The Relationship Between Trump and Putin, the Diesel Deal

Donald Trump is trying to persuade Vladimir Putin to agree to end the war by offering Moscow economic benefits. However, these moves may be part of a much larger plan – to restore business relations with Russia and distance it from China. If the Kremlin once again rejects the agreements, Washington still has leverage capable of seriously impacting the Russian oil industry.

Adv

When did Trump actually begin pushing for a deal with Putin?

Many people say the diesel deal is nothing. Then why is Donald Trump pushing it against all common sense? Why is he making such a big deal out of a deal that seems to offer so little? Or is it just a chance to claim that he’s managed to lower fuel prices?

With all due respect to many other analysts, let me say that there are various theories, and I’m listening to them. Obviously, this has something to do with the election. He knows very well – and his energy secretary would tell him right away – that this will have almost no impact on diesel prices before the election.

So, unless this is being done for show – perhaps there’s some visual component to it – but given the problems he’s having with votes in the United States, it won’t make much of a difference. That’s why I think there’s something else at play.

And what we’ve been learning step by step, gradually, is that all of this didn’t start withdiesel agreement. In fact, it began back in September, when he was at the General Assembly in New York. And back then, according to the New York Times, American diplomats were talking to European diplomats, proposing to unfreeze Russian funds and gradually begin returning them to the Russians.

So it turns out that the diesel deal, as I now believe, was just the tip of the iceberg. A more comprehensive project was underway, similar to the one that existed when he had just taken office. During the first three, almost four months, Donald Trump was very focused on offering Putin all sorts of economic incentives, which included oil and gas perks, as well as easing sanctions, in an attempt to get him to enter into negotiations and reach an agreement on Ukraine.

So he seems to be returning to that approach.

Full interview: watch the video

What hidden game is the American leader playing against the Kremlin?

But let’s be completely frank. Is he still trying to do this because of Russia’s war in Ukraine, or does he simply want to rebuild a business relationship with Putin and return to normal cooperation with Russia?

You can look at this from two angles. Some people will tell me, “Yes, he’s corrupt, but he’s already made $2 billion since becoming president this time around.” So the diesel deal won’t add much to that. I don’t think so.

In fact, many people go so far as to call Trump a traitor to the Ukrainian cause or a traitor to the West’s resistance against Russia. And I don’t think he objects to that, because it’s part of the image he wants to project.

Let me explain. First, look at what he did. As I said, one of the first things we know is that they probably spoke with Putin earlier, but they wanted to raise this issue, to let the Russians know that they’re trying to figure out whether it’s possible to return this money to Russia. All that frozen money, which is mostly in Europe, with some of it in the United States.

Then he went through a whole series of other issues. There’s the diesel deal, but he and his negotiators were also in talks with the Russians about possibly restarting the Nord Stream gas pipeline so that an American company could buy it. You know, that old story.

And very importantly, just before that, a little over a month ago, the Senate and the House of Representatives finally passed a bill that Lindsey Graham had been pushing since last June, even before his death, together with Democrat Richard Blumenthal. They call these “devastating, draconian sanctions” against the Russian state.

The idea was that the way to finally stop Russia’s aggression in Ukraine – as well as in Africa, the Middle East, and the problems it creates for others in Europe – is to strike at its finances. It can do all this because it earns money as a resource-rich country. And it’s mostly not gas – it’s mostly oil. Their plan was to break that.

They passed this bill, and Trump signed it. To me, this seems similar to things that have happened in the past. Trump has the power to impose something like 100% tariffs and secondary sanctions against the five leading countries that buy Russian oil, along with a campaign against oil refineries being carried out by Ukraine.

According to my analysis – and I’ve been saying this for a year and a half now – this would crush the Russian oil system, especially if it happens during cold weather. It would destroy them; they wouldn’t be able to export oil – we’re talking about 3.5 to 4 million barrels. It would cripple the oil fields in Western Siberia if they had to be shut down, especially in the winter.

