What is it about Putin that fascinates Trump so much? Several articles examining their complex relationship suggest that Trump’s soft spot for Putin dates back nearly 40 years. Referencing a widely quoted statement that “Putin went through a lot of hell with me,” a Le Monde article said Trump’s words “echoed the persistent allegations of collusion between the billionaire and the Kremlin that have intensified since Trump entered politics a decade ago.”
European leaders often portray Russian President Vladimir Putin as a tyrant, a land grabber, and a Russian bear. And following the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine War three years ago, the deadliest in Europe since World War II, Putin has gone from being a bad guy in Western European eyes to being something worse: a war criminal.
|
|
Yet, the biggest enigma across many Western capitals is why US President Donald Trump, the leader of the free world, is eager to embody everything that the West despises about Putin. Trump is enamoured of Putin. His admiration for the Russian president was once again evident during their 15 August meeting in Alaska.
Waiting for Putin
|
|
|
|---|
As Trump waited for Putin on the red carpet, you could almost sense the butterflies up and down his stomach, like a lover waiting for a date. He squinted and pouted nervously. As Putin alighted and approached him, the dam of his affection for the Russian president burst into irresistible applause. Quite remarkable.
Since his second inauguration in January, Trump has hosted many world leaders in the White House, from British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, Canada’s Mark Carney and South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa.
Except in Trump-tionary, the new playbook, where uncertainty and bullying have replaced rules and courtesy, the engagements in the White House would qualify more as encounters in the predator’s lair than diplomatic meetings.
Encounters in the Lair
In February, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was pinned to the wall and hammered for dressing improperly to the White House, and daring to offer a different view of the war in his country from that of President Trump.
Canada was slammed with more trade tariffs after Carney’s visit, and the same, even worse, treatment was meted out to India after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit. Where outside the Trump world does a major trading partner get slammed with an additional 25 perc ent trade tariff, as was the case with India, for buying Russian oil, whereas Putin, the man in the middle of the war, got a reprieve on the eve of the Alaska summit for showing up on his terms?
During his visit, Ramaphosa was treated to an unsolicited movie of the so-called graves of white South African farmers, allegedly stripped of their land – fabrications by the White House.
In a broadside against US politicians in 1987 that highlighted his interest in Russia, Trump reportedly paid for an advert in The New York Times, saying, “The world is laughing at American politicians as we protect ships we don’t own, carrying oil we don’t need, destined for allies who don’t help.”.. Therefore, it is unsurprising that he has treated NATO contemptuously and insisted that the US would not pay for Europe’s security.
But when Putin came, it was different. Not only did Trump wait for him on the tarmac, applauding as the Russian president walked the red carpet to meet him, they both travelled in the Beast, a rare privilege that bypassed a carefully planned last-minute attempt to prevent a one-on-one summit.
For Putin, the special one, Trump wangled a one-on-one.
The world waits anxiously to see how the combined effort of seven European leaders will save Trump from himself. Moscow is also watching closely.
The Thing About Putin
What is it about Putin that fascinates Trump so much? Several articles examining their complex relationship suggest that Trump’s soft spot for Putin dates back nearly 40 years. Referencing a widely quoted statement that “Putin went through a lot of hell with me,” a Le Monde article said Trump’s words “echoed the persistent allegations of collusion between the billionaire and the Kremlin that have intensified since Trump entered politics a decade ago.”
In a bid to expand the Trump business empire, in the late 1980s, the young billionaire reportedly explored the possibility of building the Trump Tower in Moscow, with unverified reports that he was even recruited as a KGB agent with the code name “Krasnov.”
In a broadside against US politicians in 1987 that highlighted his interest in Russia, Trump reportedly paid for an advert in The New York Times, saying, “The world is laughing at American politicians as we protect ships we don’t own, carrying oil we don’t need, destined for allies who don’t help.”
Therefore, it is unsurprising that he has treated NATO contemptuously and insisted that the US would not pay for Europe’s security.
Lovefest
Almost 20 years ago, when Russia was still grappling with the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Trump told CNN that Putin was doing “a great job of fixing the country,” and then in 2013, the billionaire playboy moved heaven and earth yet failed to court the Russian president to attend the Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow.
