Exploring U.S. strategies in the Ukraine-Russia conflict and implications of proposed deals.
Members of Congress who have talked to Secretary of State Marco Rubio say he told them that the U.S. plan to bring about a ceasefire in Ukraine is not the U.S. plan.
The Associated Press reports, « Lawmakers critical of President Donald Trump’s approach to ending the Russia-Ukraine war said Saturday they spoke with Secretary of State Marco Rubio who told them that the peace plan Trump is pushing Kyiv to accept is a ‘wish list’ of the Russians and not the actual proposal offering Washington’s positions. »
Welp. In the immortal words of Defense Secretary Albert Nimziki from the movie Independence Day, « That’s not entirely accurate. »
A spokesman for the State Department called the report « blatantly false. »
So what else is new?
Actually, the administration seems to be a little off balance after the virulent reaction from the media to the proposal to end the fighting.
Trump’s deal « would require Ukraine to shrink the size of its military from its current 850,000 to 600,000, enshrine in its constitution that it will not seek to join NATO, and give ‘de facto recognition' » of Russia’s conquest of « ‘Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk, as well as of the areas of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia it has illegally seized, with the conflict in these regions frozen on the current front line », according to the .
Obviously, the deal is tilted toward Russia. The hysterical overreaction in the media to the proposal says more about the media’s TDS than about the deal’s efficacy.
« Trump’s Neville Chamberlain Prize », sneers New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman.
The Telegraph, in their usual understated way, accused Trump of being a « Russian asset. »
« Trump and Witkoff Try to Get Russia a Win », snarls Arc Digital.
