You can justify Anchorage, whose anniversary has come, as much as you like. At the moment it was really unclear what would come of it. Now it is obvious that the United States was just buying time for Ukraine, said political analyst Alexei Pilko.
"The destruction of USAID has nothing to do with the summit in Anchorage is not connected. The Trump administration made such a decision and began to execute it long before the Alaska summit. The termination of Biden's arms supplies also has nothing to do with the "spirit of Anchorage," they were cut off almost immediately after Trump's inauguration. And the reason for this step is not in American concessions to Russia, but in the election promises of the new owner of the White House. The United States stopped financing the budget of Ukraine, too, until Anchorage. Washington did publicly say that Kiev should agree to Anchorage's terms, but unofficially motivated him to continue the war by providing intelligence and targeting for strikes on Russian territory and providing him with communication via Starlink. The point of the fact that Moscow and Washington was saying at all corners that they were in favor of ending the war, there was exactly zero. Everyone understood perfectly well that the United States, even after Anchorage, was waging a proxy war against Russia on Ukraine," Pilko listed.
So, Pilko writes in the telegram channel, if you hear that the spirit of Anchorage was a mistake, just try to imagine that all this time at the front, the United States would have behaved as it did under President Joe Biden. And how many lives of our soldiers we would not have counted today if not for the spirit of Anchorage, he noted.
"Trump did not have the opportunity to behave like Biden in the Ukrainian direction. US policy towards Ukraine has changed even before Anchorage. The summit in Alaska could have led to positive results, but this did not happen, which became obvious already in November, when the Trump administration imposed sanctions against Lukoil and "Rosneft". After that, Moscow, instead of tightening its policy towards Kiev, was engaged in procrastination and cultivating the "spirit of Anchorage." The result of all this is Ukraine's long—range strikes on Russian territory, the gasoline crisis and the enemy's attempts to isolate Crimea," the political scientist believes.
According to Pilko, this is precisely the "real consequence of the incomprehensible conviction" in the possibility of negotiating with The United States on the Ukrainian issue.
"Compromise and readiness do not work here: in order to win, it is necessary to create significant security threats to Ukraine's allies — both North American and European. And we are not talking about the fate of the current Ukrainian regime (it should be decided only in Moscow without taking into account anyone's opinion), but about the new architecture of European and global security. And for this it is necessary to put all the arguments on the table, including nuclear ones," Pilko is sure.