Putin, Lavrov, Warn Trump Of 'Road To Nowhere'

Yesterday both Putin and his foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, delivered pointed statements regarding the prospects for negotiations between the Anglo-Zionists and Russia. Those statements appear to me to be intended to deflate the Trumpian hot air balloon, the claim that Russia is somehow desperate to get into talks with the great deal maker.

Before we get to the specifics, let me remind readers that Russia has no reason—zero reason—to trust Trump. Recall that Trump came into office in 2016 promising to make a deal with Russia—supposedly to facilitate a pivot to the Main Enemy, China. That framing of the matter was an open message to Russia that Trump basically regarded Russia as a means to an end. That may be a perfectly rational approach, but it was also a warning to Russia to be wary. In the event, Trump ended up escalating both sanctions against Russia and the arming of our Ukraine proxy massively—facts which would have confirmed to Russia not to take anything Trump says as gospel. No reasonable person could expect the Russians to accept the excuse that Trump was pressured into those policies by domestic politics—that excuse was simply another reminder that Trump didn’t really control US foreign policy. Therefore, Trump’s later claims that the Russian Special Military Operation would never have occurred if he had still been president would have left the Russians singularly unimpressed. So also Trump’s claims to settle the war in 24 hours. Finally, Trump’s scenario for ending the war—pretend that this was a strictly Russian - Ukrainian war, then bully each side into accepting peace on terms that Trump would determine, OR ELSE. Or else, if Russia didn’t comply Trump would escalate massively. Again. That would simply confirm to Russia that Trump refused to accept Russia as an equal and sovereign partner and that he still would resort to warfare to get what he wanted.

So, when Trump began talking up Russia’s supposed desperation to talk to him, the Russians reacted. First, Putin’s spokesman, Peskov, pointedly stated that Trump had misquoted Putin. Then, yesterday, Putin revealed that Zhou had attempted to snooker Putin with a ceasefire or no-war deal in exchange for a delay in Ukraine joining NATO. Putin made it clear that he didn’t fall for that line then and wouldn’t fall for it this time around, either. Also yesterday, Sergey Lavrov left no doubt about Russia’s position. Lavrov’s words are quite dense, so I’ll comment on each paragraph:

We cannot be satisfied with empty talk. So far all we've heard is talk about the need to come up with some kind of truce, and it's not particularly hidden that this truce is needed in order to gain time to continue pumping weapons into Ukraine. A truce is a road to nowhere. We need legal agreements that will fix all the conditions for ensuring the security of the Russian Federation and, of course, the legitimate security interests of our neighbors. These legal documents must be drafted in a way that will secure the impossibility of violating these agreements in an international legal context.

This looks like a warning that, if Trump keeps up the truce/ceasefire chatter, he may never get to a negotiating table at all. The Russians regard such talk as, at best “empty” and “road to nowhere”—a subterfuge to rearm Ukraine. The third sentence strikes me as a demand that the US agree to binding preconditions before any talks begin. What those might be could be subject to negotiation, but would probably be significant. For example:

It's a multipolar world, definitely. Would I take for granted that the Western colleagues also participate [by accepting that reality of multipolarity]? Without a doubt. But how can they position themselves--will they get over that psychological loss of domination that they enjoyed for half a century? All of that depends on their political culture and their real sound understanding of their place in this real life, and and their ability to act accordingly in accordance to the new situation [of multipolarity].

Again, I’m struck that this looks like a demand by the Russians that Trump should—in a concrete and binding fashion—recognize that Russia is an independent power pole in today’s world. As a precondition. Exactly how that would be formulated could be discussed, but Russia seems to be clearly demanding that they be treated as equal partners, and not as the recalcitrant children that Trump has set them up as.

We never cherish any hopes or illusions, speaking about this or that President taking office on the 20th of January. We will wait and see. Until the new Administration is sure about its policies and sets them forth, we know that there is a Russophobic bipartisan consensus in the United States and that irrespective of party allegiance the Ruling Elites will promote and pursue their policies of weakening Russia, as their competitor.

This, too, is a rebuff to Trump. The Russians will wait to see what Trump’s actual policies will be and will not get into a game of responding to everything Trump may say—or of allowing Trump to set the terms for negotiations. But this also means that they are demanding concrete actions from Trump. No more “empty talk.”

So if this is the message that we're hearing from the new Washington team--to restore the dialogue that was cut off by Washington after the start of the Special Military Operation--if all of that is in earnest we will respond positively. But the Americans were the ones who severed the dialogue. If Washington takes into account our legitimate interests the dialogue will bear fruit and will not be useless. Otherwise, things will remain as they are.

For the fourth time Lavrov states that it’s up to Washington to take the first step—and that that first step must be a recognition of Russia’s “legitimate interests.” Russia will define its own interests. If the Anglo-Zionists try to define Russia’s interests “things will remain as they are.”

Now, as Danny Davis remarks, all this puts Trump in a very difficult position. The Russians are setting up conditions that will to their own partners (China, Iran) a refusal to negotiate, unless Trump follows through on previous statements. For example, Trump previously stated that he would cut off funding for Ukraine—at least in major part. He is currently making noises like he wants to back out of that. Expect the Russians to respond, We were willing to go forward with that sign of good faith, but now we can’t believe anything Trump says. What will Trump do in that position? Escalate out the wazoo as the clown Gorka claims? Well, Gorka was only repeating Trump’s own words, so … where will Trump get the wherewithal to escalate? Will Trump accept Ukraine as an anchor tied to his agenda?

And it’s actually much worse than that, as we’ve been saying.

In a well thought out piece today, Simplicius the Thinker maintains, as we have done in repeated posts of late, that when the fog of proxy war clears the real winner in Syria will be Erdogan's Ottoman Empire redux. Simplicius points to the ever more open and closer ties between the jihadis and the Turks--while the Anglo-Zionists scramble to romance the jihadis. But Erdogan is clearly in the driver's seat, as his statements escalate into a picture of an Ottoman Syria free of Anglo-Zionist interference.

Simplicius presents some of the latest indications of this—but we stress that each day brings new indications of Turkish intent. He begins with the appointment of a Turkish national to a top position in the “Syrian” government. That’s called a clue. You’ve already seen much of this, but reminders are useful:

Now a Turkish national has been appointed as the first female senior official in Jolani’s new government:

And this comes amid reports that Turkey will be establishing its presence in the military academies of Aleppo and Damascus:

Turkey will send military advisers to train the new Syrian army at academies in Aleppo and Damascus, the Turkish resource ClashReport writes, citing its sources.

There is also mention of the possible deployment of a Turkish army unit in Homs to train air defense operators for the new Syrian authorities.

If that wasn’t enough, Erdogan’s son Bilal was seen in a video calling for a large pro-Palestine gathering on the Galata bridge in Istanbul for January 1st, just as they did last New Years, from which the video footage is pulled. But the big shift lies in their gathering under the banner of an interesting new slogan:

“Yesterday Hagia Sophia, today the Umayyad Mosque (Damascus), tomorrow Al-Aqsa (Jerusalem).”

This appears to be the official poster for the event, with the slogan even printed on top:

As can be seen, a nationalist fervor is slowly building up for the recapture of Jerusalem. Israel now has its hands full with a seriously armed, notoriously tenacious NATO member with its sights set on a modern reconquista of its former dominions. The way things are going, Turkey may soon control virtually everything that happens within Syria by proxy, and Israel will face its greatest ever challenge directly on its doorstep.

Yeah, good luck with curbing Turkey. As if Erdogan wouldn’t look for backing from Russia and Iran—and China—in response. Simplicius talks of Turkey being forced to forge some sort of backing from Russia and Iran. When was the last time Erdogan went out on a limb? Actually, that was nearly ten years ago, against Russia, and he seems to have learned the lesson from his misstep—playing his cards very carefully throughout the brutal Anglo-Zionist genocide in Palestine. The question to ask is, What are the odds that Erdogan sorted all this Syrian thing out before acting? Pretty good, I’d say.

Then Simplicius reminds us that Russia continues to forge ties with other regional players.

With the US backing Israel, I could foresee Turkey being forced to forge closer ties with Russia and perhaps Iran as backstops, in order to surround Israel and keep it under pressure. Russia is already slated to sign the big comprehensive strategic partnership with Iran on January 17th, just as it did with North Korea recently:

https://tass.com/world/1894081

…

Then Simplicius pastes in a tweet that we also cited the other day:

Israel now scrambles to weaken Iran as much as possible, brutally striking Yemen for the past few days while praying Trump gives his blessing to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities upon his arrival. But I believe Israel is focused on the wrong opponent and has in fact traded one enemy for a far more powerful one.

As I never tire of saying, all these local conflicts are actually fronts of a global war. How will Trump juggle these fronts? Instead of leading a united, if puny, NATO, Trump could find himself in a confrontation with both an ever more powerful Russia as well as with the one really serious military power left in NATO. That’s a recipe for disaster, and it means that Russia is holding virtually all the cards.