🔗 Share this article

Back in January, with the president’s election vows to resolve the war in Ukraine in under 24 hours” still vivid in minds, there was genuine unease in Moscow over the US leader’s plans. After Mr. Trump suggested that significant levels of Tariffs, Duties, and Restrictions” on Russia might be necessary, one prominent pro-war Moscow analyst remarked: “It’s better to prepare for the worst. Soon, we’ll reflect on Biden’s term with fondness, like a thaw.”

Unfulfilled Threats and Missed Opportunities

How wrong can you be? Since then, the US president has consistently talked the talk without coming close to walking the walk. In May, after Vladimir Putin turned down a month-long ceasefire, and peace talks in Turkey stalled, a “bone-crushing US sanctions package failed to appear. An 8 August cut-off for Mr Putin to consent to a ceasefire inexplicably morphed into a red carpet welcome in Alaska, where Mr Trump applauded a leader sought for atrocities as he stepped off from his plane. The “severe consequences” threatened by Mr Trump if the Alaska talks did not lead to peace never happened.

Encouraged Actions and Allied Vulnerabilities

Emboldened, Mr Putin has accordingly persisted to pursue his war objectives in Ukraine, and probe for western weaknesses. The previous week’s incursion of Russian drones into Polish territory exposed insufficient Nato planning, as F-35 and F-16 fighter jets were quickly dispatched to deal with cheap suicide devices that cost around $ten thousand each to produce. It also sent a warning of possible intensification in the event of any future “deterrence force” deploying European troops on Ukrainian soil. Such challenge called for a robust and coordinated response, exerting the kind of pressure on the Kremlin which Mr Trump has so far refused to countenance. Instead the US president seems, once again, to prefer bullying his European allies to confronting Mr Putin. In a statement which reeked of insincerity, Mr Trump declared over the weekend that the US was “ready” to impose stricter sanctions on Russia, but only if certain unlikely conditions were met.

Unrealistic Demands and Economic Leverage

Aiming for a significant economic gain, Washington is demanding that the EU must increase its imports of US LNG at a rate that analysts judge undoable. Other demands include the imposition by the EU of 50%-100% tariffs on Russia’s most important ally, China, and an end to all imports of Russian oil by Nato members. This includes Turkey, which has refused to sanction Moscow, imports 57% of its oil from Russia, and lies outside the EU.

Observers looking on the bright side in Brussels believe that Mr Trump’s pressure may persuade pro-Trump governments in Hungary and Slovakia to end their deep dependence on Russian energy imports. That is extremely unlikely to happen, as Mr Trump and his advisers must know. Nor can the EU afford to court the kind of economic retaliation from Beijing that caused Mr Trump himself to retreat from a full-blown trade war not long ago.

Concerning Events and Lack of Movement

Throughout this week’s state visit, it will be Sir Keir Starmer’s turn to try to pin Mr Trump down on decisive action. But from the fruitless Alaska talks to his latest diversionary tactics with the EU, Mr Trump keeps finding reasons not to get tough on Russia. Last week’s drone incursion in Poland represented an worrying raising of the ante. Ukraine’s prospects, and wider European security interests, are being steadily undermined by a president who, in this context, barks but never acts.