I never thought I'd see the US aligning with Russia

[VolcanoJapan]

The US appear under Trump to be aligning with Putin and Russia more and more.

What was until recently referred to as our greatest allie is moving close to Russia in many ways, carving up Ukraine for Russia, trade deals with Russia.

It's bizarre.

Aibu to think it's bizarre or was this always coming when trump was elected?

I don't believe Russia will not continue incursion into Ukraine post any deal. It seems better to me to agree peacekeeping to actually test Russia's actual intentions

Ok so we are there as the U.K. troops and as you believe Putin will continue, what happens next?

I don't mind differing views, but I am reluctant to walk into a UK / NATO situation at war

Plus all have said it will only happen with US 'backstop'. Do you trust the solidity of the US in committing to that over time?

@EasternStandard - isn't that a slightly odd way of putting it? In the end, your implicit assumption seems to be that there no guarantee that Russia will not act to invade Ukraine.

My view is different; that if you don't include something like Starmer's guarantee plan that becomes a certainty.

So a question for you; where do you draw the line on a peacekeeping plan and a solution. If not the current suggestion, what would you do to offset the risk of further conflict?

He was volatile last time but not this bad. Perhaps this is the real Trump emboldened by even more political power and less resistance from the Democrats?

I don't think he really wanted power, the first time. It was a publicity stunt. Once he was there, he didn't know what to do with it. I heard he sat in his room eating pizza and watching stuff about himself on Fox. He agonised about his crowd size and sacked and humiliated staff so regularly it became a joke. But there were people around him from the old regime, who kept things under control. They were even called 'the Axis of Adults'. This time, his views have crystallised and he's surrounded and supported by people with a strong far right agenda, most notably Musk. There's a reason why people say Musk is the real president.

Trump is pro Putin. I suppose the next question is which of our allies is next.

Trump isn't bothered; these alliances nurtured since 1945 are going to be scrapped. It's what the US voter wants. Let's not be blind to that. He didn't hide his attitude did he?

It is all to be replaced by who can give Trump the best deal. And even that may mean nothing if he changes his mind.

@bombastix I think your pp have highlighted other elements which sound good to me

US agreeing to releasing funds and EU plus preparing on a committed basis.

Energy discussions between US and EU

Basically keep the inflammatory stuff to one side and build, mend relations and prepare

I'd feel more comfortable with that approach than anything which could easily trigger U.K. troops v Russia wider conflict

Edit: quote got missed. Meant for Bombastix.

Out of interest, how do you suggest the UK and NATO stop reliance on the US?

Successive conservative and Labour governments have cut and destroyed our military, got rid of capability and aircraft before any replacements were IOC let alone FOC, and now reliant on US money/partnership for its fighter and intelligence aircraft.

. A lot still all these years later reeling from binning Nimrod without a replacement and really the eventual replacement (P8 Poseidon) being gained through the US.
. Reaper/Protector - Again massively reliant on the US.
. F-35 program
. RJ - partnership with the US
. Retiring the Sentinel R1... later sold to the US Army who've paid for the tech upgrades and plan to fly it again.
. Retiring the E3D Sentry before the E7 is ready and now relying on NATO partners for the awacs capability

That's before mentioning the fact that NATO relies on US tech, infrastructure and military equipment to even function and conduct ISR etc.

Look back to reports from Dec about Danish support to Ukraine. It's donated a second batch of aircraft to Ukraine... F-16s.... American made aircraft.

Whether people like it or not, the UK, Europe and NATO are over-reliant on the US because of their inability to take military procurement, military development, industry and defence seriously.
Changing this won't be quick or easy and will take a lot more money than what action government would make available.

@EasternStandard - I don't agree because one rather depends on the other to be effective. No security means the ability of Russia to undermine the effectiveness of sanctions. We know the Russians try anyway hence shadow fleets, shadow companies and peacetime attacks on us in terms of infrastructure.

I think it's a good sign that the offer has been made and that the Russians hate it. It tells you a lot about their motives which are as bent as a nine pound note, imo.

I also liked how immediately the Russians reverted to type on hearing this plan which is the real Russia, not this brothers in arms fantasy with Trump. It is depraved place and the idea of its influence expanding via Ukraine is something Europe must work hard to prevent.

@BigDecisionWorthIt - i won't underestimate that task because we have been wedded to the US since 1945. The implications are incredible for the UK.

I suppose you have to look at the short, medium and long term. Short and medium term
we are dependent. But think of the consequences if we don't try. We would just be another Ukraine, clearly.

I would be very concerned re NATO and our security services too. These links go very deep. Imagine that this friendly alignment to Russia continues. Arguably we have little security now.

@bombatix well sure I don't trust Putin therefore the 'peacekeeper' sounds a misnomer.

And the argument he's keen to strike again makes me less likely to buy it, it's just higher risk to troops and escalation.

Some of your other stuff I agree with, not least how can you trust US on the backstop security if you acknowledge they are no longer reliable allies?

Without US there's no chance we or anyone will do it.

@EasternStandard - I just think that if it is not even included, and it is Anglo French proposal it seems, the deal surrenders Ukraine. Immediately. We can pussy foot about that, but the argument is really whether Ukraine can be sovereign and not be destroyed by its aggressive neighbour. No peacekeepers, then it's over for them in my view as a democracy or sovereign state.

