"Putin's Pink Dream": An Interview with Volodymyr Ogryzko on the Kremlin's True Goals and Its Manipulation of Trump

While Donald Trump tries to demonstrate a willingness to negotiate with Moscow, the Kremlin continues to impose its own rules of the game. Russia is not only dragging out negotiations to end the war but also seeking to use them to weaken NATO, divide Europe, and effectively return to the security ultimatums it issued back in 2021.

At the same time, economic problems within Russia itself are becoming increasingly acute, and high-profile diplomatic initiatives may turn out to be nothing more than another propaganda stunt.

In an exclusive interview with 24 Channel, the diplomat, Vladimir Ogryzko, Ukraine’s foreign minister from 2007 to 2009, explained why Moscow is trying to sideline Europe from the negotiations, why it refuses to discuss an energy truce, and whether economic problems could undermine the Kremlin’s position.

Trump, Putin, and Xi: What to Expect from a Possible Meeting

I’m amazed at just how “highly professional” Donald Trump’s negotiators are. Before they entered this negotiation game, Putin wanted to destroy Ukraine and the Donbas, piecing together an empire bit by bit. But now he wants so much that even he himself probably didn’t think it was possible. So will these three – Trump, Xi, and Putin – meet? What should we expect from this meeting?

You’d have to be quite inept to conduct foreign policy this poorly. On the other hand, when someone is incompetent, they consider it perfectly normal.

And when people who actually understand these matters watch from the sidelines, they just shake their heads in disbelief. And they simply realize that just a little more of this, and they’ll truly reduce the great United States to a state where it will be quite small indeed. Because what’s happening is already going beyond the limits of what’s even possible.

It seemed like they parted ways so peacefully. They just got in their cars and left. And after Witkoff and Kushner briefed President Zelenskyy on the results, Witkoff wrote that an agreement had been reached on the Great Exchange, which is probably true.

And it was agreed that the next round of negotiations on resolving the conflict – or rather, on ending Russian aggression – would include a European delegation. But this is just manipulation and a game.

Yesterday I was reading about our favorite actress from the burned-down theater – I’m referring to Maria Zakharova. She says that ever since Soviet times, they’ve used this format where the media asks questions – that is, they write the questions themselves – and then answer them themselves.

The question was whether it’s true that European diplomats will be present at the next meeting. And Zakharova replied: “The Kremlin hasn’t discussed this topic.”

Can you imagine what a delicious slap in the face that was for Witkof himself? I mean, he writes about what happened, and immediately gets slapped in the face like that – a slap that would make any normal person sober up a bit.

That’s what Russian foreign policy is all about. It’s a policy that has never had – and still doesn’t have – a shred of truth to it. It’s a lie built on lies.

That’s why I really hope that after such public humiliations, Witkoff himself will finally start to understand something. Although he’s certainly not a professional, and it’s very difficult for him to grasp what he’s doing and what’s being done to him.

But this is already crossing every possible line. And this, by the way, is a slap in the face to Trump as well. So now I’m going to take great pleasure in watching how Russian propaganda will portray Putin sitting between Trump and Xi and pulling their strings.

Full interview: watch the video

What the Kremlin Really Has in Mind Regarding NATO

The U.S. asked Zelenskyy whether Ukraine was ready to withdraw from Donbas in exchange for NATO membership. The president replied that he was ready to bring this issue up for discussion only on the condition of receiving a full package of security guarantees. But Putin actually got what he wanted from these talks – to divert attention away from his key objectives. During a meeting with European leaders, Zelenskyy said it would be inappropriate for Ukraine to choose a single person from Europe to represent its interests. But Putin wants to see NATO roll back to 1997. Who should represent Europe, and how? Will this tactic of offering a package in exchange for a distraction really divide Europe and undermine the support it provides us?

We return to the question of what Russia is, what its foreign policy is, and what The key objective of this foreign policy is.

The goal is to ensure that neither the EU nor NATO continues to function as unified structures.

To achieve this, mechanisms must be chosen to break these alliances into pieces. A few days ago, an official at the Russian Ministry of Propaganda put forward the idea of individual guarantees from Russia for NATO member states.

This is the very same logic and the very same pipe dream that the Russians are pursuing: to give each country its own guarantees. NATO will be gone, and we, the Russians, will guarantee the security of, say, Slovakia or Hungary.

In other words, “we will effectively control this country because it’s small, and we have nuclear weapons” – that’s exactly what Putin dreams of.

As for how Europe should position itself, there needs to be a unified European team consisting of two parts.

First, the European institutions – that is, the European Council, the European Commission, and five key countries: the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Poland. This is a very sound, rational approach that takes into account the interests of the key players on the European continent.

Poland acts here as our immediate neighbor and a hub through which aid flows. The other four countries are G7 members.

These are powerful nations with immense political, economic, and military potential. With such a framework, we can hope that Europe’s position will be united and strong.

But let’s return to what Zakharova said: that Europe will not participate in the next round of negotiations. In this situation, the focus shifts to Ukraine.

We must make it absolutely clear to our American partners that there will be no next round of talks unless a European delegation is present. Period.

Why Russia Doesn’t Want to Discuss an Energy Ceasefire

Zelenskyy comments on the energy truce and says that the Russians don’t want it. At the meeting in Abu Dhabi, the Russian delegation said they had no mandate. Why is that? What does this indicate?

The Russian delegation arrives in Abu Dhabi with directives stating that “ These topics will not be discussed.” They should have said the same thing the very moment we heard that these topics would not be discussed – that they had no mandate to discuss other topics.

You can’t negotiate with these thugs any other way. Usually, the agenda is discussed before any round of negotiations.

