A lot of people in Washington — and I mean a lot! — aren’t especially pleased with the fact that President Trump will be sitting down next to Russian President Vladimir Putin on July 14, with only a couple of translators, no note-takers to document the conversation, and no advisers present. Bilateral meetings between heads of state are typically highly choreographed affairs; after a few photographs are taken of the two leaders smiling and shaking hands, both go into a conference room with their aides and begin discussions. The aides are included in the dialogue both for insurance purposes and for back-up. Trump, however, is not the kind of man held captive to conventions.
Weeks after his televised confab with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, Trump seems convinced he can look into Putin’s soul (where have we heard that phrase before?) and determine whether there is some commonality of interests Washington and Moscow can collaborate on. According to John Huntsman, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, talking with Putin one-on-one was entirely the president’s idea.
Trump, of course, is completely confident about his deal-making prowess. To the president, the Democrats and foreign policy intellectuals in the “Never Trump” faction who are extremely worried about him being snookered by Putin are a bunch of children who couldn’t negotiate their way out of a brown paper bag. During a campaign rally in Montana on July 5, Trump exuded a mountain of self-confidence, as only he can. “Will I be prepared [for the meeting]?” he asked the crowd of thousands. “Totally prepared. I’ve been preparing for this stuff my whole life.”
Will Trump and Putin be able to work something out next week? Or will Trump be taken for a sucker? As the president is fond of saying, “We’ll see.” But for the summit to be shielded from the calamity that so much of Washington’s foreign policy community is nervously awaiting, Trump should write these three simple tips on a notecard and keep it in his suit pocket.
1. Crimea is Ukrainian territory, even if many Crimeans speak Russian
Trump caused a stir last week when he appeared to leave open the possibility of recognizing Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula. Actually following through and granting that kind of recognition, however, would be a gargantuan foreign policy concession to the Kremlin and an even more gargantuan political nightmare to an administration that doesn’t need any more controversy. To accept Moscow’s claim to the Ukrainian peninsula would be to de facto accept how Moscow acquired that territory — through force. Not since the 1940s has a country in Europe taken another country’s territory by force. Putin broke the spell in 2014 when Russian special operations soldiers seized Crimea overnight with no Ukrainian army resistance. This is not something that an American president should formally endorse, even if a Russian-controlled Crimea is a fact of life on the ground.
2. Putin is a master manipulator, so be aware
Vladimir Putin is literally schooled in the art of deception. He is an intelligence operative to his core and has run the Russian state over the last twenty years just as you would think an intelligence officer would. Putin has an uncanny ability to read people and exploit any weakness that his sparring partner may expose. American and European officials who have negotiated with Putin in the past describe him as someone who can be charming, uber-pragmatic, and tough-as-nails depending on which tact is required. Trump has demonstrated himself to be someone susceptible to flattery, so Putin will likely try to shower his American counterpart with compliments. The sooner Trump recognizes that Putin doesn’t really mean what he says, the less prone he will be to falling for the spell. It’s all an act, Mr. President.
3. Focus on small ball
U.S.-Russian relations are in bad shape. Indeed, ties between Washington and Moscow may be as bad as they were in the early 1980s, when President Reagan was in the process of deploying Pershing missiles in Europe. Back then, it was all about strategic competition and balance-of-power politics. Now, the U.S.-Russia rivalry involves a whole litany of areas, from cybersecurity and conventional military exercises along the NATO-Russia border to armed conflict in Syria and sanctions enforcement on North Korea. Trump may believe he can strike a grand bargain with Putin that touches on all of these issues, but the gulf between both countries’ bottom lines is far too wide and deep to arrive at anything substantial. The reality is that Washington and Moscow have different national security interests all the way up to the most elementary of concepts: What rules and principles should dictate how the world is run today?
It would be more prudent for Trump to use the summit as an opportunity to chip away at the animus and mutual suspicion that has dominated the relationship since Putin came back to the Kremlin in 2012. That means discussions about more mundane deliverables, such as reinstituting people-to-people exchanges, reopening consulates in one another’s countries, and increasing their diplomatic delegations on a mutual basis. Trump would be wise to solicit Putin’s assistance in keeping Iranian and Iranian-aligned forces away from the Israeli border. While the Russians haven’t exactly been a great implementer of Syria ceasefires and de-escalation zones in the past, the last thing Moscow wants is more Israeli sorties against Assad-aligned forces in Syria, particularly when the Assad regime is on the upswing.
Through it all, President Trump ought to remember the Hippocratic Oath: Do no harm. If Trump and Putin leave Helsinki next week without incident, the summit can be packaged as a win.
Daniel DePetris (@DanDePetris) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. His opinions are his own.
