Will there be a "good conversation"? Or will Trump and Putin focus on arms control and other critical issues?

Joshua Tucker: As a former advisor and ambassador for national security, what can you tell us about how the presidential summits fit into foreign policy and diplomatic strategy? ?

Michael McFaul: Historically and certainly at the time of Obama, the summits tended to be events that forced action, creating deadlines for both governments to come to terms. agreements or progress in negotiations on matters of mutual interest. The Kremlin but especially the White House want "deliverables" (a word that I learned while working for the government!) For these summits: tangible results that advance the interests of their respective countries. For example, at President Obama's first summit with President Medvedev in July 2009, we signed several agreements in Moscow, including a framework agreement for the new START treaty, which set the parameters for our negotiating teams. Obama and Medvedev then met the following year in Prague for a second summit in which they signed the new START Treaty

. In July 2009, we also signed a "transit agreement" that allowed United States to ship lethal weapons. Russian airspace to our soldiers in Afghanistan. We would not have finished negotiations on this deal if we did not have the pressure of an imminent summit to do so. At the time of our third summit with Medvedev in June 2010 in Washington, we had a much longer list of deliverables. You can read about it here:

JT: What do you think President Trump and the US team hope to accomplish at the next summit?

MM: I hope that President Trump will also focus on deliverables – advancing the concrete national interests of the United States. At the top of its list should be arms control, since the new START treaty will expire in 2021, and the US and Russia have not addressed an extension of this treaty – or a follow-up treaty. The next arms control cycle will be extremely complicated, so we must start now.

President Trump should also seek the approval of President Vladimir Putin for his strategy of denuclearization of North Korea. Strong words of Putin's support for this goal and Trump's diplomacy would be an accomplishment.

I also hope that President Trump does not try to do too much. Tragically, I believe that the central element of US policy towards Russia today should be containment. Just as we did during the Cold War, we should also seek to cooperate on issues where we can, but the bilateral agenda is very narrow right now. I hope that President Trump understands the dangers of trying to extend it, which would only benefit Putin, not the United States.

I also hope that Trump will discuss human rights with Putin, but I have no illusions that such a conversation

However, I am afraid that Trump is not so eager to hear with Putin that he might be tempted to say things that are not in the national interest of America. Already, at the approach of this summit, President Trump hinted that he wanted to withdraw from Syria, study the idea of ​​reducing our military footprint in Germany, call on Russia to return to the G-7 and consider recognizing Crimea as part of Russia. Discussing any of these concessions would be a serious mistake. I'm also worried that Trump is touting Putin as an effective and strong leader as he did with Kim Jong Un at the Singapore summit. It also does not serve US national interests or even Trump's reputation. Putin will perceive this kind of language as a sign of weakness

JT: According to you, what President Putin and the Russian team hope to get out of this summit?

MM: Putin wants a feast of love. To get the victory, all that Putin needs is that Trump say nice things about him and signals that he wants to move on and forget the past warring actions of Russia over the past few years. last three years. Putin wants a friendly press conference in which his annexation of Crimea and the invasion of Ukraine do not show up; his support for one of the most brutal dictators of our time, Bashar al-Assad in Syria, is not mentioned; or the violation by the Kremlin of US sovereignty in the 2016 presidential election receives only a minor mention. Discussion on the normalization of relations would be chilling on the cake. A sign of Trump approval at the lifting of the sanctions would be the icing on the cake. (Even Putin can not seriously think that Trump would discuss the recognition of Crimea as part of Russia.)

I would like to point out that I support the idea of ​​a diplomat opposite-to -face, even with our opponents. We did it during the cold war; we can do it now. But the previous US presidents went to these summits without praising Khrushchev or Brezhnev, without checking our values ​​at the door, and with a razor-sharp focus on achieving results that benefited the American people. Trump must remember that it is not his personal relationship with Putin that matters; it is rather what he can achieve at this summit to advance the American national interests that should guide his actions.

JT: Based on previous Trump summits with Xi Jinping and Kim Jong Un, what advice would you give Trump before his summit with Vladimir Putin?

MM: and above all, get ready! Know what you are looking for during the meeting. Putin has been in this position for 20 years – and met with four US Presidents, and worked on foreign policy and international security issues all his life. And Putin always comes prepared, seeking to advance what he believes to be Russian national interests.

Second, do without the "good conversation". You can do business with Putin without calling your friend.

JT: In your book, you described the current state of Russian-American relations as "hot-peace" as opposed to a cold war. Do you think the summit could fundamentally change the nature of US-Russian relations?

MM: The mood music in US-Russian relations could change for a while following this summit, but our fundamental differences on many foreign policy issues will not go away. Putin wants to weaken American power in the world and undermine the liberal world order, including institutions like NATO and the European Union. Putin seeks to discredit the practice of democracy in the world, but especially in the United States and Europe. Putin wants to kidnap American allies in Europe – and signs of disunity at this week's NATO summit only serve Putin's interests.

Sometimes Trump says that he shares Putin's world view, especially with regard to the liberal international order. But we are not an autocracy; Even the President of the United States does not dictate US foreign policy. So I think that the fundamental issues that shape our competition with Russia today – including, by the way, our normative differences regarding democracy and autocracy – will remain in place long after Trump is not there. more president. The best we can do right now is to avoid further erosion, and above all to avoid war.