The historic Helsinki Summit ended after two closed doors, one in front of the press, three hours in total, between Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump. But the summit still keeps its place on the agenda. Because even within the hour in front of the press, the material itself contains a lot of important clues as to what is behind the closed doors in itself.
In this context, at the very beginning of the clues in question, there existed in the power centers / countries such as the EU-Germany, England, Iran and even China. It is also worth mentioning that the process that can be expressed as "panic", "worry", "anger", "frustration" and "new quests" will accelerate and heat up. Therefore, after the Helsinki Summit in the world, a new turn is conceived, and in this context, the greatest contribution to the process of zirvenin is confronted as "deepening" and "enlargement" of ambiguity. In a more concrete way, we have entered a turning point to be called the reconstruction of existing equilibrium-equation searches.
This is equivalent to redepositing cards; as seen in the system of complex alliances that came to the fore in the process leading to the First World War. It is obvious that this overly slippery, slippery alliance process, called a conclusion / realist of realist politics, will make a contribution to world peace. So what are the actors in the first place, especially the US-Russia couple, trying to do and what kind of consequences can this lead to? In this case, it is inevitable to handle the process, even briefly, on some of the major actors ...
US-Russia Dimension ...
In the process, of course, the new strategy that the US has put into practice with President Trump is quite important. It is important that Trump and the US turn into an unpredictable one. On the other hand, the beginning of the US in recent years, especially with Trump, to follow the "unpredictability strategy" is equivalent to its weakness, at least it leads to such a perception.
Until now, the US, which wants to build a global hegemonic power by itself, has once again declared that it is looking for a partner in Helsinki. We know that this partnership process has begun to become apparent from the last days of Bush, that he was named by Obama and that he was persistently persisting with Trump.
It is also worth noting here that the United States has not achieved the desired result in this joint search process, which is aimed at a controlled two or multipolarity between Russia and China. So what does the US want to do?
Here are five key objectives of the US: 1) to divide the anti-US block within itself; 2) To isolate China and surround it more strongly. (Turkey-Russia-Iran trio here in a way that would be vital to add to their ranks.); 3) Restoring and reinforcing its own block over the "opposing block" of its declining influence on its allies; 4) Realizing the Great Israel Project; 5) To establish the new Yalta Regime.
So here are three key actors in question for the United States: Russia, Turkey and Iran. Recently, with the approach of trying to strengthen the efforts of Turkey and Russia so pacifying Iran, the idea of drawing on its axis is going on here almost deciphered. Especially, Russia, which has climbed with Crimean-East Ukraine, is very supportive of tehdidine USA and Trump's criticism against Russia in Helsinki Summit, not to warn/threaten him.
Here, too, it should be underlined: Russia is, in the present circumstances, the most ideal and appropriate partner in terms of the United States. As a matter of fact, there is no other option, as Obama has received a rejection from this offer of partnership to China in the last period.
Russia (if that is the case in fact) will be the scene of frequent discussions as one of the actors of the "Great Israel Project-BIP" in the future. This will mean a new milestone in terms of the "Great Middle East Project - BOP" that the US has put into practice in line with the BIP target. Given the recent traffic between Russia and Israel, the agenda of these rounds is also clear by three to five degrees. At the very least, the lack of the Russian leg of one of the three important pillars of the Astana Process will finish Astana de facto.
So, there are two happy actors of summit: Russia and Israel. We can call it two winners. It is clear that one of the basic priorities of the USA, as it was clear at the press conference, is that Israel has security over Syria-Iran and that it includes Russia.
On the other hand, one of the winners of this summit may turn into an act of loss at any moment in an environment that, at first sight, is built on "anti-US" and "brute power" and thus becomes a center of attraction. It's a serious mistake to do; In addition to the EU-Turkey-Iran England could lead to losing the duo. That actor becomes a problematic actor in the point of reliability!
EU-UK Size ...
First of all, we can say that the gap between the Helsinki Summit and the US-EU is getting deeper. Trump's definition of Germany and the EU as "hostile, hostile, hostile country" is very important in terms of putting the atmosphere in US-EU relations.
One of the uncomfortable actors is the UK. The United States, which has left the EU and moves a step closer to the United States, may go on to pursue a more cautious policy in the future. The recent "reverse gear" situation in the Brexite process is probably due to the fact that it is foreseen. Therefore, these reactions to Trump could lead to a coexistence within the European front, or the EU could push it further into Russia.
To put it more concretely, we can say that there are three options in front of them in terms of actors: 1) Making a choice between the USA or Russia; 2) Another actor, for example, heading to China; 3) To build up their own power centers as soon as possible by putting an end to hostilities among themselves.
Turkey Size ...
As for the size of Turkey; The search for reconciliation between Trump and Putin seemed to reduce the "preference" pressure on us for a while at first glance, but it could lead to even more grave consequences, since it is not known how the two leaders went to share in the Middle East. The point that needs to be discussed is, of course, this part which is not declared. We do not know what was said behind closed doors, but now is like we think, then we can talk about a new era in Turkey-Russia-Iran relations. Where do we know from? Because history tells us that ...