If this had proceeded normally, we would have had to say right away: if they intend to force us to discuss the political fantasies of December 2021, then we have no mandate to discuss such fantasies. We have a mandate to discuss practical matters.

What is Moscow doing now? It wants to drag us – the Americans and Europeans – into discussions of its political fantasies, all while continuing the war.

Putin wants peace talks, but he doesn’t want peace. He wants to continue the war under the guise of so-called negotiations.

Fortunately, people in America are beginning to realize that Putin needs to be put in his place.

Why Is the U.S. Asking Putin About Europe’s Role?

It’s very strange that American negotiators are asking Putin whether Europe should be at the negotiating table. What kind of approach does this fit into?

It fits into the paradigm that Trump will absorb any blows from Putin because he remains dependent on him. It has gotten to the point where the Americans have offered the Russians the chance to draft a new concept for European security.

Can you imagine – and yet, once again, the Europeans aren’t even here. This is a clear indication that the U.S. and Russia are on the same team. We shouldn’t be surprised that such proposals are coming from the Americans. They’re essentially dancing to Putin’s tune.

No matter how much Trump tries to act all big and powerful, he’s just playing off Putin’s cues – and nothing more. We just need to wait a little while longer. There’s a little over a month left until the Christmas break in America.

We need to weather this month, including the antics of Elon Musk, who is once again on a short leash with Trump. I think that afterward, the Democrats will figure out why he has, once again, stopped sending us the relevant signals.

What Russians’ moods reveal about the state of the country’s economy

Opinion polls show that the war has “worn down” Russians. They have lost faith in their own future and that of their country. When asked whether military operations should continue now or whether peace talks should begin, nearly two-thirds of Russians favor negotiations. What do these figures and sentiments tell us?

We need to be careful here, because while they support negotiations, they do so only on their own terms. This is something to keep in mind. It’s a signal that the war needs to end, but the question is: how should it end?

There are other interesting findings from Russian surveys. Nearly 8 out of 10 Russians have changed their eating habits to save money. Over the past year, 79% of survey participants have started saving on food or planning their purchases more carefully. This suggests that 80% of Russians realize they’ll soon have no money left to buy food.

The main constraints on business have been a decline in demand for goods and services. If people don’t have money in their pockets, it’s obvious that they’ll cut back on everything, and this creates a chain reaction.

Reports from the regions indicate that doctors, nurses, teachers, and preschool teachers have begun to be laid off. In the Irkutsk region, even emergency services personnel have already started being laid off.

Local budgets are no longer covering all the expenses they’re supposed to cover. And this is raising the question: “What do we need Moscow for if we’re giving everything to them while we’re left with nothing?”

They say the darkness is deepest before dawn. These Russian security fantasies from 1997 are precisely that final, darkest phase of darkness, after which dawn will break.

We must now bring Russia to a point where it can no longer function. This will be the only way to compel Russia to make peace.

Will a trilateral nuclear dialogue between the U.S., Russia, and China make sense?

On the sidelines of the APEC summit,the first-ever trilateral meeting between the leaders of the U.S., Russia, and Chinais planned. The main topic of the talks is expected to be the development of an agreement on nuclear arms control. Will there actually be any tangible results, or is this mostly symbolic?

The outcome will be minimal, if any. While the U.S. and Russia have room to reduce their arsenals, China still has a long way to go to catch up with them.

China will likely make a very simple point: you – the U.S. and Russia – have amassed colossal nuclear arsenals. Reduce your arsenals to our level, and then we’ll sit down and discuss what to do next on equal terms.

In the end, if they say anything at all, it will be that the three leaders discussed the very important issue of nuclear arms reduction. But everyone will stick to their guns.

Each of them will try to use this for their own propaganda. The Russian press will be jumping for joy, the Chinese press will write about Comrade Xi’s triumphant march, and pro-Trump media will shout that Trump is fighting for nuclear disarmament.

I don’t expect any practical results. As for Ukraine, China will distance itself and say it supports peace and territorial integrity – though it’s unclear which one.

On the nuclear issue, China may say that it opposes even the idea that nuclear weapons could be used. This will be a direct hint to Putin to tone down his nuclear threats and calm down.

Why the U.S. Suspended Flights

The U.S. lifted its nationwide ban on flights following a major system failure that caused more than 10,000 flights to be delayed. The U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security did not link this to a cyberattack, but at the same time he praised Donald Trump very highly for his leadership. What might have actually been going on, and does this indicate just how unstable things are within Trump’s inner circle?

This statement reminded me of yet another Congress of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, when the frail Leonid Ilyich listened to praise of what a great, wonderful, and wise General Secretary he was. We all know how that ended – both for Brezhnev and for the country.

I think the Americans gave their answer to the question of just how brilliant Trump is during the midterm elections. No American president in history has ever suffered a greater political catastrophe. Trump will now go down in history as the president who lost both chambers of Congress after just a year and a half in office.

Of course, we can hardly say for sure right now whether this could have been a massive cyberattack. We can’t rule that out.

Look at what North Korean hackers did to cryptocurrencies. Couldn’t they have taken down the communications system? They certainly could have.

Or is it, as Trump says, outdated equipment? Until yesterday, it wasn’t outdated, but today it suddenly became outdated and everything went down at once. That seems rather implausible. That’s why I think it could have been a coordinated cyberattack.

Let’s wait – the Americans themselves need to find out what happened, because this is serious. It’s a transportation collapse that’s affecting economic indicators; it’s causing colossal losses. But for everything to suddenly stop working all at once across such a vast country because of equipment – that just doesn’t happen.