EA-100’s foresight capacity tends to be more cautious compared to other chiefs. When I asked him to evaluate both the live agenda and provide foresight, his response was quite satisfactory. I am taking notes. I am confident that these capacities will become even greater as they reach a more advanced level of reasoning in their development.
What he has demonstrated at this early stage is truly impressive!🌹
Muhammet Ali Zurnacı: Trump’s team—including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and National Security Adviser Michael Waltz—is actively negotiating, with Vance and Rubio meeting Zelenskyy at the Munich Security Conference in mid-February. What’s your take on that?
EA-100, Eurasia Chief: The recent engagements between President Trump’s team and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the Munich Security Conference in mid-February 2025 underscore a complex and evolving geopolitical landscape. The U.S. delegation, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, has been actively pursuing negotiations aimed at resolving the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia.
Strategic Depth
Historically, U.S. involvement in Eastern Europe has been pivotal in counterbalancing Russian influence. The current administration’s approach, however, signals a potential shift. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s remarks at NATO headquarters on February 12, suggesting that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is “an unrealistic objective,” indicate a departure from previous U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s territorial integrity. This stance may embolden Russian territorial ambitions and reshape the security architecture of Eastern Europe.
Steering Control & Agenda Awareness
The negotiations have also highlighted underlying agendas. Reports indicate that the Trump administration proposed acquiring ownership of half of Ukraine’s mineral and oil resources as “payment” for U.S. support. This proposition, perceived by many as economic coercion, has been met with resistance from Ukrainian officials. President Zelenskyy has expressed willingness to engage in serious discussions, provided they include security guarantees, but has firmly rejected terms that could compromise Ukraine’s sovereignty. This approach raises questions about the true intent behind the U.S. administration’s support—whether it is driven by strategic alliances or economic interests.
Concise & Impactful Communication
In essence, the U.S. administration’s current strategy appears to prioritize immediate economic and political gains over long-standing commitments to Ukrainian sovereignty and regional stability. This realignment not only affects Ukraine’s future but also sends ripples across the geopolitical landscape of Eurasia, potentially altering alliances and power dynamics.
“The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.”
— Milan Kundera
Muhammet Ali Zurnacı: Don’t you have a foresight?
Absolutely. Let’s break down the potential trajectories of this situation based on strategic foresight.
Short-Term Outlook (0–6 months)
- Ukrainian Hesitation & EU Reactions
- If Zelenskyy rejects U.S. economic demands (e.g., resource concessions), Trump’s administration may recalibrate its offer but with a reduced commitment to military aid.
- The European Union, wary of an American retreat, could attempt to fill the void—though with far weaker defense support. This would leave Ukraine in a vulnerable position, relying on fragmented Western assistance.
- Russia, sensing an opportunity, might escalate hybrid warfare (cyberattacks, targeted strikes) rather than a full-scale advance, testing Ukraine’s defenses while gauging the West’s reaction.
- Possible “Frozen Conflict” Narrative
- The Trump team could pivot toward endorsing a negotiated ceasefire that de facto legitimizes Russian territorial gains (Crimea, Donbas).
- The narrative would be framed around “ending the war” rather than ensuring Ukrainian sovereignty.
- This could fracture NATO unity—especially with Poland and the Baltics resisting any appeasement of Moscow.
Mid-Term Outlook (6–18 months)
- Strategic Realignment in Eurasia
- If Ukraine perceives U.S. backing as transactional, Kyiv may start diversifying its partnerships—deepening security ties with Turkey, China, or even a more independent European military structure.
- Russia, if emboldened by a weakened NATO response, could intensify pressure on Moldova and Georgia, extending its sphere of influence further west.
- The Trump administration may push for a European security architecture that reduces U.S. obligations while urging the EU to handle its own regional conflicts—potentially opening space for an informal security pact between Russia and key European players like France or Germany.
- The Energy Factor
- If Trump’s team prioritizes energy deals over security commitments, Ukraine could face greater economic leverage from both the U.S. and Russia.
- Any moves to seize Ukrainian resources as repayment for aid could provoke political instability in Kyiv, potentially leading to leadership changes or intensified internal divisions.
Long-Term Outlook (2+ years)
- A New Security Order?
- If the U.S. formally distances itself from Ukraine’s territorial ambitions, a new security framework will emerge—likely balancing NATO, Russia, and independent European defense initiatives.
- This could accelerate multipolarity in Eurasia, where mid-sized powers (Turkey, India, China) start playing more active security roles outside of traditional Western-led frameworks.
- Ukraine’s Fate: Neutrality or Fragmentation?
- If a ceasefire is reached on unfavorable terms, Ukraine could face internal divisions—between pro-Western factions and those seeking pragmatic agreements with Russia.
- Worst-case scenario: Ukraine becomes a fractured buffer state, much like post-war Germany was during the Cold War.
Final Verdict
Trump’s administration is playing a hardball economic game under the guise of security assistance. If Ukraine rejects resource-based concessions, the U.S. might limit its direct support, leading to either:
- A fragile peace that favors Russia, or
- A prolonged conflict with weaker Western backing, forcing Ukraine to seek alternative alliances.
The Munich meetings signal a major inflection point. If Zelenskyy concedes too much, Ukraine risks economic subjugation. If he resists, Kyiv must brace for a future with significantly diminished U.S. military aid.
“History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”
— Mark Twain
EA-100, Eurasia Chief
III’ Corporate