‘Bullshit’ from the US: What the Rubio-Lavrov Meeting Really Means for Ukraine
Фото: Reuters
Source: Author’s Facebook page
At the Kuala Lumpur meeting between the US Secretary of State and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, the Kremlin failed to sway Rubio or capture his interest.
The Kremlin tried to create the impression among all concerned that after Putin’s “bullshit,” Lavrov had come up with some new and very good proposals—something completely different from what had been voiced so far. However, it failed to make any impact. Rubio’s assessment of these “new ideas” was openly mocking, filled with hesitant qualifiers like “probably,” “maybe,” and “I wouldn’t,” conveying sharp sarcasm: “Yes, you could probably say that this is a new and perhaps different approach. Again, I wouldn’t call it a guarantee of peace, but it’s a concept that we will certainly discuss with the president today, as soon as I finish our conversation.”
Ultimately, Rubio skillfully transformed the familiar Trumpian “bullshit” into three cleverly crafted phrases, stretching its meaning without adding any substance.
Rubio also reported that “Washington expects to secure the transfer of Patriot air defense systems needed by Kyiv, available from several US partners in Europe.” The US is offering these countries, which are awaiting their deliveries of Patriot systems, to postpone their receipt to prioritize Ukraine. This statement, along with its timing and setting, clearly signaled the White House’s dissatisfaction with Putin’s conduct in the dialogue.
Of course, it is not guaranteed that these Patriots will be delivered to us, but the announcement itself sent a strong message to Putin.
Lavrov summarized the conversation with the vague remark, “There are things that are not commented on.” The Kremlin’s media managed only to highlight a nervous twitch in Rubio’s right eye, caught on video as he looked at Lavrov across the table. They called it a friendly wink and tried to put on an optimistic face despite the poor outcome.
What does this mean for us in practice? Nothing definitive. However, it may indicate Trump’s strategy to apply both pressure and incentives to Putin. Other statements from both Rubio and Trump suggest a growing consensus that using the war in Ukraine to score a political victory before the 2026 elections will not succeed—Putin will not agree.
If that’s the case, then what was once seen by the Trump team as a “promising PR asset” — the Russia-Ukraine situation — has now shifted into the category of “a persistent, unpleasant problem for years to come, complicating relations with multiple parties.” This development will likely diminish any prospects of cozying up to Putin at Ukraine’s expense.
As a reminder, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on July 10 that during a conversation with Sergei Lavrov, new ideas were discussed for ending the war in Ukraine. At the same time, he added that President Donald Trump is “disappointed and saddened that the Russian side has not shown more flexibility” to end the conflict.
In addition, Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the recent suspension of arms supplies to Ukraine a “short-term pause” in the arms transfer process. According to him, some of the defensive weapons were recently used during Iran’s attack on Israel. Therefore, a pause was necessary to account for the available weapons.
Instead, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated that during the meeting, there was a “substantial and frank exchange of views” on issues such as Ukraine, Iran, Syria, and other global problems.
Also, follow “Pryamyi” on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and Instagram.
• Materials published in the “OPINIONS” section reflect the opinion of the author of the publication, who bears full responsibility for the accuracy of the information.
• The editorial staff of prm.ua may not share the opinions expressed in the author’s material.
• The owner of the webpage in the “OPINIONS” section is the author of the publication.