Russia currently has an advantage in Ukraine, but is far from even its minimum goals. And the real goal remains to have Ukraine under Russian control, says a German expert on the announced meeting between Trump and Putin.
"In my opinion, from a Russian perspective, almost nothing has changed. Currently, Russia has a military advantage in Ukraine, but is far from achieving even the minimum goals it has set itself. And the real goal remains to have all of Ukraine under Russian control - perhaps not territorially, but politically. "For Vladimir Putin, diplomacy is an alternative path to achieving Ukraine's surrender, and in this regard there are various options through which he will try to get there - including through a conversation with Trump," says Dr. Janis Kluge, an expert on Eastern Europe and Eurasia at the German Foundation for Science and Politics.
He emphasizes that by agreeing to a meeting with Trump, Putin has once again taken the initiative after pressure mounted over Trump's ultimatum. "In the conversation, he will most likely set conditions, try to divide the Europeans and Trump, or present the Europeans as an obstacle to peace," Kluge believes. According to the expert, Putin will certainly again try to question Zelensky's legitimacy and present him as an obstacle. "Ultimately, for Putin, it's about achieving the same goals by other means," Kluge tells German public broadcaster ARD. Here is the entire interview with him:
"I think this is also part of the Russian plan"
Russia wants to be given at least four regions, even though it has not occupied them entirely. Do you see in this regard a path to a compromise that would be at least somewhat acceptable to Ukraine?
Kluge: No. The granting of territories to the aggressor Russia by the Ukrainian side is unthinkable and cannot be imposed politically. This is not a realistic path. Any attempt at coercion would plunge Ukraine into a severe crisis.
I think this is also part of the Russian plan. Putin's goals go far beyond annexation - for him, it is a means of destabilizing Ukraine. And Ukraine cannot agree to this, and therefore it is difficult to imagine a compromise on this issue.
The war has been going on longer than Russia had planned - and it is associated with great costs. But there are no signs of a change in Russia's thinking - on the contrary, Russia continues to increase its army, spends more and more money, mobilizes an incredible number of people. I do not see a change in thinking on the Russian side.
Why is Trump adopting this approach?
Kluge: With his ultimatum, Donald Trump got himself into a zugzwang and had to do something. In my opinion, the announced meeting is a chance for Trump to get rid of his ultimatum. So far, he has shown no inclination to put serious pressure on Putin. And he has never intended to really go against Russia. There may have been times when he was frustrated by the lack of progress in the peace talks, but Putin seems to be able to capitalize on any situation.
Why did India end up the victim?
Trump threatened sanctions against countries that continue to buy Russian oil - and has already implemented this threat against India. Does this affect Russia?
Kluge: Not yet, and it is not the most effective tool against Russia. It seems to me that Trump was more looking for a reason to impose these tariffs on India - and that Russia was simply a convenient pretext. In recent months, Trump has done nothing to put Russia under direct economic pressure, although he had a lot of means in this regard. No new sanctions have been imposed since Trump took office, and the enforcement of existing ones has been weakened.
India, of course, will have to take the high tariffs on its exports seriously and will have to respond somehow. This could mean, for example, that Indian refineries start buying less Russian oil, which would force Russia to look for new customers and offer them higher discounts. Thus, Russia's oil revenues may decrease, but nevertheless in the short term this will not pose a major financial threat to Russia.
Let's not forget that China, which buys even more Russian oil, was not subject to tariffs, and China is an even more important economic partner for Russia than India. There is no system in Trump's actions - he uses the tools selectively, which is somewhat understandable: if Trump imposes such tariffs on China, this will have serious repercussions for the United States itself.
"Sanctions against oil exports could lead to a price spike"
Are there any sanctions at all that could put significant pressure on Russia?
Kluge: There are ways to limit Russian oil exports without tariffs - and they are the most important source of income for Russia. Russia continues to export about the same amount of oil as at the beginning of the invasion. To change this, for example, as in the case of Iran, the threat of secondary sanctions could be made against importers - refineries and companies in India or China, best combined with pressure on other oil-producing countries to expand their production.
The problem with sanctions against Russian oil exports is that they could lead to an increase in prices on an international scale. The world market would probably cope if Russian oil exports were reduced by sanctions to between 500,000 and 1 million barrels per day. But this is only a small part of Russian exports - anything beyond these quantities would lead to a serious increase in prices. This sets a limit to the measures against Russian oil exports.
And the effect for Russia will only be apparent in the long term. There are no other measures that would severely affect Russia economically in the short term. Interestingly, Trump's latest statements about sanctions sound more modest - he himself seems to doubt whether the imposition of sanctions will have an effect.