Article
Paul Stronski
{
"authors": [
"Paul Stronski"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
History Shows Why Trump Needs Clear Objectives for Putin Summit
A conciliatory approach with Russia has not worked out for the past three U.S. presidents or a long list of European leaders, and it likely won’t for Trump either.
Published on Jul 15, 2018
Source: Axios
Next week's Helsinki summit poses the risk that President Trump could make a rash offer to Vladimir Putin in an attempt to improve U.S.–Russian relations. It's possible he might recognize Moscow’s annexation of Crimea, assent to Syrian President Assad’s continued rule or waver on America’s commitment to NATO.
The big picture: As much as Trump may want to turn the page with Putin, his recent call for a one-on-one meeting without aides is risky. Putin is a shrewd negotiator. A conciliatory approach with Russia has not worked out for the past three American presidents or a long list of European leaders, and it likely won't for Trump either.
Putin has been playing leaders for years:
- German Chancellor Angela Merkel spearheaded the Minsk agreement in 2015 to end the Ukraine war, which Russia never seriously implemented.
- Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy brokered the end to the Russian–Georgian war in 2008. Putin reportedly signed off on the ceasefire, but Russia flouted it nonetheless.
- Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama all thought maintaining a personal rapport with their Russian counterpart would advance U.S. interests. In most cases, it didn't. (Clinton's attempt to cultivate Russia ended in bitterness over the Kosovo war, while Bush's own infamous overtures preceded Russia's invasion of Georgia.)
Trump wants splashy deliverables to show he can go toe-to-toe with Putin on the global stage. But instead of agreeing to whatever Putin wants on Ukraine or Syria for the sake of a deal, Trump should articulate a vision for how his administration plans to secure U.S. interests vis-à-vis Russia. Reviving arms-control discussions or agreeing to increase educational, cultural and scientific exchanges would be good places to start. Both would help rebuild trust and lay the groundwork for future improvements in relations.
The bottom line: Trump boasts of not “preparing very much” for high-stakes diplomacy — an approach that has not secured results with North Korea's denuclearization. To avoid getting played again, he should approach the Helsinki summit with concrete objectives to avoid improvising a costly deal.
About the Author
Paul Stronski
Former Senior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program
Paul Stronski was a senior fellow in Carnegie’s Russia and Eurasia Program, where his research focuses on the relationship between Russia and neighboring countries in Central Asia and the South Caucasus.
- Russia’s Growing Footprint in Africa’s Sahel Region
- Russia in the Balkans After Ukraine: A Troubling ActorCommentary
Paul Stronski
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- Taking the Pulse: Is Canada Leading a Third Way?Commentary
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has twice inspired praise for standing up to U.S. President Donald Trump: at the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos and on Canada-U.S. trade negotiations. Is Carney showing a third way better than the EU has in dealing with the Trump administration?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europe’s Self-Confidence ProblemCommentary
The EU’s responses to two recent incidents expose the gulf between European perceptions and capabilities. Unless the union can bridge that gap, it will never become a real geostrategic power.
Rym Momtaz
- Europe’s Overseas Countries and Territories as Geopolitical AssetsArticle
European states control several Overseas Countries and Territories around the world that carry strategic, economic, and environmental weight. As great powers challenge the rules-based order, defending them is a geopolitical imperative for Europe.
Marc Pierini
- Why MAGA’s Far-Right European Ties Will EndureCommentary
In supporting Europe’s far-right, MAGA and Russia both want the same thing: a weaker EU. Europe must defend itself without abandoning the openness these forces exploit.
Armida van Rij
- Letter from the Editor: Europe Takes Two Steps Forward But One Step BackCommentary
As we close out another season of Strategic Europe, it is worth taking stock of the deep shifts underway.
Rym Momtaz
