US foreign policy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Putin ready to make Ukraine deal, Trump says before Alaska summit

      by

      Donald Trump has said he believes Vladimir Putin is ready to make a deal on the war in Ukraine as the two leaders prepare for their summit in Alaska on Friday, but his suggestion the Russian leader and Volodymyr Zelenskyy could “divvy things up” may alarm some in Kyiv.The US president implied there was a 75% chance of the Alaska meeting succeeding, and that the threat of economic sanctions may have made Putin more willing to seek an end to the war.Trump insisted that he would not let Putin get the better of him in Friday’s meeting, telling reporters: “I am president, and he’s not going to mess around with me.“I’ll know within the first two minutes, three minutes, four minutes or five minutes … whether or not we’re going to have a good meeting or a bad meeting.“And if it’s a bad meeting, it’ll end very quickly, and if it’s a good meeting, we’re going to end up getting peace in the pretty near future,” said Trump.He also said a second meeting – not yet confirmed – between him, Putin and Zelenskyy would be the more decisive.“The second meeting is going to be very, very important, because that’s going to be a meeting where they make a deal. And I don’t want to use the word ‘divvy’ things up, but you know, to a certain extent, it’s not a bad term, OK?” Trump told Fox News Radio.He was referring to the possibility that Zelenskyy will have to accept “land swaps” – in practice the handing over of Ukrainian territory to Russia, potentially including some not captured by Moscow.Later on Thursday, Trump suggested that any second, trilateral meeting could happen quickly – and possibly take place in Alaska.“Tomorrow, all I want to do is set the table for the next meeting, which should happen shortly,” he said. “I’d like to see it actually happen, maybe in Alaska.”Any such meeting would be a concession by Putin since he refuses to recognise Zelenskyy as the legitimate leader of Ukraine.Trump conceded he was unsure whether an immediate ceasefire could be achieved, but expressed interest in brokering a peace agreement. On Putin, he said: “I believe now, he’s convinced that he’s going to make a deal. I think he’s going to, and we’re going to find out.”Zelenskyy will face a difficult choice if Putin rejects Ukraine’s call for a full 30-day ceasefire and offers only a partial break in the fighting, particularly if Trump thinks a three-way meeting should still go ahead.The Ukrainian president spent much of Thursday in London discussing Wednesday’s video call between European leaders and Trump with the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer. European leaders were largely relieved with the way the conversation went, but know Trump is unpredictable and prone to acting on instinct, rather than sticking to a script.View image in fullscreenThe US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, said changes on the battlefield could make peace harder. “To achieve a peace, I think we all recognise that there’ll have to be some conversation about security guarantees,” he said.Trump has rejected offering such guarantees before, but it is possible European security guarantees could be agreed. Rubio said he believed Trump had spoken by phone to Putin four times and “felt it was important to now speak to him in person and look him in the eye and figure out what was possible and what isn’t”.Starmer and Zelenskyy met in Downing Street for breakfast on Thursday and hailed “a visible chance for peace” as long as Putin proved he was serious about ending the war.European leaders emerged from Wednesday’s meeting reassured that Trump was going into his summit focused on extracting Putin’s commitment to a durable ceasefire and was not seeking to negotiate over Ukraine’s head.The plan for Trump and Putin to hold a joint press conference after their talks suggests the White House is optimistic the summit will bring about a breakthrough. Moscow is determined that the summit should not just focus on Ukraine but also agree steps to restart US-Russian economic cooperation.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn a brief summary of the Downing Street meeting, British officials said Zelenskyy and Starmer expressed cautious optimism about a truce “as long as Putin takes action to prove he is serious” about peace. In a separate statement, Zelenskyy said there had been discussions about the security guarantees required to make any deal “truly durable if the United States succeeds in pressing Russia to stop the killing”.On Wednesday Starmer co-chaired a virtual meeting of the “coalition of the willing” – a European-led effort to send a peacekeeping force to Ukraine to enforce any deal – where he said there was a “viable” chance of a truce.On Thursday the prime minister gave Zelenskyy a bear hug in the street outside the door to No 10 in a symbol of continuing British solidarity with the Ukrainian cause. Similar public displays of solidarity followed the disastrous February meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy, when the two leaders quarrelled in front of the cameras in the White House.View image in fullscreenFurther sanctions could be imposed on Russia should the Kremlin fail to engage, and Starmer said the UK was already working on its next package of measures targeting Moscow.Trump has frequently said he will know if he can achieve peace in Ukraine only by meeting Putin personally. He sets great faith in his personal relationship with the Russian leader, but on Wednesday he played down expectations of what he could do to persuade Putin to relent. At the same time he warned there would be “very severe consequences” for Russia if Putin did not agree to a ceasefire, a veiled threat to increase US sanctions on Russian oil exports.He has so far held off from imposing such economic pressure on Russia, but by the end of the month the US is due to impose additional tariffs on Indian imports into the US as a punishment for India continuing to buy Russian oil.The UK would like to see the US consider other, more targeted sanctions, either on the so-called shadow fleet of Russian oil tankers or on refineries that use Russian oil. But Moscow briefed that the Alaska summit, far from leading to extra economic pressure on the Russian economy, would instead include discussion and agreements on new US-Russian economic cooperation, a step that would relieve the pressure on Russian state finances.Some European leaders took heart from the detailed grasp of the issues shown on the call by the US vice-president, JD Vance, and by hints that Trump could be willing to contribute US assets to a European-led security guarantee for Ukraine in the event of a peace agreement.The Alaska summit, due to start at 11.30am local time (2030 BST), will include a one-to-one meeting between Trump and Putin, with interpreters, then a wider meeting.The Russian delegation will include the foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov; the defence minister, Andrei Belousov; the finance minister, Anton Siluanov; the head of the Russian sovereign wealth fund, Kirill Dmitriev; and Putin’s foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov. More

