Trump Will Get Played By Putin Again
Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin will meet for first time at the G20 summit in Hamburg on July 7 and 8. While few oppose the two leaders meeting face to face, the meeting itself carries serious risks, especially as National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster claimed on Thursday that the administration has “ no specific agenda ” for the meeting. Putin does have an agenda, though.
According to European intelligence sources Putin believes he can get concessions on sanctions by promising Trump cooperation in Syria. Trump, who has expressed admiration for Putin’s leadership style and refused to criticize him, clearly wants to show he can do something past presidents couldn’t: strengthen and stabilize the U.S.-Russia relationship without getting played. The problem, of course, is that for months the United States has been getting played. After interfering in the U.S. election last fall and experiencing little more than a rhetorical slap on the wrist, Putin’s takeaway is simple: Russia’s aggressive actions such disinformation campaigns, buzzing U.S. ships and planes, energy coercion, and hacking carry no consequences. And if Trump and his White House team don’t come up with a plan fast, the United States will get played once again when the two leaders meet next week. Trump needs both a strategy and a message.
The first message Trump needs to send to Putin should be one of transatlantic resolve, and he can do that during his stop in Poland, which will proceed his meeting with Putin in Hamburg. In Warsaw, Trump can reassure skittish allies and showcase transatlantic unity by reaffirming his commitment to transatlantic values, NATO’s Article 5 , and enhanced deterrence. In his speech there, Trump should stress that, while we sometimes have differences with our allies over issues like defense spending, we will not tolerate Russia’s attempts to undermine our democratic systems and divide Europe from the United States. Putin has no doubt enjoyed watching the transatlantic partners spend months wringing their hands over the future of the relationship as Trump’s views on Europe and Russia have remained vague. Putin needs to see and hear from Trump personally that the ties that bind the two sides of the Atlantic are as strong as ever.
After the visit to Poland, when Trump finally sits down with Putin in Hamburg, he should open by stating unequivocally that while the United States values engagement with Russia, it is not prepared to make trades, particularly over the heads of U.S. allies and partners. In other words, the United States will not trade cooperation in Syria for the lifting of sanctions, especially after Russia recently threatened to shoot down anything “ west of the Euphrates ,” including U.S. jets. Trump should remind Putin that U.S.-Russia cooperation in Syria is in everyone’s interest — Moscow included — and that alone should drive our efforts to diffuse tensions between our two countries and work towards a long-term solution in Syria.
Putin will use the meeting to plug all of the amazing things Russia can do to help Trump achieve his goals in defeating the Islamic State. Trump shouldn’t believe him. Why? Experience shows that Putin often promises his counterparts the moon and consistently under delivers. Remember when Putin pledged his cooperation in Syria when he met with President Barack Obama at the U.N. in the fall of 2015? Russia launched its first strikes in Syria just days later.
Trump should also view Putin’s pledges of support with some skepticism because it’s not clear what Russia even brings to the fight. Putin can offer more air power but that isn’t what the United States needs. More troubling, Russia’s partners in the Syrian conflict (Assad and the Iranians) and its rules of engagement (or lack thereof) put Moscow and Washington on opposing sides both geostrategically and tactically. That doesn’t mean Trump and Putin should avoid talking about Syria. It just means Trump should proceed with extreme caution, and he shouldn’t exchange anything — especially those two Russian compounds the U.S. government seized last fall — for loose pledges of support.
In addition to Syria, the two leaders need to discuss Russia’s increasingly aggressive use of asymmetric tactics like hacking and disinformation campaigns. Trump could take a page from French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent visit with Putin and challenge him (publicly or privately) on Russia’s efforts to undermine U.S. democratic institutions. Trump should make clear that we know these attacks often stem directly from the Russian government and that they won’t be tolerated. In the week before the two leaders meet, Trump’s team should make a list of concrete actions that the United States will take if such behavior continues. Given the severity of the threat, this subject requires far more than a “cut it out.”
There are plenty of other issues to cover, which again, makes it surprising that McMaster said that the Trump team doesn’t have much of an agenda. The two leaders should talk about extending New START, instability in the Balkans, the INF Treaty, and how to take risk-reduction steps. Sam Nunn, Igor Ivanov, Des Browne, and Wolfgang Ischinger in a recent letter to Trump suggested the two countries also create a NATO-Russia Military Crisis Management Group. Whatever the two leaders discuss, it is important that Trump seek input and advice from some of our closest Europeans allies, many of whom he will see in Hamburg before he sees Putin.
