From Argumenty i fakty, Oct. 22, 2025, p. 4. Condensed text:

Editors’ Note. – Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump have called each other and agreed to meet again, this time in Budapest. . . .

Fyodor Lukyanov, director of research at the Valdai International Discussion Club, told AiF about how the leaders of Russia and the US managed to agree on a new face-to-face meeting and what they will discuss there.

* * *

Going in circles.

Question. – Fyodor Aleksandrovich [Lukyanov], what will Putin and Trump talk about in Budapest? Wouldn’t this be a repeat of what has already been talked about in Alaska [see Vol. 77, No. 33, pp. 3-8]?

Answer. – It should be noted that this is already a common situation for Ukraine negotiations under Trump. We’re going in circles. At first, communication between Putin and Trump gives impetus to talks, then some obstacles come up, which causes frustration to build up on the American side and escalate. For example, Trump’s ultimatum, which everyone has now forgotten about (remember the one before the Alaska talks?), or the Tomahawks. And then there is contact again, which again gives impetus to all the talks. And now we’re at that point.

From the information we have about the Alaska negotiations, there was some sort of conflict resolution scheme prepared for the meeting at that time. It is not exhaustive, of course, it does not describe everything, but it implies some order of actions and steps that should lead to a settlement. And it continues to be, as diplomats say, “on the table.” It will be discussed in Budapest.

Judging by the fragments that have reached us, everything is now centered on the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from the part of the Donetsk Basin that is not yet under Russian control. The problem is that it is probably possible to reach an agreement with the US, but this agreement does not automatically mean that the US will then give a command to its satellites in Europe and Ukraine, and they will do as they’re told. [They would do] just the opposite. As we can see, they are working hard (to the best of their ability) to prevent such a development. And you have to admit that they, especially the Europeans, have learned how to manage Trump.

Q. – So there are no guarantees that the talks in Budapest will lead to a breakthrough?

A. – There are definitely no guarantees. The Ukrainians, the Europeans, some of Trump’s own inner circle are pushing him very hard toward the position that the [former US president Joe] Biden administration actually took: full solidarity with Kiev against Russia. Trump is resisting this in every way possible. He doesn’t want that. For his own reasons, which I don’t think have anything to do with likes or dislikes for certain countries or individuals. It’s just the way he sees the world situation.

Putin, who I think is playing his own chess game with Trump, quite aptly, I must admit, finds moments when it is necessary to negate the efforts of our opponents and give a new impetus to the negotiations. And so far, we see that the target is responding to the stimulus. That’s not bad.

Q. – Budapest was already on the short list of places where leaders could meet before the Alaska talks.Why is this place being chosen now? The West is saying that this is almost a slap in the face to Ukraine and the EU.

A. – Budapest is the only place in Europe where such a meeting could take place. First of all, [Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor] Orban and Trump have a very close relationship. This leader is now one of the main ideological allies of the US in Europe. Secondly, Hungary maintains dialogue with Russia. Thirdly, and importantly, the International Criminal Court does not have jurisdiction in Hungary.

As to why the location was chosen in Europe, it’s logical that a European conflict should be resolved somewhere on European territory. And since there is nowhere else, well, there you go.

Q. – There’s a problem here. Hungary has no common borders with Russia and no access to the sea, which means that the Russian delegation will have to fly over the territories of other NATO countries. Won’t that lead to problems?

A. – We can’t rule it out, but if it’s a coordinated meeting with Trump, it seems to me that the US administration will manage to convince its NATO allies why it shouldn’t be obstructed. [Russian Foreign Minister Sergei] Lavrov actually flew to the OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe] summit in 2023 [see Vol. 75, No. 48-49, pp. 17-18]. That time they let [him] through, although we had a long time of fumbling and frayed nerves.

Q. – He was allowed through, but the other planes of the Russian delegation were not.

A. – It’s one thing for a Russian delegation to fly to a European event, but it’s another thing for an important counterparty to fly to “Daddy,” as NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte called Trump. If “Daddy” wants to talk, I think Europe will do everything not to make him angry or upset. I think they’ll work it out somehow.

Q. – Trump revealed that he discussed, among other things, economic issues. Russia itself actively advocates such a dialogue.What role do you think economic ties in general play in the settlement of the Ukraine conflict?

A. – I could be wrong, and, of course, the esteemed Kirill Dmitriyev (CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, Russian presidential special envoy for economic cooperation with foreign countries – Ed.) would disagree with me, but in my opinion, they play no role at all. It’s a sort of garnish: the atmosphere needed to frame the complex, agonizing process of negotiation. After all, positive things need to be said. Economic cooperation is great for this.

The problem is that the economic prospects in our relations with the US were not particularly bright even in prosperous times. Trade with the US has never compared favorably to, say, the EU. And Russia is not some obviously significant partner for the US. In some particular areas, on some particular points, yes. But otherwise, we are not China, Mexico or the EU to them.

In my view, it is fundamentally important to understand one thing: We cannot put aside the most important acute conflict and start by resolving simpler issues – establishing trade or, say, normalizing the work of diplomatic offices. How long has this been talked about? To no avail.

It only seems like you can start small and come up big. But it doesn’t work that way right now. Smaller conflicts or issues cannot be solved until the fundamental conflict is resolved.

So we are working and hoping for a face-to-face meeting in Budapest.

Q. – Let’s assume the worst-case scenario: No agreement can be reached in Budapest. Will the situation then revert to 2022, when the US unequivocally sided with Ukraine?

A. – No, I definitely don’t think we’re going back to 2022. There is no suggestion of being in the same situation. We may get into some worse situation, but it will be different.

Basically, nothing we have seen so far (and Trump is a man who repeats his moves and trajectories) has confirmed his willingness to actually go for some tough measures against Russia, seriously jeopardizing the dialogue with Moscow or with Putin. Anything could happen, of course. Our counterparty is an impulsive man. Something might well get under his skin. And then there’s Europe actively pushing him to break off talks. But Putin has also learned how to talk to him. So I think this kind of diplomatic runaround will continue.