    • 63 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      The Trump-Putin summit – podcast

      by

      Last Friday, after weeks of speculation, Ukraine’s worst fears were confirmed: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin were going to meet to discuss the future of Ukraine … and Volodymyr Zelenskyy was not invited.With the summit between the two presidents set for Alaska on Friday, the Guardian’s central and eastern European correspondent Shaun Walker reports on what we know so far.What might a ceasefire deal negotiated between Russia and the US look like, how might it ever be enforced, and what do Ukrainians think about this meeting?The former British ambassador to Russia Laurie Bristow tells Lucy Hough what it is like to negotiate with Putin and whether he believes a lasting peace in Ukraine is possible. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump nominates ex-Fox commentator Tammy Bruce for deputy UN ambassador

      by

      Donald Trump said on Saturday he was nominating Tammy Bruce, the state department spokesperson, as the next US deputy representative to the United Nations, which would make the former Fox News commentator an ambassador.The president made the announcement on Truth Social, where he praised Bruce as a “Great Patriot, Television Personality, and Bestselling Author”.She has been serving as the chief spokesperson for the state department since Trump took office this year.Trump said Bruce, who had no prior foreign policy experience before being named state department spokesperson in January, “will represent our Country brilliantly at the United Nations”.Bruce is a former radio host who was a commentator on Fox News for more than 20 years, where she also served as an occasional guest host of Trump favorite Sean Hannity’s show. She served as the president of the National Organization for Women’s Los Angeles chapter from 1990 to 1996. Before her political conversion to conservatism, she hosted a radio show where her outspoken views were broadcast widely on Los Angeles station KFI, and she was one of the few radio commentators representing the progressive movement at that time.Bruce was fired from her radio job after she vocally protested OJ Simpson’s 1995 acquittal and later became a critic of progressive feminism.She rose to national prominence thanks to her conservative TV appearances and writing. In 2002, Bruce published her book The New Thought Police, in which she claimed to “expose the dangerous rise of Left-wing McCarthyism”. She was also briefly a contributor to the Guardian’s opinion pages.Bruce, a lesbian who was given an award by the Log Cabin Republicans at a Mar-a-Lago gala in 2022, has been outspoken in her opposition to transgender rights. She has shared articles that spread misinformation about the trans community, including pieces featuring anti-trans “detransitioner” activist Chloe Cole.As a spokesperson, she has defended the Trump administration’s foreign policy decisions, ranging from its mass deportation policies to its handling of the ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza, which Trump had promised on the campaign trail he would quickly end.If Bruce is confirmed by the Republican-controlled Senate, she could be in post before the man nominated to be her boss, Mike Waltz. The former national security adviser’s Senate confirmation for US ambassador to the UN has reportedly been stalled by Rand Paul, the Kentucky Republican who clashed with Waltz over his prior support for keeping US troops in Afghanistan. More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump administration doubles reward for arrest of Venezuela’s president to $50m