This first meeting between Trump and Russia will be hugely consequential for future of the U.S.-Russia relationship as well as the wider transatlantic community. It will also tell us a lot about how this administration plans to deal with authoritarian leaders in the future. That’s why it’s important to get it right. Trump needs to come to this meeting prepared, well-informed, and armed with ideas and countermeasures. If he ignores the advice of his very capable Russia hands and decides instead to rely on his “good brain,” the results could be disastrous. Putin brings decades of experience to this meeting and is coming to the table with a plan. We need one too.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/05/no-specific-agenda-means-trump-will-get-played-by-putin-again/
Tags
Who is online
109 visitors
The article makes a LOT of sense. I predict Trump will follow little, if any of it.
Since your link to the original source is non functional, I question your use of headline for this seed. I demand you prove that is the real headline and not some made up flame based click bait on your part.
This being the link:
My guess is that the full headline of the article is:
"No Specific Agenda Means Trump Will Get Played by Putin Again"
I would venture to say that John has posted only that part of the actual headline in order to mislead NT by not including the "cause" for the balance. Nice trick, John.
Didn't we just see a ''conservative'' post a title that was completely false and it had to be changed.
Yes we did.
So it was changed? Then do you feel this one should be changed to provide the original wording as well?
As I said to XX, if anyone believe that there is a problem with the title, report it to Perrie.
You didn't answer my question.
Dropping the "No Specific Agenda Means" from the original title, isn't changing the article title sufficiently to contradict or mislead the reader to the content.
I don't agree. IMO dropping the introductory phrase that modifies the balance of the title emphasises beyond the intention of the author that Trump is playable by Putin.
Buzz, if anything, by dropping the first part, hurts his point, since IMHO, not having a plan is actually worse than just getting fooled. It's a double whammy. But in any case, he didn't change the name of the title enough to change the meaning of the content. That is what the clause in the CoC is meant to cover and in fact, I have made John and others fix titles that don't meet that criteria.
They have become accustomed to having Obama tell the world what they are going to do, when they are going to do it, where they're going to do it and when they are going to stop.
Maybe it's time to start dealing the cards with the face down for a change. I've found it works better that way and gives you a lot better chance to win the hand.
I don't agree. IMO dropping the introductory phrase that modifies the balance of the title emphasises beyond the intention of the author that Trump is playable by Putin.
Stop bowing to Trump. It is pathetic.
Says the guy that spent eight years brown nosing Obama.
I don't give a shit about Trump - you know damn well he's no skin off my teeth. However, I LOVE being Devil's Advocate to your profound hatred of him. You're so obsessed I enjoy poking taking shots at your obsession.
Buzz, Trump is not qualified to be president of the United States. Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]
You mean like a conservative just did a day or so ago XX.
If you can prove that the headline is made up, report it and quit whining.
Never. It's a liberal fantasy.
Indeed it is. Since Trump now represents us in dealing with foreign powers, one must wonder if our progressive friends are rooting for Putin to play Trump against our national interests?
I'd like to know when Putin played Trump before?
You know, when Putin was interfering in the 2016 election and he didn't do anything about it until it was too late.
Wasn't Putin playing Obama then?
If Trump tries to ''fly by the seat of his pants'', Putin will leave him with no pants at all.
Putins response after meeting Obama for the first time was, "we can steal his pants and he will do nothing."
Obamas tenure was proof of that, and saw obama reduced to defending Putin and vilifying Romney for suggesting Putin was a threat. It's hard to recall any leader so dominating another on the same level as Putin did Obama.
Watching democrats who cheered obama give Putin the world complain about trump being too soft on Putin is akin to Neville chamberlain attacking Churchill for being soft on the nazis.
Just a reminder Sean, either Obama nor Clinton are president. Trump is now the president, it would be nice if you could remind us how Trump is going to handle Putin in their upcoming meeting.
As far as Gerrymandering goes, it would seem that the courts are not in favor of the republican gerrymandering. SCOTUS vs NC and the upcoming case which the republicans/Wisconsin lost in a lower court will now be heard by SCOTUS...
Putins relationship with trump is directly informed by what happened under obama. It's silly to ignore the past and pretend history began with the election of trump.
So you have no thoughts on how or what Trump will do in his meeting with Putin.
Anything on the gerrymandering?
I agree with the article, Trump should not follow Obama's lead and offer concessions to Russia based on Putin's promises.
The Supreme Court was wrong on the North Carolina case. Put up a seed and I'll be happy to discuss why.
Actually Sean I don't see where Obama was mentioned in the article. But I'm with you that Trump should keep his mouth shut. Perhaps McMaster would be a better man to meet with Putin. A bit more experience than Trump and not nearly as thin skinned as Trump.
