War or peace: what could a meeting between Trump and Putin bring?

The activities of American billionaire Elon Musk, who is part of the inner circle of the elected President of the United States, are increasingly irritating European politicians. In general, the European Union (EU) has never been particularly fond of this figure. This is not so much due to his political views, but rather because he became the owner of the social network Twitter (now X) – a colossal internet platform with millions of users, which raises many questions for EU regulators.

Meanwhile, in recent days, the questions, or rather, the complaints have arisen not so much towards the social network X, but towards Musk personally – due to his open support for far-right groups. Recently, the controversial billionaire, who is soon to lead a new department aimed at improving government efficiency in Donald Trump's administration, posted on his X page: “Only AfD (the far-right German party ‘Alternative for Germany’) can save Germany.” “Yes! You are absolutely right,” responded Alice Weidel, the candidate for chancellor from this political force in the upcoming February elections, almost instantly.

“We have freedom of speech, which extends to multi-billionaires. But freedom of speech also means that you can say things that are incorrect and do not contain good political advice,” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz diplomatically replied to Musk, who, by the way, recently referred to the American entrepreneur as a “fool” due to the collapse of the ruling coalition in Germany.

Musk's open support for the far-right German party has caused such a loud resonance in Western media that even French heavyweight politician and former EU Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton felt the need to weigh in, having long harbored undisguised antipathy towards Elon Musk. “Musk openly supports the far-right AfD party. Is this not an example of foreign interference?” Breton wrote on social media.

“Brother, American ‘foreign interference’ is the only reason you don’t speak German or Russian,” retorted the scandalous billionaire. By the way, he also expressed his willingness to sponsor the leader of the British far-right party Reform, Nigel Farage. British media have already begun to speculate that the head of Reform will soon receive a donation from the billionaire amounting to around $80 million, which will become the largest contribution to any party’s treasury in the history of British elections.

It is important to emphasize that British electoral legislation prohibits foreign donations to political parties in the country. However, it allows such donations from individuals and companies that are located or registered in the UK. Therefore, everyone immediately assumed that Elon Musk could easily afford to financially support his British ally through Tesla, the electric car manufacturing company based in the UK.

There have even been articles in the British press suggesting that Prime Minister Keir Starmer may soon introduce a new law to prevent Musk from making donations to Reform. Additionally, the British Prime Minister had previously had reasons to dislike the ubiquitous American: recently, Musk referred to the United Kingdom as a “tyrannical police state,” supporting a petition calling for new general elections amid the declining ratings of Mr. Starmer and his political force.

Elon Musk's influence within Donald Trump's team is steadily growing, and not everyone is pleased about it, notes Reuters. However, it seems that the elected president is currently quite satisfied with Musk's excessive provocations on the brink of scandal, including in the geopolitical arena.

By the way, speaking of global politics, Donald Trump recently made quite a stir by announcing his intention to meet with Putin and discuss ways to end the full-scale war he initiated against Ukraine. “President Putin said he wants to meet with me as soon as possible. So we will be waiting for that; we must end this war,” Trump stated. “I will end the war in Ukraine. I will stop the chaos in the Middle East. And I promise that I will not allow a third world war,” assured the leading Republican.

As is well known, during the presidential campaign, Mr. Trump repeatedly demonstrated his determination to stop Putin's “special operation.” Nevertheless, the new statement from the soon-to-be 47th American president has for the first time translated plans for dialogue with the Kremlin dictator into a practical plane, something that was completely excluded under President Joe Biden. It should be noted that Trump and Putin had met only four times in history in various formats – at the G20 and APEC summits in 2017, on June 16, 2018, in Helsinki, and a year later, on June 29, 2019, at the G20 summit in Osaka. Their only full-fledged negotiations in a “face-to-face” format took place precisely in Finland.

