THE LONG-AWAITED MEETING

Perhaps the central intrigue since the inauguration of the U.S. president has been focused on the format of the Trump-Putin meeting planned for the G20 summit in Hamburg on July 7-8. Both leaders will definitely meet but the question is ‘how’ they are going to do this. Apparently, the same question worries each and every leader of the world.

Trump's advisers recommend him to have a short informal meeting, or, even better, to avoid any meeting at all. Instead, they propose routine discussions around the most-pressing global issues between the delegations of the U.S. and Russia, including the bilateral cooperation. However, the American president is persistent. “He’s pressing for a full bilateral meeting with media access and all the typical protocol associated with such sessions,” reports the Associated Press citing its sources in the White House.

Trump's desire to establish good relations with Russia has not changed for many years. Back in 2007, in his interview with Larry King, Trump expressed his admiration for Putin “doing a great job in rebuilding the image of Russia.” During the election campaign, Trump repeatedly stated that if he won the election he would have “very, very good relations” with Putin and with Russia. Just before the inauguration, on January 7, he wrote on Twitter: “Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. Only stupid people, or fools, would think that it is bad!.”

However, in the course of his tenure at the White House, Trump’s confidence in his own statements has diminished noticeably. He still hopes to get along with the Russian leadership, but is uncertain as to whether this ever comes true.

This could not work otherwise, as the controversy over Trump’s secret communications with Russia has been growing since the moment of inauguration. In May, the U.S. Department of Justice appointed the former FBI director Robert Mueller to serve as special counsel to oversee the investigation of “any Russian links” associated with the last presidential campaign. Similarly, both the Democrat and Republican delegates of the House of Representatives carry out a parallel investigation on this issue.

On June 14, the U.S. Senate adopted a new package of sanctions that target the key sectors of Russian economy, including mining, metals, shipping and railways sectors. The senators were almost unanimous in adopting the new bill: only two out of one hundred voted against it. Amazingly, it is the first time the anti-Russian sanctions can receive a status of law.  The presidential administration cannot mitigate or cancel them without the approval of the Congress. This way the legislators are trying to influence the U.S. foreign policy. But they are not confronted not only by Trump and his team, but also by the European allies of the U.S., whose interests will be affected if this bill is adopted.

The sanctions adopted and gradually tightened during the Obama administration used to serve as a demonstration of cohesion within the Western democracies. Thus, they have diligently avoided the moments that might have harmed the energy stability of Europe. As a result, neither Gazprom nor Alexey Miller were included in the sanctions lists. There were, however, attempts to somehow weaken Europe's gas dependence on Russia, clearly manifested by Obama’s flirting with Iran.

The EU is suffering from a growing gap between its own gas production and consumption. Therefore, it is necessary to increase imports. With 166 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas supplies (109.8 and 32.5 bcm by Norway and Algeria, respectively. Source: Platts 2016), Russia has been the leading supplier of the EU. In 2019, it is planned to commission Nord Stream 2, a new branch of the pipeline connecting Russia with Europe, which will increase supplies by 55 bcm annually. Project participants include companies from Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, Austria and France. Then the American legislators suddenly decide to fine anyone, who invests more than $1 million in Russian gas pipeline projects and particularly underline the inadmissibility of the construction of the Nord Stream 2.

The next day after the Senate resolution, Berlin and Vienna reminded Washington that the new package “contradicts international law of extraterritorial sanctions” and harms the energy security of Europe. “To threaten companies from Germany, Austria and other European states with penalties on the U.S. market if they participate in natural gas projects such as Nord Stream 2 with Russia or finance them introduces a completely new and very negative quality into European-American relations,” said the Austrian Chancellor Christian Kern and the German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel.

Despite a discontent with American actions, the Europeans still keep their own sanctions in force. They are extended until January 2018, as the EU believes that Moscow does not comply with the Minsk agreements on resolving the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

Procedurally, the Senate bill must go through hearings in the House of Representatives. The objections of the Europeans proved to be a significant support for Trump's team, which argues that this document can deprive the administration of levers of influence over Russia. Eventually, the congressional representatives “discovered” that the bill violated the Constitution and should be put forward not by the Senate, but by the House of Representatives, since it concerned state revenues.

The mere fact of existence of such a document implies that the American lawmakers remain in uncertainty as to whether Trump cancels anti-Russian sanctions under the influence of any subjective circumstances. To convince them of the opposite and to show that the bill was not necessary, the Trump administration announced the expansion (for the first time during Trump’s tenure) of sanctions against Russia. Just four days after the Senate vote.

But this was not the reason for the cooling of Russian-American relations, which has never got warmer since Trump’s inauguration. Therefore, in February, all the Russian central television channels received the Kremlin's secret order to stop excessive mentioning and appraisal of the U.S. president.

Perhaps Trump wishes to get along with Putin, but many, including his closest associates, do not share his desire. In particular, for the first time since 1987, the U.S. presidential administration has voiced a likelihood of withdrawal from a landmark nuclear arms pact, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (The INF Treaty) signed with the Soviet Union. The Pentagon officially accused Russia of deploying ground-based missiles, which violates the INF Treaty. Until now, such possible violations were mentioned only as media assumptions. In response, Russia accused the U.S. of deploying the missile defense systems in Europe, which Moscow regards as a direct violation of the INF Treaty.

After Trump significantly expanded the authority of the Pentagon in the Middle East, one can hear statements about a real danger of direct confrontation between Russia and the U.S. in Syria. Thus, Senator Chris Murphy (D) wrote on his Twitter account: “Four direct engagements with Syria in less than two months. Trump is starting a new war that Congress has not declared.”

In response to the downed bomber of the Syrian Air Force, Russia immediately stated that since June 19, it has ceased cooperation with the U.S. to ensure flight safety over the territory of Syria. The U.S. military has repeatedly used special channels of communication with Russian counterparts in Syria to smooth out conflict situations with the Assad armed forces and Shiite formations backed by Iran. A lack of such communication can also lead to unpredictable consequences.

Moreover, Moscow has interrupted all contacts with Washington concerning the preparation of the meeting of the two presidents. In particular, the meeting between Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and his American counterpart, scheduled for June 23, was canceled as “meaningless” for now. Perhaps Moscow understands the whole complexity of the Trump situation and is, therefore, playing footsie such as replacing ambassador to Washington Sergei Kislyak with Anatoly Antonov, deputy foreign minister, former deputy minister of defense, expert on Syria and the Middle East.

On the other hand, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson admits that he is trying to harmonize relations with Russia according to president's instruction. In particular, he has developed a sort of roadmap based on three points. The first should demonstrate the persistence of the Trump administration: Russia must understand “that aggressive actions against the U.S. (such as the supply of weapons to the Afghan Taliban or persecution of American diplomats in Moscow) are counterproductive”. The second point of the roadmap outlines a range of issues of strategic interest to the U.S., for which a dialogue with Russia is necessary. These include the issues associated with North Korea, Syria and cybersecurity. Finally, the last goal is the achievement of “strategic stability” in relations with Russia and coordination of mutual geopolitical goals. The roadmap has been leaked to the press so that Moscow can prepare for discussions.

The chances are that Trump and Putin will indeed meet in Hamburg, but the meeting will take place behind closed doors. In fact, the two presidents have something to discuss.