twitter-thread.com
Where is the national interest of the United States? by @Gerashchenko_en(Anton Gerashchenko) | Twitter Thread Reader
Where is the national interest of the United States? I have written before that Moscow sees negotiations as "business in exchange for war," while the US perceives them as "peace in exchange for business." The Kremlin’s main objective is to buy American consent to the normalization of the war Russia is waging against Ukraine. At this stage of the negotiations between Russia and the US, I can see the Kremlin’s interests. I can see Putin’s personal interests. I can see benefits for certain American business groups. But can someone explain what the national interest of the United States is in all this? Because "a few people will make a lot of money" is a rather modest answer for a country with global ambitions. Putin celebrated his birthday on October 7, and the "gifts" from Washington arrived two days later: permission to trade Russian diesel fuel and a new attack on the International Criminal Court, which issued a warrant for his arrest. Moscow has already received the first gift. President Trump announced more than 300,000 tons immediately, 500,000 tons in November, then one million and then three million more, depending on the condition of Russian oil refineries. The US authorized these transactions until April 7, 2027. The license contains no requirement for Russia to end the war or halt strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. President Trump wants cheaper fuel and is betting that this news will have a positive effect on his approval ratings and the elections. For Putin, it means additional revenue and a huge political victory. The next step could be a US demand that Ukraine stop striking Russian oil refineries. Trump has already promised lower prices and now has his own incentive to put pressure on Kyiv. Protecting Russian refineries would give Russia far more than simply fulfilling a contract. The plants could be repaired without repeated strikes, the fuel shortage could be reduced, fuel supplies to the military could become more stable, and export revenues could be restored. Behind the talk of cheap diesel lies a very practical question: who will ensure the recovery of Russia’s war economy? Diesel may be just the beginning of the bargaining. Reuters reported on negotiations involving an American investor in Nord Stream, while Eric Lipton, a journalist with The New York Times, reported on a deal involving Russian oil assets that would benefit business partners of people close to American negotiators. The pattern is becoming clear: profits for American businesses, a return to Western markets for Russia. Ukraine and the EU bear the losses. Putin’s second gift is sanctions targeting the ICC as an institution. On October 9, the Trump administration moved from imposing restrictions on individual officials to targeting the court’s financial and technological support systems. Officially, the measures are intended to protect Americans and their allies. Putin is celebrating. Meanwhile, Moscow itself is labeling the judges as defendants. On October 8, Russia’s Prosecutor General’s Office announced it had sent requests to the Netherlands and other countries to arrest and extradite nine current and former ICC officials, including the court’s president, Tomoko Akane. They were convicted in absentia following a prosecution launched in retaliation for the arrest warrants against Russia’s leadership. Russia is demanding the extradition of the judges pursuing its leaders, while the US strikes at the court’s own resources the following day. A coincidence?
