© AFP / EyePress News
Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Joe Biden hold their summit in Geneva at the first such meeting since 2018.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Joe Biden hold their summit in Geneva at the first such meeting since 2018.
In Geneva, the US and Russia issued a joint statement in which "we reaffirm the principle that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought."
Assorted Dr Strangeloves will cringe - but at least the world has it in writing, and may breathe a sigh of relief with this breakthrough of sorts. That doesn't mean that a "non-agreement-capable" US military-industrial complex will abide by it.
Moscow and Washington also committed to engage in an "integrated bilateral strategic stability dialogue in the near future that will be deliberate and robust." The devil in the details is in which "near future" the dialogue will progress.
A first step is that ambassadors are returning to both capitals. Putin confirmed that the Russian Foreign Ministry and the State Department will "start consultations" following the new START-3 treaty extension for five years.
Equally important was the actual Rosebud in Geneva: the Minsk protocol. That was one of the key drivers for the White House to actually ask the Kremlin for the summit - and not the other way around.
The US establishment was shaken by the lightning-flash military buildup in Russian territory contiguous to Donbass, which was a response to Kiev's provocations. (Putin: "We conduct exercises on our territory, but we do not conduct exercises dragging equipment and weapons to the US border.")
The message was duly received. There seems to be a change of posture by the US on Ukraine - implying the Minsk protocol is back.
But that can all be - once again - shadow play. Biden said: "We agreed to pursue diplomacy related to the Minsk agreement."
To "pursue diplomacy" does not necessarily mean strictly abiding by a deal, already endorsed by the UN Security Council, that is being disrespected by Kiev non-stop. But at least it implies diplomacy.
A benign reading would reveal that some red lines are finally being understood. Putin did allude to it: "In general, it is clear to us what our US partners talk about, and they do understand what we say, when it comes to the 'red lines.' But I should say frankly that we have not gone as far as placing the emphases in detail" sufficiently to "distribute and share something."
So no detail - at least not yet.
Comment: Free speech, by definition and adherence, should not require defense nor constraint.