So he had this up his sleeve, and he’d done something similar before, when he imposed sanctions against Rosneft and Lukoil nearly a year ago. But when he had them up his sleeve, he did something similar. He kept it a secret. He didn’t use them. He went to Putin. And we believe he told him, “Listen, I have these sanctions. They’re really bad for you. I don’t want to do this to you.”

And he launched into this whole tirade about how Russia should be part of Europe, how we could do business, how we could invest a trillion dollars. “Forget about Ukraine, forget about conquering it, and so on. Actually, I have Mr. Zelenskyy; he’ll strike some kind of deal with you – it won’t be all that bad. Stop.” And he warned them.

And then they put on this whole charade, Putin and Lavrov: “Oh, maybe we’ll meet with you in Hungary” and so on. But in the end, they did nothing. And finally, Trump said, “Hey, I tried everything.” And then he imposed sanctions, and they were quite devastating.

So I think he’s doing the same thing because he has a plan that goes beyond simply crushing Russia. He’s very attached to this reverse Nixon strategy, where he wants to drive a wedge between Russia and China. So, before imposing devastating sanctions against its oil sector, he’s going to play games with them. He’s putting them in his pocket and saying, “I’m suspending these sanctions.”

Now he goes and offers Putin everything under the sun. He even makes baseless insults against Zelenskyy, likely just to win over the Russians and say, “Guys, I don’t want to destroy your oil sector. Come on, let’s make a deal.”

There’s some evidence from what I heard today from Bloomberg that discussions are apparently ongoing. My suspicion is that this round of attempts to resume talks with the Russians probably won’t work, but things are going badly for the Russians. Perhaps they’re conducting some kind of negotiations. I don’t know; I can’t predict it.

But I predict that if Putin ends up doing what he did last time – like when he went to Alaska – the Americans didn’t even have time to present all the economic incentives they had for him. He started lecturing Trump on ancient Slavic history and on how Russia and Moscow should rule Ukraine. And you know, Trump got fed up with it; he went home and imposed the sanctions I mentioned earlier.

So I think that if Putin doesn’t see this process through to the end, Trump may eventually resort to harsh sanctions. Once he realizes that he’s done everything he can but hasn’t achieved the desired result, he may impose them. After all, Trump has already signed these sanctions – which were supported by an overwhelming majority in the U.S. Congress – and they are truly draconian.

And let me tell you, if I’m wrong about what Trump has in mind and he doesn’t do this, I’m quite certain that any subsequent president will impose these sanctions. So I think he’s playing this game; it’s his way of negotiating. In my opinion – though others obviously disagree with me – I think this is a cycle he’s going through.

How does this affect the Republicans’ approval ratings?

But don’t you think this is the wrong approach ahead of the midterm elections? Surely, Trump’s approach and his flattery of Russian dictator Putin – who is killing Ukrainians every day – are actually undermining the Republicans’ standing among all MAGA supporters?

There are two theories about Trump. I’ve heard him say – you watch all these short clips on YouTube where reporters interview him in the past: “You know, people don’t understand what I’m doing. They won’t understand what I’m doing on the international stage. And yes, I’ll lose a lot of votes.” That’s one perspective. On the other hand, he’s also very interested in winning the election.

I’d say that people in the U.S. who don’t like Trump have very deep-seated reasons for disliking him, and this isn’t just about Ukraine. It’s simply domestic politics. He won’t change these people’s minds. He’s done some truly cruel things regarding immigration and many other issues. That’s not our topic, but people are genuinely upset.

Meanwhile, within his base, there are people who also don’t like what he’s done, but there are also those who do. Some consider him too soft. Part of what he’s doing in Ukraine appeals to one segment of his base in a certain way, while another segment doesn’t like it.

So I think you can’t explain this with the election. He’s trying to use the diesel deal to help with the election, but all these other things he’s doing… As for the attempts to negotiate with the Russians and all these concessions, they’re going to try.

It looks like there might be a trilateral meeting involving Putin, Trump, and President Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy is fully in favor of this, and it would likely be a positive development. We’ll just have to see how things play out, right? Because it’s time to end this war. Obviously, it’s time to put an end to this war. It’s gone too far, it’s lasted too long, and there have been too many deaths. In a sense, everyone agrees on this.

