The article questions whether Donald Trump's apparent realization that Vladimir Putin might have been manipulating him is genuine or simply a reflection of his shifting alliances and rhetoric. Experts like Max Boot are skeptical, believing it's the latter and highlighting the lack of concrete actions from Trump to back his words.
Max Boot believes that Trump's statements are empty rhetoric unless accompanied by tangible actions, such as increased weapon supplies to Ukraine to counter Russian aggression. Michael McFaul, a former US ambassador to Russia, agrees, stressing the need for actions to match words, including more sanctions on Russia and military aid to Ukraine.
The article recalls Trump's previous assertion that Putin never broke ceasefire agreements during his presidency, illustrating his past tendency to believe he has dominance over Putin. His concession that Putin might have manipulated him would require a significant departure from this deeply held belief.
The article concludes by suggesting that whether Trump's recent statements mark a genuine turning point depends on his subsequent actions. Without concrete evidence of stronger action against Russia, his shift in tone might be nothing more than a fleeting change influenced by others' rhetoric.