As far as the SCOTUS decision goes, if I remember correctly there was an article posted on it when it happened.
Anything on the gerrymandering?
Yes, the Democrats fixed it so Mel Watts couldn't lose even if he tried to with 7 of the largest cities comprising his district.
North Carolina's 12th congressional district is a congressional district located in the city of Charlotte and surrounding areas in Mecklenburg County . Prior to the 2016 elections, it was a gerrymandered district located in central North Carolina that comprised portions of Charlotte, Winston-Salem , Greensboro , Lexington , Salisbury , Concord , and High Point .
I know in Fayetteville NC they have 4 of the 9 districts drawn up so a minority is assured of winning at this link. So the only districts that will make the difference is the 4 the Republicans have to win and whoever wins the 5th one.
So it works both ways, but like the news when Democrats leak information 'the information becomes the news' and when Republicans leak information the question of' where did he get it and did he get it legally' becomes the news.
Sean thinks Obama is still president, which is better than facing reality.
Your hypocrisy amuses me, that's enough,
Unless he gives Alaska back to Russia, its probably impossible for trump to handle Putin worse than Obama did.
We'll know in a few days. You have so much faith in Trump you spend virtually all your time here berating Obama , Clinton and other Democrats.
And, you spend all of your time here berating Trump. You are over the top on your hate for this man. It lessens your accountability. You don't see anything relating to Trump or conservatives as a possible "good thing". With you it is "all or nothing". That is why you have no ethical standing when it is discussed.
We know what you are going to say. But, I will tell you what. If Hillary had won, I would, probably. be you because my hate for her would be ever ending.
You don't see anything relating to Trump or conservatives as a possible "good thing". With you it is "all or nothing". That is why you have no ethical standing when it is discussed.
It is true that there is a lot of time spent berating Trump by various folks online, although it is hardly a surprise or out of line since he is the most unqualified and disqualified person ever to run for president of the United States.
Excuse me for reading up on Trump before the election. I knew a long time ago his term would be a farce.
Actually, John, you said, repeatedly, that Trump would not be elected President.
And you were wrong. Why keep attempting to achieve the same results?
Excuse me for reading up on Trump before the election. I knew a long time ago his term would be a farce.
Did he search out Marxist Professors too and start his political career in the living room of a terrorist?
You have so much faith in Trump
It's amazing how pointing out how pointing out the weakness in the far fetched, loony conspiracy theories and made up facts and rewriting of history that constitutes the majority of the left's arguments on this site somehow constitutes "such faith in Trump."
This is the perfect case in point. How can an Obama defender possibly attack Trump as unable to handle Putin with a straight face?
OM predicts:
There will be lots of whispering in bed...
Pillow talk. The only real question is will Putin give him a kiss after he screws the whole US and NATO? Putin is going to eat him alive.
The only real question is will Putin give him a kiss after he screws the whole US and NATO?
It has been reported that Pres. Trump has done extensive preparation for his upcoming meeting with the current leader of Mother Russia.
An image from his prep, (showing how he believes he should behave during his one on one meeting with Putin), was captured by a staffer and released to the press.
That's Trump. All Putin has to do is praise him a little bit and scratch him behind the ears and he might as well be a male slave in a dog suit. I see no different.
Even today during a news conference with the President of Poland Trump still could not bring himself to say that it was Russia that hacked into our elections in 2016. A lot of people say it's because he is afraid that it will bring the legitimacy of his Presidency* into question and that his ego just could not stand it. I say it's because he knows worked in concert with Vladimir Putin in 2016 and knows that he would not be sitting in the Oval Office if not for Putin. I say he was installed as President* of the U.S. by Vladimir Putin and that means he is not the President of the United States of America, but rather is nothing more then a common Russian assent or extremely high placed spy.
He will not challenge Russian meddling into our 2016 election because he was an open art of it just like he wants to be a cooperating part of it in 2018 and 2020. If the American people do not open their eyes to this truth soon then by the time of the inauguration in 2021 (if is Trump) then America will be nothing more then The United Soviet States of America completely control by Putin from Moscow through his hand picked treasonous boy, Donald Trump. Is that what you really want? Because if you continue to support Trump then that is what you will get
Good luck with that because I won't be around to see it because when it does happen I know the price of a good solid 10 foot piece of 1 inch rope guaranteed to hold up to 350lbs and I know I'm not that heavy. I won't live under Russian rule. Will you?
