During talks with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, U.S. President Joe Biden will have no room for diplomatic maneuvering, as any action of the American leader may incite the hatred of his constituents, The Wall Street Journal wrote
The author of the article, Walter Russell Mead, professor of foreign affairs and humanities at Bard College in New York, believes that the main topic of conversation between the two leaders will be the Ukrainian crisis, where Biden can take two positions: help Kiev integrate with the West and send NATO forces there or make concessions to extinguish the risk of a full-fledged conflict with Moscow.
“Neither seems attractive. A tough stance could lead to an escalation of the conflict. Many Americans will oppose another indefinite military commitment and Russia’s hostility to the US will intensify. The decision to make concessions will be all too quick after the Afghan disaster, with many long-time allies questioning America’s word. Russia will become more influential and more contemptuous of the US”, – the expert explained.
The publication’s US readers shared their expectations of the talks between the Russian and US presidents in comments.
“It is useful to look at the problem, from the other side. If the Warsaw Pact had expanded to Canada and Mexico in the 1980s, how would the US react?” – Patrick Lee asked.
“Biden will have a video call with Putin. Empty-headed Joe will read a prepared script while Putin thinks three moves ahead”, – Kevin Klarnet is confident.
“The key question is whether Ukraine should become a member of NATO, with an unambiguous mutual defence pact. My answer is no, defending Ukraine is not in America’s security interest, nor is defending the three tiny Baltic states that are members of NATO. When and if Russia decides to take control in the Baltics – and as this newspaper has reported, special forces raids, kidnappings and other forms of Russian incursions are real and ongoing? – we are prepared to go to war to protect them. Is this a good policy? Is it worth it? Again I say no. We can give them weapons and money to help, but to waste American blood and resources where our interests are insignificant and where we are likely to lose? Absolutely not”, – wrote Robert Fagan.