      by

      The Trump administration is doubling to $50m a reward for the arrest of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, accusing him of being one of the world’s largest narcotraffickers and working with cartels to flood the US with fentanyl-laced cocaine.“Under President Trump’s leadership, Maduro will not escape justice and he will be held accountable for his despicable crimes,” Pam Bondi, the attorney general, said on Thursday in a video statement announcing the reward.Maduro was indicted in Manhattan federal court in 2020, during the first Trump presidency, along with several close allies on federal charges of narcoterrorism and conspiracy to import cocaine. At the time, the US offered a $15m reward for his arrest. That was later raised by the Biden administration to $25m – the same amount the US offered for the capture of Osama bin Laden in 2001, after the September 11attacks.Despite the big bounty, Maduro remains entrenched after defying the US, the European Union and several Latin American governments who condemned his 2024 reelection as a sham and recognized his opponent as Venezuela’s duly elected president.Last month, the Trump administration struck a deal to secure the release of 10 Americans jailed in Caracas in exchange for Venezuela getting home scores of migrants deported by the United States to El Salvador under the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. Shortly after, the White House reversed course and allowed US oil producer Chevron to resume drilling in Venezuela after it was previously blocked by US sanctions.The prisoner swap sparked controversy, as one of the Americans freed in the exchange is an ex-US soldier who was convicted of killing three people in Spain in 2016. Dahud Hanid Ortiz, found guilty in Venezuela last year, was flown to Texas alongside the other nine freed Americans, whom rights groups had deemed “political prisoners”.Bondi said the justice department has seized more than $700m in assets linked to Maduro, including two private jets, and said 7m tons of seized cocaine had been traced directly to the leftist leader.Maduro’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.In her announcement, Bondi repeated claims linking Maduro to Tren de Aragua (TdA), the Venezuelan gang, saying: “Maduro uses foreign terrorist organizations like TdA … to bring deadly violence to our country … He is one of the largest narcotraffickers in the world and a threat to our national security.”Some experts have cast doubts on the Trump administration’s claims that TdA is “invading America”. The narrative that TdA is a state-sponsored terrorist group wreaking havoc on the US has been used to fuel the president’s aggressive and broad attacks on Venezuelan immigrants, with policies that advocates say have trampled on people’s due-process rights. In one high-profile case, Andry José Hernández Romero, a gay asylum seeker, was expelled to El Salvador after the US claimed his tattoos were proof he was a TdA member and “security threat”.Experts have noted that the Venezuelan government had previously protected TdA, but it was unlikely the gang was acting “at the direction” of the Maduro regime, as the White House has claimed.The Washington Post reported in April that a National Intelligence Council assessment concluded there were some low-level contacts between the Maduro government and TdA, but said the gang was not commanded by Venezuela’s leader.The Associated Press contributed reporting. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Durham disclosures further undermine Gabbard’s claims of plot against Trump

