The Question of Trump and Appeasement.

I read today that Mr Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, says there would be no point inviting Europe to take part in the discussions over Ukraine because Europe just wants to prolong the war. This sounds farcical on first reading, but I assume that what he meant was that Europe doesn’t want Putin to come out of the conflict with a substantial land grab. Trump, on the other hand, is now putting distance between America and Europe and probably doesn’t give a monkey’s toss if Ukraine loses some of its territory. Trump is, therefore, the one the Russians want to deal with rather than Ukraine or any other representative of Europe.

And Trump’s own position would appear to be very simple. If he can get a deal – by hook or by crook – in which Russia withdraws but keeps some prime real estate close to the warmer parts of the Black Sea, he can then present himself to the world as a peacemaker. (He could even come up with some pathetic, fallacious sound bite as he did when he said ‘I took a bullet for democracy.’ And he would be more easily able to save billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine, which would be more acceptable to the folks at home than firing half the American civil service.) Some people would no doubt see Trump’s position as appeasement and draw parallels with Anthony Eden’s response to Nazi aggression in 1939, but probably not enough to count for very much.

And I might be completely wrong, of course. Time will tell, won’t it?

(But do I detect a slight whiff of the potential for a much bigger conflict here, one which I expect America would watch from the sidelines? I hope not.)