LETTER: Trump gave Putin a propaganda victory
Summary
In this letter to the editor, Linda Wallers responds to Peter Kinsley’s claim that Democrats apply a double standard when criticising Donald Trump’s meeting with Vladimir Putin while seeming to accept President Joe Biden’s meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Wallers argues the two encounters are not comparable. She says Biden initially avoided high-level engagement with the crown prince over human-rights concerns, but later met him for strategic reasons and directly confronted him over the 2018 murder of Jamal Khashoggi. By contrast, Wallers says Trump’s 2025 Alaska meeting with Putin was a lavish welcome — complete with a military flyover — that treated a leader indicted by the International Criminal Court as a guest of honour, effectively handing Putin a propaganda victory and undermining long-standing US foreign-policy positions.
Key Points
- The letter rebuts a claimed “double standard” by comparing the context and conduct of two leaders’ meetings.
- Biden had previously refused to engage with the Saudi crown prince over human-rights concerns but later confronted him directly about Jamal Khashoggi when strategic circumstances required outreach.
- Trump’s 2025 summit with Putin in Alaska was staged with ceremonial fanfare, which the author says celebrated, rather than held accountable, a leader indicted for war crimes.
- The author contends Trump’s conduct undermines decades of US foreign policy and gives Russia a propaganda win amid its aggression in Ukraine and alleged atrocities.
- Conclusion: one meeting held a leader accountable; the other celebrated one — a difference in principle, not hypocrisy.
Context and Relevance
This short letter engages with current debates over US diplomacy and how state visits are presented. It touches on wider issues: accountability for human-rights abuses, the messaging effect of ceremonial treatment, and consistency in foreign-policy norms amid crises such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. For readers tracking how the US frames relationships with authoritarian leaders, the piece underscores how optics and protocol can carry strategic consequences.
Why should I read this?
Quick and punchy: if you saw the photos of Trump and Putin and wondered why some people are outraged while others call it routine, this letter lays out the simple difference — accountability vs celebration — and why that matters for US credibility. Saves you time by boiling the argument down to the core point.
