The United States and Russia held a security meeting in Geneva, Switzerland on the 10th, represented by U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Xueman (left) and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov (right). (Image credit / Twitter @DeputySecState)
The eight-hour U.S.-Russian security meeting saw the U.S. seek Russia’s withdrawal of troops on the Ukrainian border, despite assurances by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov that Russia “has no plans to invade Ukraine”, but did not commit to withdrawing troops.
At the same time, the Russian side reiterated that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) must ensure that it will never expand eastward and will never accept Ukraine’s membership.
The U.S.-Russian security meeting was criticized for saying different things and lacking consensus, but Michael McFaul, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia and a professor of political science at Stanford University, pointed out that this is not surprising.
For those “naive” expectations or suggestions that Xueman should treat concessions as a gift to seek a diplomatic breakthrough, McPhail bluntly said that “real diplomacy doesn’t work like this.”
Those who advocate compromise do not understand Putin at all
“The Biden team is ready to start serious negotiations with Vladimir Putin, as long as Putin shows that he is serious,” McPhail predicted on the 9th, and Xueman confirmed at the press conference following the meeting that the United States and Russia on the 10th The purpose of security meetings is to discuss, not negotiate, and focus on understanding each other’s primary concerns.
So, should the United States compromise with Russia’s most concern: “NATO does not expand eastward and does not accept Ukraine”? There have been a lot of debates in American academic circles recently, but McPhail is firmly opposed to it, the biggest reason being that he doesn’t trust Putin.
“I first met Putin in 1991 and have been writing regarding him for 20 years. I was in the same room with him for five years during the Obama administration. “Those who believe in the ‘guarantee’ that NATO will not expand and Putin will stop undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty and democracy, don’t understand Putin at all,” McPhail said.
During the U.S.-Russian security meeting, Ryabkov asked the U.S. side to make “a steel-like assurance” that Ukraine would never join NATO. not aggression and undermine the democracy of both countries” provides the same guarantee.
(More related news: Russia’s visit to Ukraine is intended to “force peace with war”, and the light start of the war may fall into the “consumption strategy” of Europe and the United States)
Cold water has been poured on the strategy of “Uniting Russia and China”
Not holding any illusions regarding “Huairou Putin”, McFair further opposed changing the “alliance with China and Russia” in the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union to “alliance with Russia and China” and re-implementing the old technique now. This strategy was won by former US National Security Council officials. Supported by Charles A. Kupchan et al.
McPhail pointed out that the “alliance with Russia to make China” is indeed quite attractive, but the reason why the United States had the opportunity to penetrate the needle back then was because China and Russia had long had a major rift. Now China and Russia are closely related in terms of economy, security and ideology.
McFair doesn’t think pulling Russia into the Western camp would do much good, and it would give Russia more room to bargain — something Putin is currently doing. Moreover, courting one dictator to prevent another will only make Biden’s Democratic coalition appear hypocritical.
McPhail also believes that if the United States wants to deter China from attacking Taiwan, it must first effectively deter Putin from invading Ukraine.
(More related news: Today’s Ukraine is tomorrow’s Taiwan? American scholars: Taiwan has advantages both inside and outside, but one thing is more dangerous than Ukraine)
If the U.S. shouldn’t soften its stance, is it possible for Russia to back down? McPhail said he mightn’t be sure of Putin’s thinking, but Moscow did have a precedent in 2009 and 2010 when it compromised the content of the New Start Treaty.
Trump’s withdrawal from the INF Treaty is expected to be resurrected
At the US-Russian security meeting, Ryabkov warned that although there is no deadline set, Moscow will not wait for weeks or months. If the two sides “talk down”, Russia will respond with “military technology” – this is Possibly referring to the redeployment of intermediate-range missiles (INF) in Europe.
Xueman also sternly stated that if Russia leaves the negotiating table recklessly, it means that Moscow has never seriously wanted to solve the problem through diplomatic means.
Despite this, there was still some progress in the meeting. Xueman affirmed that the two sides were frank and frank. Ryabkov also pointed out that the discussion process was difficult but professional, and he felt that the United States was serious regarding the sincerity of Russia’s proposal.
Xueman pointed out that Washington does not rule out the possibility of restarting the Intermediate-Range Missile Treaty (INF Treaty), and is also open to limiting the deployment of European missiles and the scale of military exercises.
In 1987, the United States and the Soviet Union signed the Intermediate-Range Missile Treaty. In 2019, then-U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew from the treaty on the grounds that Russia had breached the treaty and that China, which has a large number of missiles, was not a signatory. In the same year, Russia followed suit.
More news media reports
The salary is not beautiful, and the office workers really want to leave… The finance and semiconductor industries are most concerned regarding the balance between life and work
Pingtung County Magistrate’s Civil War” “Knowing that thousands of arrows will pierce the heart!” Pan Mengan publicly supported Zhou Chunmi and Zhuang Ruixiong denounced “holding power requires restraint”
The second by-election and the strike” “Korean Wave” completely ended the Yan family’s opponent is Tsai Ing-wen, not Lin Jingyi