      by

      Tulsi Gabbard, the director of US national intelligence, hoped to uncover evidence that Barack Obama and his national security team conspired to undermine Donald Trump in a slow-motion coup.But if her crusade was aimed at proving that Obama embarked on a “treasonous conspiracy” to falsely show that Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential election to help Trump, Gabbard made a mistake. A previously classified annexe to a report by another special counsel, John Durham – appointed towards the end of Trump’s first presidency – has further undermined Gabbard’s case.It was a quixotic enterprise from the start.After all, the 2019 report from Robert Mueller, the original special counsel appointed to investigate the Russia allegations, and a bipartisan five-volume report the following year from the Senate intelligence committee – then chaired by Marco Rubio, now Trump’s secretary of state – both affirmed the offending January 2017 intelligence community assessment, which expressed “high confidence” in Russian interference.Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, seemed to validate the intelligence’s premise in 2018 when, standing beside Trump at a news conference in Helsinki, he admitted wanting him to win.The newly unclassified 29-page document from Durham, made public this week, contains a deflating conclusion for Gabbard. It confirms that Russian spies were behind the emails that were originally released as the result of a Russian cyber-hack of internal Democratic information channels and which Trump supporters believed showed the campaign of Hillary Clinton, his 2016 opponent, conspiring to accuse him of colluding with Moscow.“The office’s best assessment is that the July 25 and July 27 emails that purport to be from Benardo were ultimately a composite of several emails that were obtained through Russian intelligence hacking of the US-based thinktanks,” Durham writes. He is referring to Leonard Benardo, of the Open Society Foundation, funded by George Soros, a philanthropist and bete noire of Trump’s Maga base.One of the emails purportedly from Benardo proposes a plan “to demonize Putin and Trump” and adds: “Later the FBI will put more oil on the fire.”That message and others, including from a Clinton foreign policy aide, Julianne Smith, became part of the so-called “Clinton Plan intelligence”. Benardo and Smith disputed ever writing such emails.In his 2023 report annexe, released on Thursday in heavily redacted form, Durham at least upholds Benardo’s disavowal – concluding that it has been cobbled together from other individuals’ emails to produce something more incriminating than the actuality.For Gabbard, who is feverishly trying to prove the existence of a “deep state” determined to sabotage Trump, emails suspected to have been confected by Russia is hardly a brilliant look in her evidence package.Some former intelligence insiders find that unsurprising – dismissing the idea as a Trump-inspired fiction. “Trump is lying when he speaks of a ‘deep state’,” said Fulton Armstrong, a retired CIA analyst who served under Democratic and Republican administrations. “But if there were one, it would not be Democrat. The culture of that world is deeply Republican.”The national intelligence director – who has never served in the intelligence services or sat on its eponymous congressional committee when she was in the House of Representatives – is likely to see Durham’s finding as immaterial to her quest to put Obama officials on trial for “manufacturing” intelligence.But Gabbard’s insistence – echoing her boss’s view – on the existence of a plot to torpedo Trump was dismissed on Friday by John Brennan, the CIA director under Obama, who told the New Yorker that Obama issued instructions that intelligence showing Russian meddling to be kept hush-hush, at least until polling day, to ensure a fair election.“He made very clear to us [that] he wanted us to try to uncover everything the Russians were doing, but also not to do anything that would in any way interfere in the election,” Brennan said.Gabbard has cited a 2020 House of Representatives intelligence committee report – endorsed only by its Republican members – challenging the assertion that Putin wanted to Trump to win.However, Michael Van Landingham, one of the CIA authors of the 2017 intelligence assessment now in her crosshairs, said credible intelligence cast the Russian leader’s motives in an unambiguous light.“The primary evidence to get to Putin’s mindset was a clandestine source that said, essentially, when Putin realized that Clinton would win the election, he ordered an influence campaign against Hillary Clinton,” Van Landingham told PBS News Hour.“Then we saw a series of events that happened with the hacked US materials by the Russian special services or intelligence services to leak those materials similar to the information a clandestine source had provided. At the same time, we saw lots of members of the Russian media portraying Donald Trump in a more positive light.“There was other information … collected by the US intelligence community … over time, having a high-quality, clandestine source telling you that Putin was counting on Trump’s victory, having members of the Russian state saying Trump would be better to work with because of his views on Russia that don’t represent the US establishment, all of those things gave us high confidence that Putin wanted Trump to win.” More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Travelling to Trump’s US is a low-level trauma – here’s what Africans can do about it

