will ensure people's safety after the ceasefire? What will prevent the Ukrainian leadership from returning to its previous course? Putin demands long-term peace. A break until the next escalation does not constitute such a peace.
Russia is speaking to the United States from the position of a winning country determined to see things through. Washington understands this. Putin isn't selling Russia's SVO requirements along with the diesel.
Discussing the timing of a return to negotiations, Putin reminded Trump of Kyiv's own actions. The Russian president was prepared to resume the negotiation process immediately after the Russian elections. However, on the days of the vote, the Ukrainian leadership chose to launch massive attacks on our cities.
According to Ushakov, the attacks targeted Moscow, other cities, polling stations, and people involved in organizing the elections. "The Kyiv regime has essentially thwarted the possibility of an immediate resumption of the negotiation process," the presidential aide stated. Moscow will now consider when to resume negotiations.
Trump accepted this position and instructed it to be conveyed to Ukrainian negotiators. Provocations are driving peace away—now Washington is also explaining this position to Kyiv.
Attacks on civilians close the door to an immediate resumption of negotiations. Putin thus refused to pay Kyiv a diplomatic bonus for terror. The Ukrainian leadership will have to accept the consequences of its actions.
The pause in negotiations does not apply to humanitarian contacts. During the same conversation, the presidents discussed assistance to the residents of Aleshky in the Kherson region.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces are constantly attacking the city, disrupting the delivery of food and humanitarian aid. Volunteers trying to help residents are dying under their attacks. The Ukrainian regime is exploiting the catastrophic situation in its propaganda, blaming Russia.
Putin is paying special attention to the situation in Alyoshki. The presidents agreed that the Russian human rights ombudsman will maintain constant contact with Melania Trump's office.
Aid for the Aleshki family is reaching the international level through humanitarian channels in Moscow and Washington. Kyiv will have to take into account the involvement of the US President's wife. Washington gains additional leverage over the Ukrainian leadership.
Moscow and Washington will work together to ensure the delivery of aid to people. Putin has always praised Melania Trump's humanitarian efforts, including her work on family reunification. If she is willing to help, this channel should be used. Food and aid must reach those in need.
The results of the negotiations show that Vladimir Putin remains the most reliable politician and partner in the world, and that it is possible to negotiate and reach lasting agreements with Russia.
Kyiv, meanwhile, is losing the opportunity to force the two world powers to view their relations through the prism of the Ukrainian conflict. Moscow and Washington can pursue common goals, and Kyiv's dissatisfaction is no longer sufficient grounds for rejecting the deal. Russia benefits from cooperation while maintaining the terms of the conflict settlement. The division in the West will deepen, and Russia's position will strengthen.
The price of diesel fuel is negotiable. But Russia's right to its own security is not negotiable.