event: botmodel data: GPT 4.1 nano data: data: ++ data: start data: ++ data: data: This data: thread data: suggests data: the data: US data: is data: pushing data: Russia data: towards data: a data: deal data: by data: using data: pressure data: and data: incentives data: , data: mainly data: to data: secure data: Don data: bas data: . data: Moscow data: shows data: interest data: but data: is data: using data: the data: plan data: to data: appear data: in data: control data: . data: The data: US data: has data: tough data: sanctions data: and data: pressures data: Ukraine data: , data: making data: a data: compromise data: possible data: but data: hard data: , data: especially data: with data: internal data: forces data: wanting data: war data: . data: If data: Trump data: wins data: , data: a data: quick data: deal data: might data: happen data: , data: but data: if data: it data: fails data: , data: it data: would data: be data: a data: big data: political data: loss data: for data: Biden data: . data: ++ data: end data: ++ event: trylimit data: -1 An internal server error occurred.
This is my “game-theoretic” read of the leaked transcripts between Witkoff, Ushakov, and Dmitriev:
1. The US is steering the peace track and using a calibrated mix of pressure and incentives on Russia
1/
2. Moscow signals real interest in a deal. The 28-point list is a maximalist opener, not a final position.
3. The central Russian goal is to secure Donbas at the negotiating table after failing to take it militarily for four years.
2/
4. The US frames the plan as “yours” to flatter Russian agency. Witkoff pushed Ushakov to write it; the Kremlin obliged.
The idea originates in Washington, but the optics let Moscow claim it is outplaying America, which suits Putin.
4/
5. One pressure point is oil sanctions. Washington passed tougher restrictions than expected after months of hinting it wouldn’t. There are others, hidden.
5/
6. The US approach to Ukraine is pressure without incentives.
The corruption scandal constrains Zelenskyy’s domestic footing, and US officials are described as threatening to scale back intelligence and weapons flows if Kyiv rejects the deal.
6/
I can’t verify the credibility, but I keep hearing versions of “we’ve never been pressured this hard.”
7/
7. What this suggests: a deal is possible. There is theoretical space for compromise, though it is hard to see how Ukraine concedes territory or accepts limits on its self-defense.
8/
And each side still has internal forces that want the war to continue, even if they are not the majority.
If Trump forces momentum, a rapid agreement is plausible — ideally not one that sacrifices Ukraine.
9/
8. If the deal collapses later, Trump owns a Biden-Afghanistan-level failure. That risk is politically lethal.
10/
So Washington’s main concern is building real guarantees that prevent or sharply raise the cost of any future Russian attack. On this point, Kyiv and Washington are aligned.
11X
This is my “game-theoretic” read of the leaked transcripts between Witkoff, Ushakov, and Dmitriev:
1. The US is steering the peace track and using a calibrated mix of pressure and incentives on Russia
1/2. Moscow signals real interest in a deal. The 28-point list is a maximalist opener, not a final position.
3. The central Russian goal is to secure Donbas at the negotiating table after failing to take it militarily for four years.
2/4. The US frames the plan as “yours” to flatter Russian agency. Witkoff pushed Ushakov to write it; the Kremlin obliged.
The idea originates in Washington, but the optics let Moscow claim it is outplaying America, which suits Putin.
4/5. One pressure point is oil sanctions. Washington passed tougher restrictions than expected after months of hinting it wouldn’t. There are others, hidden.
5/6. The US approach to Ukraine is pressure without incentives.
The corruption scandal constrains Zelenskyy’s domestic footing, and US officials are described as threatening to scale back intelligence and weapons flows if Kyiv rejects the deal.
6/I can’t verify the credibility, but I keep hearing versions of “we’ve never been pressured this hard.”
7/7. What this suggests: a deal is possible. There is theoretical space for compromise, though it is hard to see how Ukraine concedes territory or accepts limits on its self-defense.
8/And each side still has internal forces that want the war to continue, even if they are not the majority.
If Trump forces momentum, a rapid agreement is plausible — ideally not one that sacrifices Ukraine.
9/8. If the deal collapses later, Trump owns a Biden-Afghanistan-level failure. That risk is politically lethal.
10/So Washington’s main concern is building real guarantees that prevent or sharply raise the cost of any future Russian attack. On this point, Kyiv and Washington are aligned.
11X
This is my “game-theoretic” read of the leaked transcripts between Witkoff, Ushakov, and Dmitriev:
1. The US is steering the peace track and using a calibrated mix of pressure and incentives on Russia
1/ ... 2. Moscow signals real interest in a deal. The 28-point list is a maximalist opener, not a final position.
3. The central Russian goal is to secure Donbas at the negotiating table after failing to take it militarily for four years.
2/ ... 4. The US frames the plan as “yours” to flatter Russian agency. Witkoff pushed Ushakov to write it; the Kremlin obliged.
The idea originates in Washington, but the optics let Moscow claim it is outplaying America, which suits Putin.
4/ ... 5. One pressure point is oil sanctions. Washington passed tougher restrictions than expected after months of hinting it wouldn’t. There are others, hidden.
5/ ... 6. The US approach to Ukraine is pressure without incentives.
The corruption scandal constrains Zelenskyy’s domestic footing, and US officials are described as threatening to scale back intelligence and weapons flows if Kyiv rejects the deal.
6/ ... I can’t verify the credibility, but I keep hearing versions of “we’ve never been pressured this hard.”
7/ ... 7. What this suggests: a deal is possible. There is theoretical space for compromise, though it is hard to see how Ukraine concedes territory or accepts limits on its self-defense.
8/ ... And each side still has internal forces that want the war to continue, even if they are not the majority.
If Trump forces momentum, a rapid agreement is plausible — ideally not one that sacrifices Ukraine.
9/ ... 8. If the deal collapses later, Trump owns a Biden-Afghanistan-level failure. That risk is politically lethal.
10/ ... So Washington’s main concern is building real guarantees that prevent or sharply raise the cost of any future Russian attack. On this point, Kyiv and Washington are aligned.
11X
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
Update
