Europe loser a great loser of Alaska; Putin’s political boycott failed – Mehr News Agency | Iranian and world news

Mehr News Agency, Iernational Group- Roya Fereydouni: US Preside Donald Trump and Russian Preside Vladimir Putin met in Alaska on Friday at an importa meeting to discuss peace and corol in Ukraine. The meeting was the first to face the two and a half years in Ukraine.

Although the war in Ukraine was the main focus of the meeting, Ukrainian Preside Walodimir Zelnsky was not invited to attend it. “Russia and the United States are two neighboring couries, and their visit to Alaska has been a rational move,” the Russian preside said at a joi news conference with Trump. He emphasized that the negotiations were held in the “constructive space” and assessed the results positively. Donald Trump also described the talks as “constructive and productive” and stated that it has been agreed on many issues.

In this regard, Mehr reporter with “On the Sinan Gazelt“The lawyer and expert of iernational relations have a conversation that follows:

After the Ukrainian War, Western couries have tried to politicize Russia to put it in political isolation. How do you evaluate Putin and Trump’s visit to Alaska?

Naturally, Putin has been welcomed by a detailed ceremony on the United States, despite the coinued sanctions, indicating that sanctions against Russia have failed. The meeting also indirectly shows that the United States will be relucta to lift sanctions against Russia in the short term, even in the short term. That such a visit to American soil is in itself a diplomatic and victory for Russia and must be evaluated from this perspective.

On the other hand, this is a major failure for Europe. Because European couries, especially the German and French governmes, insist on the coinuation and even iensification of sanctions against Russia. But the United States, despite his NATO partners against the Russian preside and targeted sanctions, accepted him with very detailed formalities. So this was the biggest sign of the failure of the policy of isolation and sanctions against Russia, at least diplomatic.

Every A few Trumps are trying to show themselves the savior of peace in the world, but this time there seems to be many challenges in the Ukrainian war, and Moscow and Kiev are still far from reaching the agreeme. What do you think is the most importa obstacle to the peace of the two couries?

Disputes between Moscow and Kiev are not merely about the challenges between the two couries; The process that began in Ukraine was in fact one of the fros in which the Western bloc was against Russia and even in general against the East. Of course, there are certain iernal issues between Russia and Ukraine, such as the division of land, who will remain under corol, how will it be in the eve of a ceasefire or peace agreeme, whether compensation will be paid, and many other questions. There are many differences in these areas. Some areas under Russian -corolled are accepted as Moscow soil. There are also areas where war is still underway. But resolving these issues is not just about resolving the disputes of Moscow and Kiev; This was also the case at the US meeting. In fact, resolving these issues can only be resolved by resolving disputes between the Western and Russian blocs, and if such a solution is realized, other issues will be completed.

Therefore, the problem of Ukraine’s problem depends on Russia’s relations with the United States and later with Europe, especially in Britain, rather than depende on the Moscow -Kiev agreeme. There are now positive developmes between the US and Russia, but both within the US and Europe are factions and factions that oppose the normalization of relations with Russia. In the future, the conflict between these factions is likely to iensify. Because in Europe there is a possibility of tensions, there will be disagreeme in the United States about the normalization of relations with Russia. This leads to the deepening of differences within the Western bloc, and we may see unexpected developmes.

Another importa poi is that the end of the war can have heavy consequences for many European governmes. Because the hardline wing in the West was to coinue the war. If the war ends, these groups may lose their political and economic influence. Therefore, unfortunately on the issue of Russia and Ukraine, we will coinue to see the provocations of forces that do not wa peace.

Ukraine’s view of the issue of more peace on the end of their occupation by Russia is then an agreeme. But this time Zelksky seems to have a positive look at the Alaska meeting. We will also see Zelnsky’s meeting with Trump. Please explain Ukraine’s position on the peace agreeme?

In my opinion, Zelkski alone cannot solve this problem, as it requires US and European support. Curre developmes show that the United States is at least seeking to normalize and peace with Russia. Zelksky will now turn to European forces, especially Britain, and will support them to coinue the war. But Europe is in a weak position, and without the United States it is unclear how much it can resist Russia.

Therefore, insistence on coinuing the war may mean weakening and even being dismissed. Trump is now a “peaceful” gesture, but we have seen many examples that he is unreliable. Before the Iran -Israeli war, the Americans were at the negotiating table with the Iranians, but at the same time Israel attacked Iran with US support. Russia has repeatedly tried to negotiate with Ukraine, but the West responded with military operations. There are also movemes in the South Caucasus to cut off Russia and Iran. Or Syria is one of these examples. So it is clear that neither Trump nor the US governme can be trusted. The fact that today the US and Trump governme play the role of “savior of peace” does not preve them from being plotting against Russia and Iran at the same time. So just because the negotiations are positive, one cannot expect a complete peace agreeme. The coradictions between the East and the West are unsolved coradictions

Even if a ceasefire or peace agreeme arises today, new clashes will begin in the future on the Ukrainian fro, Iran, Palestine or elsewhere in the Middle East. As I said, these differences are inevitable and can only end when one side imposes its will on the other.