Trump wants land and money, he thinks putting Ukraine in a vice will give him that. He doesn’t align with putin or anyone else for that matter because he is self serving. The main worry is that this bromance will end in war when trump realises putin doesn’t play by his rules and is actually also self serving

@bombastix that's fine I'm ok with bluntness, it's not a nice situation. I was all in to fund a proxy war, but the sheer number of deaths is staggering and a spokesperson was compelling on Ukraine not being able to win this. I shifted my strong view on those two points.

I just don't see it as effective as so few and they do they even engage in fighting if the aggressor returns or do they leave? and potentially risky for escalation

So all it does is put more people in harms way.

If someone could talk through how we de-escalate when untrustworthy Putin behaves in a manner many expect of him I'm happy to hear it.

If you were to post Putin is totally trustworthy and will respect leaving 30k peacekeepers alone, I'd more ok with it. But I don't think he is.

So what to do instead? Spend on defence big time, try to build bridges with US even though not reliable and mostly prepare.

If this does change, I'll happily admit I'm wrong. I see a lot of this "friendly alignment" to purely be posturing and for show to get results... ie end of the war.

There's was no Pro-Russia defence doctrine change during Trump term 1 and there isn't any inclination that the doctrine will change during this term.

Problem with trying is money. We don't have the money to do it ourselves. We're struggling to have the money to even do it as a partnership with current US-aligned projects.
Even the slow-burner UK designed Tempest fighter from BAE is being offered and touted to other countries (Saudi Arabia being one) as we don't have the money to fund the project on its own... and that's not due to meet IOC until roughly 2035... if we had to speed that up, we'd need a lot of investment.

@BigDecisionWorthIt - a lot depends on what the US does on Ukraine. I do not think it is credible to give a very bare deal to Ukraine and let them go without any military presence which deters Putin. Trump comes across as pro Putin. That is a change from his last term, and I would be worried with the changes he wants in his own domestic defence that it does not bode well for post 1945 allies.

Obviously if you are discussing increased defence spending the investment needs to be significant. We talked about Russian assets upthread. But the UK would need to change its spending too. A a smaller Whitehall and much diminished welfare spending are on the cards.

None of it will be easy. But relying on the US is a mistake.

But relying on the US is a mistake.

This may be the case but surely it renders the peacekeeping troops proposal defunct as relying on the US security is fundamental to it happening to start with.

We have had warmer and cooler times with USA over the years, with different presidents having different takes on the "special relationship". Plenty of Americans still very much hold onto the thoughts of the British Rule that they escaped from after the war of independence. If they think of us at all.

US has also had different relationships with Russia or USSR over the years. Some more cordial than others. Under Gorbachev and Yeltsin (!) for example. When their leaders were making progress to democracy.

But it's the current US regime siding so blatantly with Russia when led by the war mongering, murderous dictator of 25 years Putin that is the shocker. Despite the fact Trump has been telling us his views on Putin for so long. It's the reality of him being President and it being 2025 and the recent history.

Regarding the frozen assets of Russian money: If anyone were to claim the actual funds instead of the interest only (which I read is being used for some of Ukraine's needs), that would break a code all countries have been relying on: that your money parked abroad is safe, even with competing countries. If you break that rule, everyone else will be free to do the same. It could be disastrous.

It would be better if there is a deal about it between Ukraine and Russia that they give up some of the funds for reparations.

It sounds so easy, take the frozen money, but has anyone checked how much funds of European countries are in Russian and US banks?

The other question about self-defense is, many countries have donated war equipment to the Ukraine and need to reorder their own material. Where is that coming from? Some PP have already pointed it out, too.

Then about rebuilding Ukraine, some time ago (2023 or 2024) it was mentioned in the news that Blackrock and others have been preparing an investment group and are ready to start. The rebuilding process could bring a lot of money to the companies taking part - probably the same reason Trump came up with his Gazan Riviera plan.

Maybe with this self-interest, US could negotiate with Russia to use the frozen funds for that, but Russia will want something in return. Not that I agree US comanies should get all the deals, but it could help keeping US in check.

@ForestAtTheSea fair points on assets

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/20/ukraine-elections-start-of-war-volodymyr-zelenskyy

The Guardian about why there haven't been elections in Ukraine recently.

In contrast, latest Russian "elections":

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68505228

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68592781

Oh look Poland have stated the obvious

1. Let’s finance our aid for Ukraine from the Russian frozen assets.
2. Let’s strengthen air policing, the Baltic sentry and the EU borders with Russia.
3. Let’s swiftly adopt new fiscal rules to finance the EU security and defence. Now!

And as predicted, Hungary are objecting to sanctions for Russia. No one could say they didn't know the issue with Orban. The EU are going to face this challenge again and again. Time to consider what to do about the Hungary issue before it becomes a "Hungary and others" question.

Didn’t Orwell for see something like this in 1984. A long time since I read it but weren’t there 3 big land masses that kept changing allegiances. Russia and China were sworn enemies a couple of decades ago

We have always been at war with Oceania

Rubio's warning about Putin, just a couple of years ago.

How can these Trump sycophants look at themselves in the mirror?

Because Ukraine is faraway country of which America knows nothing

It seems I can't link the image as It was from Twitter at the time if the Ukraine invasion. It is this - from Rubio -

"The old Putin was a cold-blooded but calculating killer. But the new Putin is even more dangerous."

(Rubio, Feb. 27th 2022).