LOL
In addition to Syria, the two leaders need to discuss Russia’s increasingly aggressive use of asymmetric tactics like hacking and disinformation campaigns. Trump could take a page from French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent visit with Putin and challenge him (publicly or privately) on Russia’s efforts to undermine U.S. democratic institutions. Trump should make clear that we know these attacks often stem directly from the Russian government and that they won’t be tolerated. In the week before the two leaders meet, Trump’s team should make a list of concrete actions that the United States will take if such behavior continues. Given the severity of the threat, this subject requires far more than a “cut it out.”
So far there is no word from the White House on if Trump even plans on bringing up Russia's unquestionable interference, ordered and directed by Putin, in our 2016 election and I am very skeptical that he will because it will damage his frail ego concerning the many lingering (and increasing) questions about the legitimacy of his Presidency*. That said, if he does not only confront Putin over this, but very, very forcefully and promise further and severe sactions if there is even a hint at a re-occurrence, then he will be seen by the entire Western world, even here in America, as a weakling on his knees kissing Putin's...um..."glove". He will rightly smell of treason.
That supposed interference by Russia is being properly investigated. IMO, this is no time for President Trump to bring up this issue. There are far more greater issues facing us than "interference". Off the top of my head....NK?
There are far more greater issues facing us than "interference".
So our Presidential elections aren't one of "great issues" ? Are you serious ?
I can't think of any greater issue facing our country then the very basis of our democracy. Even NK.
Obama didn't think so. He ignored it.
So our Presidential elections aren't one of "great issues" ?
Must not have been. Obama knew about it for months and didn't do a thing about it. Oh, he did say "Stop it!"
Awesome!
I am reporting your comment as off topic Sixpick.
Did our progressive friends know that Trump is the elected President of the United States of America and that he's the President of all the people. We the people are proud of how the President handled this trip abroad representing us to the world. That speech in Poland was simply awesome.
Trump supporters are truly going nuts.
The good news is you left the light on for them when you made your way there.
What did you say? Perhaps you could post to to Fox Nation group.
So much for "collusion." The left just wasted six months on a witch hunt and is now trying to move on from their batshit crazy conspiracy towards "interference," which is run of the mill stuff that Russia always does.
If Putin and Trump colluded, it goes without saying that Trump played Putin, and not vice versa. Now the story is Putin "played" Trump by interfering in the election without much penalty from either Obama or Trump.
By bombing Assad, pushing for NATO to spend more money on defense and praising Article 5 in Poland, Trump's acting in direct opposition to what a President working with Putin would do.
The question is what voting machines did they rig? Did they stuff ballot boxes? If not, how did they force the people in the right places to vote against the left's chosen one? That question just goes right over their heads. If they 'interfered' in the election, did they do it by releasing the stream of filth that the democrats thought they could keep secret by using virtually uncrackable passwords like 'password'?
Once again, if they didn't write it in the first place there would be nothing to expose. Whoever exposed it did Americans a service by showing who these people that say they are 'for the people' who they are really for-themselves.
it goes without saying that Trump played Putin
Oh please Trump could not in his wildest dreams "play Putin". Trump is a man who once told a friend he wasn't sure if Milania ever has bowel movements.
Trump Will Get Played By Putin Again
As predicted, he was played.
Wrong as usual.
I am inclined to believe that Trump and Family are double agents for Russia including Melania, I have no proof but that is my impression...
I assume you think the Apollo landing was faked as well...
Fake news.
Wrong as usual.
civil dialogue with comity
Really? Where is his evidence after the fact that Trump and America was played by Putin and Russia?
There is no such evidence. Liberals want us to fail. It's just a delusion.
That they want America to fail for four years is true and obvious to all beyond all doubt.
Trump: Hey Vlad, thanks for the leg up...and the leg over.
Putin: No problemski! It was part of our agreementski, my close comrade in all things off-shore oil fieldski's.
Trump: Enough chit-chat. Golf? Tillerson's waiting for us at the new club he built with Exxon Mobil's $100,000,000 'Russian infrastructure improvement...donation' (accompanied by those overly-dramatic Austin Powers-like double-handed quotation mark thingies.)
Putin: You betski. And as giftski to you and good comrade Tillerson, 2 solid gold golf cartski's await you. Is thank you for pesky sanction avoidance finagleski. Now we can afford to royally screwski the pathetic 99% in both of our countries (accompanied by overly-exuberant Pee-Wee Herman-esque hand clapping.)
Comment removed for skirting the CoC [ph] Pure progressive...
Your support of Russia over America is noted. Party before nation, eh? Pure progressive...
If that is how you interpreted my post, then Comment removed for Skirting the CoC [ph]
"Your support of Russia over America is noted. Party before nation, eh? " thanks sister for the quote. I don't see how that was skirting. Anytime a liberal accuses me or another conservative of putting party over country we can flag it automatically for skirting the coc.