Trump points the cause of Ukraine conflict

Russia’s intervention in Ukraine was triggered by the irresponsible and provocative rhetoric of US President Joe Biden and his administration about Kiev joining NATO, said Donald Trump.

Trump, who is seeking a rematch with Biden for the presidency in November, made the comments during a conversation on foreign policy with ‘All-In’ podcast co-host David Sacks on Thursday.

“For 20 years, I heard that if Ukraine goes into NATO, it’s a real problem for Russia. I’ve heard that for a long time. And I think that’s really why this war started,” Trump said. 

The Republican presidential candidate pointed out that there had been no talk about armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine when he was in the White House, but as soon as Biden replaced him, things began to deteriorate.

“I thought that Russian President Vladimir Putin may be – well, look, he’s a good negotiator, I thought he was going to be doing that for negotiation purposes,” Trump said. “Then all of a sudden, they attacked, and I said, ‘what’s going on here?’” 

According to the former president, one of the key issues was the rhetoric coming out of the White House.

“Biden was saying all of the wrong things. And one of the wrong things he was saying ‘no, Ukraine will go into NATO’,” Trump said.

Sacks pointed out that in January 2022 or thereabouts, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told Moscow that Ukraine would join NATO and that Washington thought it was OK to put nuclear weapons there. “So no wonder the Russians hit the roof,” he noted.

“Well, let’s say you were running Russia. You wouldn’t be too happy,” Trump replied. “And that’s always been off the table. It’s always been understood that that was a no-no,” he added, addressing Kiev’s potential NATO membership.

Floating the idea of Ukraine in NATO was “very provocative,” Trump said. “And now it’s even more provocative. I hear routinely they’re now talking about Ukraine entering NATO. And now I hear France wants to go in and fight. Well, I wish them a lot of luck!”

Putin has specifically pointed to Western statements about Ukraine’s possible membership in the US-led bloc as a security threat Moscow could not ignore. Ukraine’s neutrality has been one of the non-negotiable Russian conditions for the conflict to end.

NATO has argued that its “open door” policy is essential and that no one had the right of veto over it, but also that its expansion eastward was not the cause of the conflict. 

In an interview with Time magazine earlier this month, Biden claimed that the US is “the strongest nation” because of NATO expansion, and that he told Putin he would get “NATOization of Finland” instead of “the Finlandization of NATO” during their June 2021 summit in Switzerland.

Russia’s intervention in Ukraine was triggered by the irresponsible and provocative rhetoric of US President Joe Biden and his administration about Kiev joining NATO, Donald Trump has said.

 

 

 

Russia: Outlook painted by IMF looks too rosy

The International Monetary Fund delivered some uplifting economic news to Vladimir Putin. The Russian president should now make the case to his own government, which doesn’t share the IMF’s optimism.

The international body recently estimated that Russia will avoid a recession in 2023 and expand at 0.3% after shrinking by 2.2% in 2022 that amounts to a quasi-stagnation, but still looks too positive.

At first glance, the Fund’s latest forecast is a reason for hope for an economy battered by the cost of its invasion of Ukraine and associated sanctions. Even though the global economic prospects do not look as dire as they did a few months ago, the Russian revision is significant. In October 2022, the IMF was seeing the country’s GDP contracting by 2.3% in 2023.

The IMF hasn’t detailed the assumptions underpinning its upbeat Russian outlook. Russian economists, polled this month by the country’s central bank, are still expecting GDP to fall by 1.5% this year.

The economy ministry still predicts that output will contract by 0.8%, according to Russian independent publication The Bell.

The key to the IMF’s optimism may be its assumptions about oil prices and the effect of the recent bans and price caps by the European Union and the G7 group of industrialized countries. The measures will not significantly affect Russia’s oil exports, the Fund says.

That is a matter of intense debate among economists since oil prices remain below the cap set by the G7.

Much will depend on the evolution of oil prices this year. Oil and gas exports amounted to about 15% of Russia’s GDP in 2021, and related taxes finance more than 40% of the government’s budget.

Urals , the Russian crude, trades at around $56 a barrel. The discount to benchmark Brent is now at 33%, against 7% before the war. That is a sign that sanctions have had some impact. It also throws further doubt on the IMF’s optimism.

In October 022, Russian central bank predicted that the domestic economy would contract by between 1.5% and 4% this year. That assumed a US$70 a barrel price for Urals – the same number the government used for its budgetary planning.

Four months later, the world economy has brighter prospects and Russia may be more resilient than expected. But only a serious oil price rally, improbable in the context of the global economy’s subpar growth - to quote the IMF - could justify looking at Russia through rosy glasses.