So I don’t think you can explain all these things through the lens of the election. Trump is going through a phase where he’d like to see this war end. If Putin really wants to strike a deal, he might try to impose conditions on Ukraine that it doesn’t like. This has happened before, and Zelenskyy and Trump have made certain compromises on these issues.

For the most part, everything has been settled on the Ukrainian side. Zelenskyy and the Cabinet of Ministers agreed long ago to ceasefire on the spot, but they didn’t want to sign any peace agreement unless it was guaranteed. Trump had these economic agreements, which, according to him, would help guarantee this in the future – for the future president and for American companies operating there. Zelenskyy said that wasn’t enough, and he was very upset about it.

Trump really put pressure on other NATO members, and they came together. Macron put pressure on other NATO members, and they formed this Coalition of the Willing. I mean, the Europeans aren’t going to send troops into Ukraine just yet, unfortunately. Not even volunteers. That’s a different matter. But they agree that if there’s a peace agreement, they’ll use their armed forces to somehow patrol and ensure its implementation. And the Ukrainian side is satisfied with that.

So now everything depends on Putin – whether he’ll say, “All right, I agree to a ceasefire,” or propose something else, and whether a real discussion will take place. There are certain signs that if he agrees to a trilateral meeting – and if the reports I heard 15 minutes ago before we went on the air are true – then very intense discussions are taking place right now about how to reach an agreement on Donbas. We’ll see what happens.

Trump is offering, as we say in English, “carrots” to Putin to try to lure him in. But everyone knows – including Putin – that he has a big “stick” in his pocket. And that stick is the Graham-Blumenthal sanctions. If all of this falls apart and Putin doesn’t follow through, that’s the next thing Trump has to do. And that would be devastating for Russia.

How is Washington trying to “rein in” Moscow?

Trump used to say that Ukraine had no cards to play. But now our country has carried out successful counteroffensive operations. So, the point is that now that Ukraine has plenty of cards on the table, America is deciding to buy this diesel fuel, to strike this deal, to send billions of dollars. So yes, there are simply a lot of questions here, and we don’t have any optimistic outlook on the situation.

I completely understand. But you know, with Trump, it’s really hard to try to objectively analyze what’s happening, because he often doesn’t care if people hate him. In fact, he likes to manipulate things like this.

At the same time, I’ve been looking into this. I think we talked about this a year ago in August, when Ukraine launched its new drone campaign – which is still ongoing – against oil refineries. There was one earlier campaign that Mr. Biden strongly opposed, but Ukraine carried it out on its own, using its own resources, and it went quite well. It was a proof-of-concept, but the armed forces were unable to truly support it.

So a year ago in August, after all the deals Trump had tried to strike with Putin had fallen apart again – according to the New York Times – the U.S. CIA and other military logistics experts in Ukraine proposed to the Ukrainians: “Why don’t you try this campaign again, and this time we’ll help you with logistics, targeting, and so on.” And they agreed, drew up a plan, went to the White House, and Trump agreed.

So that’s the other side of the story. And he said, “All right, I have to inflict some pain for a while.” And he inflicted some pain for a while, but now he’s gone back to his other side. You’re right. Ukraine is doing quite well right now.

So you’re actually in a better position, should negotiations take place, than the country was a few months ago. Even though these drones are striking you, militarily speaking, you seem to be doing quite well. And in the campaign against oil refineries.

So, perhaps this is a good time for negotiations. Trump seems to think he’ll try to do that. But that’s his style. He won’t just slap these sanctions he has up his sleeve on Russia. First, he’ll use them and say, “Hey, Putin, look what I’ve got. Let’s try to strike a deal. I’ll offer you all sorts of things.”

That’s his style. I’m not saying that’s exactly what I would do. But I’m just trying to explain what I think is the cycle he’s going through.

Why have the Europeans “gone quiet”?

You were at the Warsaw Security Forum. What did you hear behind the scenes? How did European and American officials react to Trump’s sudden behavior?

Yes. That was just coming to light. The diesel story broke while I was there. There were many high-ranking retired military officers, commanders, and so on from the U.S., and they all have issues – obviously, just like the rest of us – with the Trump administration.