Five years later, Trump had his first meeting with Putin in Helsinki, one in which the US president publicly questioned US intelligence agencies, and agreed with Putin that, contrary to what was reported in America, there was no Russian interference in the 2016 elections.
Notwithstanding his erratic nature, Trump is right about one thing: any security guarantee that demands Russia give up all territory taken so far or leaves a window for Ukraine to return to NATO will be futile. Beyond the Trump-Putin lovefest, Zelenskyy’s brinkmanship, and Europe’s indifference to genuine Russian concerns about being encircled, something must give for peace to take hold.
“I have great confidence in my intelligence,” Trump said after the Helsinki summit, “But I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong…I think the United States has been foolish. We’ve all been foolish.”
It’s the kind of thing a philandering spouse says, paying no heed to the remotest redeeming grace of the partner they are betraying. But it doesn’t bother Trump. He is happy to trash America and shaft allies to be in Putin’s good books.
Understanding Trump
Experts have made several efforts to understand this special, complex relationship. Why does Europe and much of the world walk on eggshells to appease Trump (Starmer recruited King Charles by taking along a special invitation to the US, while Ramaphosa dragged two golfers to the White House) when Putin calls once and Trump answers twice?
Explanations range from Trump’s personality trait, especially his love of flattery and desire for validation, to his transactional worldview, aversion to conflict with strongmen (think of China’s Xi Jinping), and his scepticism of multilateralism.
Comparing the Trump-Putin bromance with the relationship between President Richard Nixon and the Chinese President Mao Zedong, or between Ronald Reagan and Russian Mikhail Gorbachev, doesn’t quite explain it.
‘Trust But Verify’
While Nixon and Reagan, for example, had personal chemistry with their counterparts from China and Russia, apart from sharing some common goals and being in control of their domestic affairs, Trump’s fascination with Putin appears to be fuelled mainly by the strongman’s vanity. Whereas Trump seems to take Putin at face value, Reagan famously described his relationship with Gorbachev as “trust but verify.”
The 15 August Trump-Putin summit ended exactly as many analysts predicted it would end: Trump dumping the responsibility for ending the war on Zelenskyy’s doorstep. Sensing the looming danger, European leaders are mustering the tact of Talleyrand and the guile of Churchill to keep Trump on a leash, and it all boils down to this: what do “security guarantees” mean for Ukraine – and Russia?
Notwithstanding his erratic nature, Trump is right about one thing: any security guarantee that demands Russia give up all territory taken so far or leaves a window for Ukraine to return to NATO will be futile. Beyond the Trump-Putin lovefest, Zelenskyy’s brinkmanship, and Europe’s indifference to genuine Russian concerns about being encircled, something must give for peace to take hold.
Still on the Matter of Bayo Ojulari
I underestimated the interest in the controversy over the rumoured resignation of the Group Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), Bayo Ojulari. More things came to light after my last week’s article, “What Happened in the Matter of Bayo Ojulari?”
If, like me, you were wondering why Ojulari can’t easily shake off Abdullahi Bashir Haske, son-in-law of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, there’s a little more to it than Haske’s long-standing business relationship with NNPCL. A source confided that Ojulari once consulted with Mars Production and Exploration Limited, a Haske-owned company. When fate brought them together again in NNPCL, old ties prevailed.
Another matter is how the current NNPCL structure is stoking internal problems. The company currently has a Group Chief Operating Officer, Rowland Ewubare, but that position doesn’t exist in the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA).
The GCOO insists that the Executive Vice Presidents should report to him. They ignore him and report to the GCEO, as Section 59 of the PIA provides, worsening the administrative chaos.
With the delicate, triangular Adamawa power play amongst in-laws – Atiku-Ribadu-Haske – and now, the court freezing the accounts of former NNPCL GCEO Mele Kyari in Jaiz Bank, the whole thing gets curiouser.
The more you look…
Azu Ishiekwene is editor-in-chief of LEADERSHIP and author of the book, Writing for Media and Monetising It.
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