      by

      Hello and welcome to The Long Wave. This week, I reflect on the increasing difficulty of travel and immigration for many from the African continent, and how one country is plotting a smoother path.Parallel experiences of travelView image in fullscreenI have just come back from holiday, and I’m still not used to how different travel is when not using an African passport. My British citizenship, which I acquired about five years ago, has transformed not only my ability to travel at short notice but it has eliminated overnight the intense stress and bureaucratic hurdles involved in applying for visas on my Sudanese passport.It is difficult to explain just how different the lives of those with “powerful” passports are to those without. It is an entirely parallel existence. Gaining permission to travel to many destinations is often a lengthy, expensive and sickeningly uncertain process. A tourist visa to the UK can cost up to £1,000, in addition to the fee for private processing centres that handle much of Europe’s visa applications abroad. And then there is the paperwork: bank statements, employment letters, academic records, certified proof of ownership of assets, and birth and marriage certificates if one is travelling to visit family. This is a non-exhaustive list. For a recent visa application for a family member, I submitted 32 documents.It may sound dramatic but such processes instil a sort of low-level trauma, after submitting to the violation of what feels like a bureaucratic cavity search. And all fees, whatever the decision, are non-refundable. Processing times are in the hands of the visa gods – it once took more than six months for me to receive a US visa. By the time it arrived, the meeting I needed to attend for work had passed by a comically long time.Separation and severed relationshipsView image in fullscreenIt’s not only travel for work or holiday that is hindered by such high barriers to entry. Relationships suffer. It is simply a feature of the world now that many families in the Black diaspora sprawl across continents. Last month Trump restricted entry to the US to nationals from 20 countries, half of which are in Africa. The decision is even crueler when you consider that it applies to countries such as Sudan, whose civil war has prompted many to seek refuge with family abroad.That is not just a political act of limiting immigration, it is a deeply personal one that severs connections between families, friends and partners. Family members of refugees from those countries have also been banned, so they can’t visit relatives who have already managed to emigrate. The International Rescue Committee warned the decision could have “far-reaching impacts on the lives of many American families, including refugees, asylees and green card holders, seeking to be reunified with their loved ones”.A global raising of barriersView image in fullscreenThe fallout of this Trump order is colossal. There are students who are unable to graduate. Spouses unable to join their partners. Children separated from their parents. It’s a severe policy, but shades of it exist elsewhere by other means. The UK recently terminated the rights of foreign care workers and most international students to bring their children and partners to the country. And even for those who simply want to have their family visit them, access is closed to all except those who can clear the high financial hurdles and meet the significant burdens of proof to show that either they can afford to maintain their visitors or that they will return to their home countries.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt was 10 years before I – someone with fairly stable employment and a higher-education qualification – satisfied the Home Office’s requirements and could finally invite my mother to visit. I broke down when I saw her face at arrivals, realising how hard it had been for both of us; the fact that she had not seen the life I had built as an adult. Compare this draconian measure to some countries in the Gulf, such as Saudi Arabia, that have an actual visa category, low-cost and swiftly processed, for parental visits and residency.A new African modelView image in fullscreenBut as some countries shut down, others are opening up. This month, Kenya removed visa requirements for almost all African citizens wanting to visit. Here, finally, there is the sort of regional solidarity that mirrors that of the EU and other western countries.Since it boosts African tourism and makes Kenya an inviting destination for people to gather at short notice for professional or festive reasons, it’s a smart move. But it also sends an important signal to a continent embattled by visa restrictions and divided across borders set by colonial rule.We are not just liabilities, people to be judged on how many resources they might take from a country once allowed in. We are also tourists, friends, relatives, entrepreneurs and, above all, Africans who have the right to meet and mingle without the terror, and yes, contempt, of a suspicious visa process. If the African diaspora is being separated abroad, there is at least now a path to the option that some of us may reunite at home.

      To receive the complete version of The Long Wave in your inbox every Wednesday,please subscribe here. More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s shift on Ukraine has been dramatic – but will it change the war? | Rajan Menon