But I noticed one thing among the Americans who were there, as well as many representatives of security services, the military, and government ministries from several other countries, including Poland. In the past, when Trump did things like this, everyone would get very emotional and upset. And I understand that. But I always thought, “Okay, you’re emotional – let’s sit down and talk about what this means and what we’re going to do about it.”

And what I noticed this time seemed much more level-headed: “Okay, Trump is doing this; we shouldn’t be too surprised – let’s continue our discussions about what needs to be done to help Ukraine.” And that’s what I saw during the discussions among the Europeans and Americans who were there.

I’m not talking about government officials, about the people who are currently in government. So in a sense, that struck me. It was a more level-headed, analytical discussion, unlike in the past. I’m not saying people weren’t emotional, but it was more mature, perhaps.

Well, yes, but sometimes people are very emotional at such meetings and more honest, because there’s nothing at stake – I mean, they usually no longer hold office. But how close is Ukraine to seriously undermining Russia’s oil industry at this stage?

I haven’t had detailed discussions with my Ukrainian colleagues about this for two or three weeks now, but you can see what’s in the news. They can strike various cities very effectively – even St. Petersburg right now. And my assessment remains roughly the same regarding the weapons Ukraine has at its disposal.

What it can really use to deliver long-range strikes are drones, and they’re coordinating this very well, despite all the problems with Starlink and Elon Musk. It’s quite effective.

As far as I understand, the situation remains as follows: when you strike these oil refineries, they remain shut down for perhaps up to a month and a half, six weeks, or thereabouts. And if you really want to break the system, analysis shows that the Russian state would have to invest so much money into it that we could start talking about the system’s collapse.

You’d need to keep them shut down for somewhere between 12 and 15 weeks. And that depends on having missiles – more powerful, heavier missiles – that can take out the large pumping stations that control these oil refineries.

And also the ports. Ports are very complex. They’re a mass of concrete, piers, and pipes that can be repaired. But if, for example, you destroy the large pumps that feed oil into them, that’s really hard to repair. It takes a long time. But drones, as far as I understand, won’t be able to do that. You’ll need missiles.

You asked me about the Warsaw Security Conference, and I took advantage of the fact that there are military officials there who know the details. I said, “All right, Trump isn’t giving us Tomahawks.” Even among those who really want him to give us Tomahawks – among the military – there’s an understanding that the United States has a certain problem. It’s not a serious shortage, but there is a certain lack.

And if you recall, around the time Trump told Zelenskyy, “I want to give you Tomahawks,” he yelled at Pete Hegset in the Oval Office. He said, “Why didn’t you ever tell me about this? You didn’t tell me directly about the problems with the Tomahawk shortage, that we’re using them up too quickly.” So this obviously has to do with why Trump reversed his decision to provide the Tomahawks.

Now let’s return to the air campaign against Russian oil. I think people in this field recognize that what Ukraine is targeting and doing isn’t necessarily what they want or hope to do. It’s what they can do. And that’s why they’re striking oil refineries – because that’s what they can do. Ukraine would like to shut down the ports so that oil cannot be exported, which would bring everything to a halt and truly cripple the system. But that requires long-range missiles.

Since it seems they won’t be getting Tomahawks just yet, we’re waiting for Ukraine to develop its own missiles. But, as far as I understand, this will take longer than some YouTube channels are optimistically claiming. There are many missiles out there, but you need a certain number of them, and developing them simply takes time.

So I thought we should put pressure on the Europeans. The French have missiles. The Germans have very good missiles, such as the Taurus. And as one military official pointed out to me, he said, “No, no, look at the range. None of them can reach the three main ports from Ukraine. They can’t reach Primorsk, Ust-Luga, or Novorossiysk. Their range is too short.”

Which makes me wonder: what the hell are the Europeans thinking? Their best cruise missiles – which, of course, were designed in case of a conflict with Russia – can’t even fly halfway to Moscow from Berlin, let alone from Paris. So that’s not a solution.

That’s why I see a problem here with moving this campaign against oil refineries to the next stage. And let me just say that I think people like Lindsey Graham – until his death – Richard Blumenthal, and the senators who supported these devastating sanctions understood these things. They could also have stopped exports from these ports using these draconian sanctions by targeting the five leading countries that buy it. So that’s another opportunity right now to really take this to the next level.

And we’ve already discussed this with you. Another point is that the Ukrainians had an idea: “All right, but we can strike ships entering the port.” And perhaps they will do that, but obviously, complications have arisen with that. It seems this aspect has calmed down. I’m not sure that this will shut down the ports and achieve the desired result.

So that’s my assessment based on what I know about the situation regarding Ukraine’s air campaign against Russian oil. Significant achievements. There’s still room to grow, and right now, I think it’s quite clear what needs to be done to move to the next stage, and that will take time.

What role is Beijing playing in this story?

Putin has proposed a meeting with Trump and Xi Jinping in China this November. And Putin wants peace – according to international journalists – on his own terms, or, as everyone says, Trump wants nuclear disarmament. What does Xi Jinping want? What does China actually hope to gain from this meeting? Certainly, the United States and China are, in a sense, economic equals, but Russia certainly is not.

That’s right. I’ve been thinking about this and listening to some people lately. Russia and China – obviously, the United States has been moving toward this great-power rivalry for three or four years now. There’s this issue with Russia and China that needs to be resolved. But Russia and China pose very different challenges to the international system.

Russia is “old school,” like in Soviet times and even a century or two before that. It’s like, “We want to take over neighboring countries and expand our territory to isolate ourselves from the world and exploit those territories.”

China, on the other hand, apart from seizing some territories on islands in the South China Sea – which is linked to controlling the adjacent maritime zone and barring access to the United States – is not currently engaged in anything resembling the conquest of neighboring countries.

They rely more on exports – they rely very heavily on exports for their wealth and for their economic model, which has actually worked quite well for them. They have shifted from more conventional products – cheap, mass-produced goods – to high-tech products, as we know, and electronics. They are moving up the value chain.

The problem is that their population is very poor. I saw the other day – I’m not sure – they’re ranked around 70th or something like that. That’s a fairly low per capita income. The coastal areas are wealthy, but inland there are many people who are truly poor. So the problem they face is that they can produce all these goods – they account for about 40% of global manufacturing capacity, and much of it is very advanced – but their population can’t afford to buy them. That’s why they have to export them. They have to find markets.

And the problem here is that, throughout the entire period of open globalization – the period of the liberal global market – the United States has been their largest market, because the United States consumes a huge amount of goods. In fact, that is precisely why the U.S. is so isolated from the international economic system in a way that other countries are not. Germany, for example, has a similar problem with China, but that’s a different discussion.

So when Trump talks to China, it’s different. These products need to be exported. The United States decided: “We’re not going to buy these products. We’re going to impose tariffs on them. We’re going to make things difficult for you.”

That’s why China started dumping its products in Europe – its cars, electric vehicles, and the like. And now Europeans, who needed to do business in China, see that they can’t allow cheap Chinese products to enter the market, and they’re finally starting to take steps to block this.

So what Xi Jinping needs is a deal with Trump so he can continue exporting. But Trump and the Europeans will insist: “Yes, but you mustn’t dump your products; you’ll have to compete fairly.” And that’s exactly what the discussion is about.

If Xi Jinping cannot resolve this issue, the economic crisis in China will continue to worsen – and there is indeed an economic crisis there. And that is precisely when we become concerned that he might resort to military options in various ways. I don’t know exactly what he intends to achieve by doing this, but it’s expected that he might do so, and this is precisely what the United States is preparing for.

And that is precisely why Trump has this deep conviction that he must drive a wedge between Xi Jinping and Putin. You can’t let them be together. And that’s one of the reasons why he’s willing to bend so far toward Putin – to pull him toward Europe – in my understanding of his strategic thinking.

However, it’s not just Trump. It’s the groups surrounding the White House – influential people who have theories about these matters and are working with him. That’s a whole different story.

Trump Is in No Hurry to Strike at Russia: An Interview with Thomas O'Donnell on the White House's Secret Game

popular videos