Is Trump’s Russia deal a white flag or a winning strategy?

In a surprising turn of events, the Trump administration's shift from economic sanctions to promises of lucrative deals with Russia has raised eyebrows. What began as a tough stance on Moscow over the war in Ukraine is now evolving into what some experts call a misguided gamble, with potentially disastrous consequences for both U.S. foreign policy and global stability. Foreign Policy breaks down why this new approach could backfire spectacularly.

The piece begins by highlighting the contradiction in Trump's foreign policy stance. Only weeks after threatening harsher sanctions against Russia if no peace agreement is reached in Ukraine, Trump and his team seem to pivot dramatically, offering economic incentives instead. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, once a staunch critic of Russia, now envisions "incredible opportunities" for U.S.-Russia cooperation. This, according to the author, signals an ill-advised reversal that could end up weakening the West’s bargaining position.

One of the key criticisms in the article is that economic normalization would primarily benefit Russia, giving the Kremlin the breathing room to rearm and intensify its aggression, especially toward Ukraine. The article contends that easing sanctions at this stage would undermine the West’s strategy to curb Russian military ambitions and could risk further destabilizing Europe and NATO. As the author notes, U.S. leverage over Russia has been effective, particularly in sectors like energy exports and technological imports, which have strained the Russian economy.

Another significant issue discussed is the dubious nature of Russia's economic prospects. High inflation, interest rates, labor shortages, and systemic corruption make Russia an unreliable partner for U.S. businesses. This is compounded by the absence of rule of law, making investments in Russia risky at best. Despite these concerns, Trump’s team remains optimistic, promising a resurgence of U.S. business in Russia should a peace deal materialize.

The article also raises a particularly strange paradox: Trump’s push for Russian economic concessions conflicts with his own agenda of enhancing U.S. energy dominance. The potential lifting of energy-related sanctions against Russia could lead to increased Russian gas exports to Europe, undermining American efforts to establish a foothold in the European energy market.

Ultimately, the article warns that Trump’s approach is a dangerous gamble, likely to fail and potentially backfire, placing the U.S. in a weakened position relative to Russia and Europe. The author argues that while diplomacy and negotiation are essential, this particular strategy risks making the U.S. more vulnerable in the long term.

Foreign Policy’s piece presents a well-argued critique of Trump’s Russia policy, emphasizing the risks of economic concessions to a geopolitical adversary without adequate safeguards or strategic vision.

By Vugar Khalilov