      by

      Donald Trump presents himself as a peerless president, an unrivaled negotiator, even a “genius”. So it’s a unique moment when he comes close – I emphasize the qualifier –to conceding that another leader has outfoxed him. Trump suggested as much recently when characterizing Vladimir Putin’s modus operandi. “Putin,” he told reporters on 13 July, “really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then bombs everybody in the evening.” Melania Trump may have contributed to this reassessment. As Trump recounted recently, when he told her about a “wonderful conversation” with the Russian leader, she responded, “Oh, really? Another city was just hit.”Trump’s new take on Putin is a break with the past. His esteem for Putin – whose decisions he has described as “savvy” and “genius” – has contrasted starkly with his derisive comments about the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whom he memorably disrespected during a White House meeting and even blamed for starting the war.As recently as February, he declared that Russia’s invasion didn’t matter to the United States because, unlike Europe, it was separated from Ukraine by “a big, big beautiful ocean”. He criticized Joe Biden’s assistance to Ukraine as a waste of taxpayers’ money.Now, Trump has not only changed his view of Putin, stunning many within his “America First” MagaA movement; he’s decided to start arming Ukraine. Well, sort of.Trump has gone beyond in effect conceding that Putin has played him. He has decided to sell military equipment to individual European countries so that they can supply Ukraine and restock their arsenals with purchases from the United States. The president formally announced the change during his 14 July meeting with Mark Rutte, Nato’s secretary general.There was more. Trump warned Putin that if he did not accept a ceasefire – which he has steadfastly refused, just as he has ignored Trump’s demand to stop bombing Ukraine’s cities – within 50 days, Russia would be slammed with tariffs as high as 100%, as would countries that continued to trade with it after the deadline.Two things are clear. First, Trump’s perspective on Putin has changed, unexpectedly and dramatically. Second, a war that Trump once said was none of America’s business now apparently matters. The president said European countries would buy “top of the line” American military equipment worth “billions of dollars” to arm Ukraine. According to one report citing “a source familiar with the plan”, the total will be $10bn.This all sounds like a very big deal. But here’s where it becomes important to go beyond the headlines and soundbites and delve into the details.Take the $10bn figure. That’s certainly not chump change. Moreover, the main piece of equipment specified so far, the Patriot “long range, high altitude, all weather” missile defense system, will provide desperately needed relief to Ukrainian city dwellers, who have endured relentless waves of drone attacks – several hundred a night – followed by missiles that slice through overwhelmed defenses. Ukraine has some Patriots but needs more: it’s a vast country with a dozen cities whose populations exceed 400,000.However, a Patriot battery (launchers, missiles, a radar system, a control center, antenna masts, and a power generator) costs $1bn, the missiles alone $4m apiece. Ukraine may not need 10 Patriot batteries, but even a smaller number will consume a large proportion of the $10bn package. The other system that has been mentioned is the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (Jassm), which combines stealth technology and GPS guidance with a 230-mile range. Ukraine will be able to use its American-made F-16 jets to fire Jassms into Russia from positions beyond the reach of Russian air defense systems. But a single Jassm costs about $1.5m, so the costs will add up quickly. Additional items have been mentioned but only generically; still, their price must also be figured in, bearing in mind that the war could drag on. So, $10bn could be depleted quickly.Moreover, beyond a certain point the US cannot sell equipment from its own stocks without regard to its military readiness requirements. Precisely for that reason, the defense department recently declined to send Ukraine some of the equipment promised under Joe Biden.And Trump has not said that there will be follow-on sales to benefit Ukraine once the $10bn mark is reached. Even if he were to change his mind, individual European countries would be able to buy only so much American weaponry without straining their finances, especially because France and Italy have opted out of the arrangement. Trump has been uninterested in joining the recent move by the UK and the EU to impose a $47.60 per barrel price cap on Russian oil sales, toughening the $60 limit the west enacted in 2022. Finally, Trump isn’t going to resume Biden’s multibillion-dollar military assistance packages – 70-plus tranches of equipment, according to the DoD.Trump’s 50-day tariff deadline permits Putin to continue his summer offensive, and may even provide an incentive to accelerate it. Russia has already shrugged off Trump’s tariff threat. Its exports to the US in 2024 amounted to $526m, a tiny fraction of its global sales.By contrast, Trump’s secondary tariffs will hurt Russia, which earned $192bn in 2024 from its global exports of oil and related products, much of that sum from India and China. If the president follows through with his threat, Beijing will surely retaliate, and the consequence will be painful: the United States exports to China totaled $144bn last year. Will Trump proceed anyway, and during his ongoing trade wars, which have already started increasing prices in the US? His track record on tariff threats leaves room for doubt.Ukraine’s leaders are understandably elated by Trump’s reappraisal of Putin. But it’s premature to conclude that it’s a turning point that could change the war’s trajectory. Washington’s new policy may prove far less momentous than Maga critics fear and not quite as transformative as Kyiv and its western supporters hope for.

      Rajan Menon is a professor emeritus of international relations at the City College of New York and a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies More