How Trump and commercial wars pushed Russia and Ukraine to the cold

In intoxicating times, and with the commercial wars that dominate the news agenda, it is easy to forget that the soldiers of Russia and Ukraine continue to fight for every centimeter of frontline territory in Ukraine.

The conflict in Gaza, the continuous economic uncertainty in the United States and Europe and the long geopolitical landscape with strengthening and opposites, ‘axes of power’ are also in view of the minds of global policy formulators, which pushes more than three years of war and a half and a half in Ukraine by the agenda.

It seems more and more than both Russia and Ukraine are being excluded in the cold, even this week’s conversations in Istanbul, who imply team negotiators from both sides, barely receiving a mention in the media. As things are, there is an uncomfortable air when it comes to the direction of war and peace perspectives.

Trump seemed to lose patience when he declared on July 14 that Ukraine could receive more weapons made by the United States, while NATO allies paid them, and gave Russia a period of 50 days to reach a peace agreement with Ukraine. If he did not, he said, Russia would face “very severe” secondary “secondary” tariffs of up to 100%.

Those could affect Russia strongly, as well as their remaining commercial partners, including India and China, which buy Russian oil and gas, among other products.

As things are, Russia has until September 2 to demonstrate that a high fire and peace plan is taken seriously, in which little progress has been made, despite some agreements on the swaps of the prisoners.

Analysts are skeptical that the threat of more sanctions will transfer Russian president Vladimir Putin to come to the negotiating table in good faith, much less talk to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

There is a section between Trump’s demand for a peace agreement and any other sanction, said Mykola Bielieskov, a researcher at the National Institute of Strategic Studies of Ukraine.

“The Kremlin is generally depositing the fact that the United States under Trump is incapable of a systematic policy of supporting Ukraine and pressing Russia,” Bielieskov told NBC News in early July.

“Severe secondary sanctions require a willingness to fight with China and India, which buy Russian raw materials,” he said.

“In the same way, when it comes to weapons, the speed and volume of supplies here and now matter. Therefore, there are many known unknowns. And I think Russia may believe that the United States will not dare to impose secondary sanctions on the commercial partners of Russia,” he added.

Ukraine, at the mercy of American and European generosity when it comes to arms supplies, has shown more disposition to negotiate in recent months, calling, together with Trump, for a high fire with Russia that has not been an answer.

He has also shown a willingness to commit even when it comes to giving up the Ukrainian territory occupied by Russia to Moscow if something of a “Holy Grail” for the country was granted: NATO membership.

But there has been little sign that Russia, which obtains small but incremental profits on the battlefield due to its strength of recruited labor and an intense drone war, would be willing to accept safety guarantees of Westerners for Ukraine, in any way.

Reaching things worse for kyiv is growing domestic disturbances, with doubts about the ongoing martial law, the lack of elections and leadership in times of Zelenskyy war.

The protests exploded in kyiv last week in the midst of a violent reaction against government movements to limit the independence of two anti -corruption agencies. The main politicians of the EU expressed their dismay for the movement towards the exit of Political, saying that it showed a lack of commitment to pursue European democratic values. Combat what has been endemic corruption in Ukraine is considered a previous requirement for EU membership, which KyIV encodes.

A reorganization of the government in mid -July also fed accusations that Zelenskyy was concentrating power among loyal ones, which could also light concerns between international sponsors and benefactors of Ukraine.

Ukraine is entering “a critical phase of internal consolidation in the midst of a growing external uncertainty,” according to Tatiana Stanovaya, principal member of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center and founder of the political analysis firm, R. Politik.

“The last battlefield developments coincide with a new American position: Donald Trump has opted for tactical delay on decisive commitment, operating operationally while transfers financial and political responsibilities to Europe, “he said in comments sent by email this week.

“kyiv, meanwhile, is using this interlude to emphasize internally. The recent reorganization of the government … underlines the intention of the Zelenskyy administration to strengthen political control and preserve cohesion against growing pessimism, institutional inertia and an intensifying labor crisis,” he added.

Despite increasing Western restlessness with respect to the internal trajectory of Ukraine, Stanovaya said: “International support is becoming more transactional, mainly oriented to maintaining the first line instead of moving forward in democratic reform.”