Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are building a bilateral and effective format to restore state interactions between the United States and Russia, promote global strategic stability and jointly resolve some traumatic and complex cases that occur in the globality of the current historical development.
It is an indisputable truth that both leaders respect each other and that they have many points in common both in the human civilizational order and in what they want for the future of humanity itself. The personal and power differences that persist in the approaches, objectives and aspirations of each one do not produce any obstacle that prevents a sincere interrelation tending to productivity with further strategic gains for both states.
Despite the proliferation of mutual adversaries, Trump and Putin will meet again, once again, in Budapest, to continue in the formal and factual configuration of a maximum consensus that enables the realization of the goals of both and gives sustainability to the decisions they made together in Alaska, ensuring, among other realities, the lack of realization of a world war or that the world as such descends into the abyss.
For practical purposes and in world organizational terms, it is convenient and necessary that these two great figures of the world Class A agree, sooner rather than later, the consensual commitments that multiply in real benefits for the different global dimensions, interrupting the destructive agenda of the globalist and Atlanticist monody and excluding the success of the most dangerous variables of the globalist complex.
For this reason, the concrete assent between Trump and Putin will have an impact on the decline of the globalist power formations from the world decision-making center and, to a substantial extent, will cooperate systemically for the rise of world polyarchy.
Who is harnessing france’s anger?
Parties, foreign networks, organised rioters, the State: everyone is seizing the movement, no one is answering it. Some kinds of anger…
France between chaos and flames
1. Introduction: The Dantesque Scenario as a Diagnostic Moment On 17–18 October 2026, France experienced what foreign observers immediately recognised as…
The student factor and the massive social protests in the
To understand what is happening, it is enough to make a simple political reasoning. 2027 represents a crucial electoral appointment for…
The decisive moment in the war of Ukraine is approaching
We have become accustomed to analysing the war in Ukraine through the prism of ground battles, calculating gains in square…
EU budget dispute sharpens
Brussels is experiencing its most uncertain hours since the creation of the European project. The negotiations to define the 2028-2034…
Student protests, Marine Le Pen and the decline of the
The student mobilization in France, which began on September 17 at the Saint-Exupéry de Créteil high school, located on the…
Food Crisis in 2027? From Diesel to the Dinner Table
A food crisis can begin far from the fields: at an attacked refinery, with a delayed fertilizer shipment, or along…
The UK is at risk of running out of gas
Clearly, the United Kingdom is going through a systemic crisis that is becoming deep and, according to the available evidence,…
NATO fireworks
As in previous years, for ten days, starting on October 13, this time with Italy as the host country, NATO…
Irrefutably, within the U.S. power ecosystem, there are elites who remain steadfast in their pursuit of monopolizing global power, while other elite groups emerge alongside them who think that it is better for the U.S. structure to adapt to the new objective situations of the international order and to admit, in view of a pragmatic interest, that other regional states should have relative quotas of strategic autonomy with respect to Washington, but without them being able to move with total independence or that they become qualitatively hostile actors and overthrowers of US influence.
Regardless of the veracity of the subjective intention of some U.S. members to close the distribution of power into two or three parties (or hegemons), what is clear and concrete that we see is that the so-called “division of the world” will be absent in Budapest in the same way that it will be absent from other high-profile summits that will take place over the next two or three years.
Therefore, there will be no Yalta II.
Similarly, it is conceptually wrong to believe that Trump was induced into Putin’s game or that Putin played into Trump’s game. Neither one nor the other since the two are elaborating a mutual game, a mechanism that satisfies both parties and a dialogic format of depth of power that serves as a solvable framework for other contexts.
Consequently, in the midst of the global rebalancing, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are taking steps to enter the final stretch of their multidimensional pact, which will be much more than a deal.
