A tiger of steadfast or bear paper .. a debate opens the doors of the unknown

In a new escalation of the American rhetoric towards Moscow, US President Donald Trump launched a direct attack on Russia, describing it as just a “tiger of paper”, in reference to its weak ability to resolve the Ukrainian war and its economy has declined under Western sanctions.

But the Kremlin did not delay the response, borrowing a counter -image, as he presented itself as the “bear” that faces pressure and stands up in the face of storms. He announced an economic growth of 1.1% in the first half of the year, with expectations of 1.3% by the end of the year, boasting that the performance of European economies is still mired in energy crises and industrial slowdown. Trump between escalation and miraculous diplomacy was not satisfied with questioning the Moscow power, but Kiev publicly to restore lands under the control of the Russian army. This message seemed to be double: on the one hand weakening Russia’s image in front of the interior and abroad, and on the other hand, Ukraine granted a support dose that may be explained as a reference to the proceeding of the field escalation. The irony is that this sharp shift in the tone of Trump came after his recent meeting with the Russian President in Alaska. Which opened the door for interpretations: Does this position reflect a real dispute with Moscow, or is it a pressure paper whose goal is to lead to negotiations on American terms? Emphasis on economic growth seemed a message addressed to two levels:
– For the Russian interior, to tighten the determination and prove that the country is able to withstand the sanctions.
– abroad, to show that the sanctions did not exhaust Moscow as much as some European economies themselves weakened. With this speech, Russia tried to draw a different picture: a flexible economy, and a country that did not lose the initiative despite the war. Reading in the scales of the forces, its conversation with the Business program with Lubna via “Sky News Arabia”, the researcher in international relations, Lana Bouchafan, saw that Trump’s statements reveal potential paths:
1. A positive path that may lead to negotiations and political settlement that stops the conflict.
2. A negative path that may open the door for a broader confrontation between Moscow and NATO, with the repercussions that this holds on international stability. According to Badan, Moscow does not consider military victory a final goal, but rather a way to reach political and diplomatic gains, while Washington seeks to accelerate events and impose a settlement that serves its interests. Between the economy and the war … the world is on the brink of confrontation balance The verbal between the American “paper tiger” and the steadfast bear “reveals that the war has exceeded the borders of Ukraine. Today it is a battle on the status of the major powers in the international system, where statements turn into pressure tools, and economic numbers into political ammunition. The current result is a state of strategic ambiguity: Are these statements a prelude to an agreement that stops the bleeding of the war, or the beginning of a more dangerous stage that redraws the security and economic map. For the world?