.
News crew: "Are we interrubting something?"
The Cocaine Train from Ukraine - All Aboard!
A few days ago Putin said was going???!?!
Zelensky says if Putin is not showing up for that meeting, then he won’t either. For once, I have to agree with Zelensky, if Putin is not there, or does not even send a representative, that obviously means Putin is not in agreement with the goals of this meeting.
Traveling all the way to Turkey, only to see an empty chair at the negotiating table would be an insult, to all participants, and only a waste of time.
He should go.
Putin’s gonna punk out. Plus he has cancer treatments scheduled.
So many possibilities. Look for the verb "may." Look for the words "might" and "might not." Look for the "if."
Let's headline "unclear." That way we can be clear about being unclear.
--- "...in a glimmer of hope...."
I would argue that one of the pivotal moments leading to the collapse of Tzarist Russia was when the Tzar took personal control over the command of the war effort. His advisors told him that if it failed then he personally would be held responsible, and it was better that he left the command structure in the general’s hands.
I think if Trump takes attends the negotiations personally, he’ll be held responsible when they fail. They most likely will fail. Not because the deal isn’t good enough, but because any deal at all is bad for Putin personally. He’s in a damned if he does damned if he doesn’t position. If the war stops then Russian’s war time economy will instantly collapse and thousands of angry and probably unpaid soldiers will return home. As long as the war continues, Putin continues in charge and is personally safe. His choice is lose control now or lose control later. He’ll vote for later.
.
News crew: "Are we interrubting something?"
Tell your Zelesnky not to come up with an excuse to weasel out of the talks and to wear a proper suit and tie!
If P doesn’t go, then Z won’t go, whaaa! Come on, put your big boy pants on and get this thing done and over with. Fine, don’t go but there’s this neat invention called Zoom. Y’all don’t need Papa Trump to hold your hands.
If Lavvrov and Rubio go but POTUS doesn’t, Zelensky technically outranks them both - he’s an elected head of a UN Charter member state, and they’re both underlings.
If POTUS is there but Putin isn’t, President Trump could lean on Zelensky but this could be construed as him lobbying on absent Putin’s behalf. Which then undermines any narrative based on him being a mediating presence. Likewise, he can’t take Zelensky’s side without Russia crying foul at being outgunned.
The best way to progress is for Zelensky and Trump to both attend, but abandon the talks if Putin doesn’t turn up... And both say explicitly, it’d be unfair for Russian underlings to negotiate against two heads of state without their own head of state present.
I see Kazan has brought up the troll thing about wearing a suit. Zelensky’s reasons for not wearing a suit have been consistent throughout, and he is just as unlikely to wear a suit in Putin’s or Trump’s presence as he is in the presence of Macron, Johnson, Starmer, Xi, or the Pope.
The problem with attacking that position given the solidarity principle behind it is, it appeals to the Russians and their sympathisers, but outside of those groups it will age like milk.
Nobody looking at the history of Ghandi today would be fixated on the fact he didn’t wear a suit without acknowledging the principle Ghandi was expressing.
Ghandi wore his garb in solidarity and to make a statement. He was consistent with it, which also mattered.
The Brits who made an issue out of the perceived “disrespect” of it found that this reflected far more badly on them in the long run than it reflected badly on Ghandi. There’s a lot about Ghandi that is open to debate, but his sartorial choice isn’t one of them.