Recently, Putin, during a live broadcast combined with the so-called big press conference following the results of 2024, stated the following: “I don’t know when we will meet (with Trump – ed.), because he hasn’t said anything about it. I haven’t spoken to him at all for over four years.” At the same time, the bunker character confirmed his readiness to engage in dialogue with the 47th President of the United States and noted that if a meeting takes place, then “there will be something to talk about.”

Considering that Donald Trump’s latest statement came hot on the heels of Putin’s remarks, Bloomberg pays special attention to this: “Trump really wants to fulfill one of his main campaign promises and put an end to the fighting in Ukraine.” Meanwhile, Putin's spokesperson, Peskov, recently stated that there are currently no specifics or prerequisites for organizing a meeting. “So far, there have been no real impulses,” Peskov responded to Russian journalists' questions about the possibility of a high-level meeting before Donald Trump's inauguration, scheduled for January 20, 2025.

Trump's signals to the Kremlin dictator have not gone unnoticed in the White House. In particular, outgoing President Biden's National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan agreed with the main thesis of the Republican regarding the need to achieve a peaceful resolution. However, he also named the main tool for fighting for peace in Ukraine as increasing pressure on the aggressor country. “I think Trump should continue to apply pressure. I believe that then a deal may be reached,” Sullivan stated in an interview with CNN.

According to him, if Washington refuses to support Kyiv, “pulling the ground from under Ukraine’s feet,” and agrees to Moscow's conditions, it would seriously damage U.S. interests in the long run. “Therefore, I believe that the most important thing for Donald Trump is to send a signal to Putin: The United States will continue to support Ukraine, Europe will continue to support Ukraine until you accept fair terms for a just peace,” Jake Sullivan summarized.

Meanwhile, in the swamps, it was unambiguously hinted that they do not intend to format the shortlist of inadequate Putin's demands (such as Ukraine's refusal from NATO, occupied territories, etc.) in any way. Deputy Head of the Russian Foreign Ministry Sergey Ryabkov stated that “dialogue with the U.S. on the Ukrainian issue can take place on different platforms, but its content and the approaches of the elected U.S. president's team are important.” In other words, in the aggressor country, the war they unleashed is referred to as the “Ukrainian issue.”

Furthermore, “To discuss this topic, one must first understand what the future U.S. administration's position on this matter is. What we hear does not align and cannot align with our approach in many aspects. Dialogue can take place on different platforms and in various formats. The question is not where the place is where the relevant representatives can come for this contact, but rather the substantive side. So far, it is completely unclear what approaches the Trump administration will present on this matter,” Ryabkov stated, adding that Russian initiatives “come from life, from realities on the ground.”

“They reflect our unwavering determination to defend our core interests, including security interests. Therefore, we cannot deviate from this line,” summarized Lavrov's deputy, making it clear that for the success of future negotiations, the Kremlin expects not only a willingness to engage in dialogue from Donald Trump but also his ability to consider all his essentially crazy “wants.”

In the end, the head of the Foreign Ministry, Sergey Lavrov, emerged from his bunker. He noted that Russia “does not harbor any illusions” regarding the prospects of a ceasefire in 2025 and that Russia is not satisfied with a ceasefire in the war it is waging against Ukraine.

“We need reliable, legally binding agreements aimed at addressing the main causes of the conflict, including overall security in Europe, NATO expansion, the recent decision by the European Union to simply lie down under the bloc, and essentially eliminate all differences between these organizations, and certainly the rights of people living in the territories who expressed a desire to reunite with Russia,” Lavrov said, stating that Russia “does not harbor any illusions” regarding the prospects of a ceasefire in 2025.

“Given the enormous and sharp contradictions between Russia and Ukraine, and the lack of a clear peace plan from Trump's team, it is unlikely that we should expect quick agreements to end the war. Rather, the opposite. Putin's statements during the ‘direct line’ indicate that he does not intend to end the war. He may agree to negotiations but will simultaneously continue active hostilities. In order for real peace negotiations to begin, at least regarding a ceasefire, it is first necessary to stop the Russian offensive in Donbas,” political scientist Vladimir Fesenko notes. The military situation, in the