Paul
Goble
Staunton, July 16 – If the last
century of diplomacy teaches nothing else, it is that secret protocols and
understandings are a far more dangerous outcome of summits than anything the
leaders involved may actually declare, not only because these things conceal
what the leaders will do but also because they open the way to radically
different interpretations.
That is the lesson of Munich in
1938; it is the lesson of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in 1939; and it is the
lesson of Singapore just a few months ago.
And it is one that should be kept in mind in interpreting whatever comes
out of the Helsinki summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
Many are going to breathe a sigh of
relief if Trump and Putin don’t make the kind of dramatic declarations that would
sell out the countries in between in the name of cooperation between Russia and
the United States – despite the fact that Putin has already won by having a
meeting and Trump has no defensible reason to make any concessions to Putin.
Because of their own personal styles
and domestic constraints, neither Trump nor Putin is likely to be willing to
spell out exactly what they have agreed to in public. To do so would not be in
the interest of either: If Trump caves to Putin in public, he will spark a
firestorm of opposition in the US, something not in Putin’s interest either,
given how useful Trump has been for Putin.
But that doesn’t mean the two won’t
agree behind the scenes, perhaps not even as formally as signing “secret
protocols” but rather by reaching “understandings” that will have enormous
consequences down the line. Thus, any reaction to what the two do in public
today will inevitably be premature.
After all, the worst consequences of
analogous agreements earlier weren’t on public view at first. They appeared
only weeks or months later – and they were and remain all the worse for
that.
What is especially disturbing is
that Russian commentators are more or less openly speculating about such a
possibility. One commentator calls his
article today “The Putin-Trump Pact,” using a term of art which inevitably
resonates in the worst possible way for the countries between Moscow and the
West (svpressa.ru/politic/article/205385/).
And Sergey Markov, a Moscow political
analyst, points to another reason that he welcomes but that should disturb
others. At this summit, he says, “Trump de facto represents [only] himself and
not the American government.” The State Department, the Defense Department and
the CAI “all spoke out categorically against this summit.”
Trump will therefore try to achieve
something so as to maintain his narrative that he can do what none of his
predecessors could. But he will have to do it in a way that generates support
at home without increasing suspicions about his relationship with Putin. For that, the best arrangement then is not a
public declaration but some kind of understanding in private.
If Trump proceeds in that fashion,
Markov says, nothing may be said in public about Ukraine at Helsinki, but “on
his return to Washington, [the American president] could pound his fist on the table
and demand an end to support for Ukraine. This will lead in a guaranteed
fashion to the destruction of the Kyiv regime,” the Moscow analyst says.
No comments:
Post a Comment