Pentagon executives met with a group of European diplomats in late August and sent them a strict message: The US was planning to stop part of military aid to Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, all NATO member states bordering Russia. The message of US officials surprised European diplomats, while at the same time lifting fears in many of them that Washington gradually turns its attention to other issues, which could encourage Russian President Vladimir Putin, Vladimir Putin.

Specifically, at that meeting, Pentagon official David Baker told the Europeans team, according to an official who has a direct knowledge of what has been stated, that Europe should be less dependent on the US, saying that under the presidency of Donald Trump.

Last Friday, their fears seemed to have a basis.

Russian aircraft MIG-31 stormed the Estonia airspace for about 10 minutes, before being stopped by Italian F-35s. Russia denied that it violated Estonia’s airspace, saying its aircraft had flew over neutral waters. A few hours later, Russian aircraft flew over a Polish oil platform, according to Warsaw. While last week, Russian drones invaded Poland’s airspace and eventually rejected.

Restrained reaction

The US reaction to these incidents has so far been restrained. Trump avoided referring to the last invasion for several hours, before finally saying that he could be a “big problem”, and after last week’s incident in Poland he had published an enigmatic message in the Truth Social application: “Let’s go!”

Its reaction seems to match the change in stance on the part of the US feared Europeans.

After months of proposals to resolve or mediate some of the most intractable conflicts in the world, Trump has largely retired from diplomacy in recent weeks, according to Reuters. Instead, he has allowed, and in some cases, he has pressed his allies to take over the reins, giving only vague promises of US help.

On the contrary, he is increasingly focusing on internal issues, such as the fight against crime, the treatment of what he calls for violent left -wing extremism, and the revision of a major visa granting program.

Specifically, after a strong diplomatic summer, including Putin’s hospitality in Alaska, Trump told Europeans that they should impose strict sanctions on Russian oil buyers if they want Washington to exert financial pressure on Moscow.

Also, while the US president spent the first months of his term in his term trying to ensure a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian organization Hamas, recently seems to be indifferent to Israel’s moves that seem to undermine the possibility of an agreement to end the war.

Indeed, although White House officials protested when Israel bombed Hamas executives on the territory of Qatar, a US ally, did not take action. When Israel began its controversial military attack on the city of Gaza, Trump did not object, even when European and Arab allies of the US condemned the Israeli government’s move.

The fact that Trump appears cautious about US involvement in major conflicts is no surprise. For almost two years, during his election campaign, he argued that the US has undertaken excessive military duties. His political opponents accused him of being isolated.

But in the summer, he showed another person. To disappoint some of his conservative political allies, he bombed Iran’s basic nuclear facilities, supporting Israel’s air attack in June. At the NATO conference held in the Netherlands later the same month, he said he would send new Patriot defense systems to Ukraine. And in July he intensified the threats to sanctions and duties at the expense of Moscow.

Return to ‘factory arrangements’

But now, according to analysts, Trump returns to his “factory arrangements”.

Aaron Devid Miller, veteran American diplomat and a senior researcher at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, notes that Trump may have just realized that the conflicts were much more difficult than he had imagined.

The president’s last turn could, of course, be easily followed by a new other turn. In April and May, he publicly expressed his intention to retire from the war to Ukraine, then back to the issue.

In addition, the departure of the White House was not absolute. In recent weeks, American weapons have again begun to reach Ukraine as part of a US-NATO security initiative called Purl program.

However, analysts are fearing that the mild US reaction to Russia’s latest challenges will encourage Putin to make even more aggressive moves.

Further departure of the US “will lead to more provocative actions than Putin, as it considers Europe weaker as it can be divided – especially without the support of the US,” notes Alex Plitsas, a senior researcher at the Atlantic Council.

Several European diplomats in Washington have stated in private discussions that they are tired of Trump’s unstable attitude towards Russia – and implying that the possibility of the US president to harden his attitude towards Moscow cannot be considered a given.

During the summer, according to diplomats, their feeling was very different.

At the NATO summit in June, Trump praised European leaders and repeatedly threatened Russia with immediate and secondary sanctions next month, and agreed to create the Purl program.

However, the summit with Putin in Alaska did not lead to any significant progress and led to a significant Piston for Kiev: Trump left the meeting with the Russian president stating that the ceasefire in Ukraine is not a prerequisite for a permanent peace.

Also, in a tense telephone conversation with European partners on September 4, Trump argued that European countries were waiting for the US to save them, at the same time that Europeans continued to feed the Russian war machine by buying Russian oil, according to two officials.

Next week, Trump told European Union officials that they would have to impose 100% duties on China and India in order to punish them for Russian oil markets. Trump, according to an official, allegedly said this was a prerequisite for taking action by the US.

Trump’s “fans” argue that the US president simply demands that Europe take over its own security.

However, some diplomats suspect it is a trap. Such measures would be difficult to overcome EU bureaucratic obstacles, as the Union prefers sanctions to duties. Two senior European diplomats in Washington also noted that Trump had recently talked about a reduction in trade barriers with India.

It is not clear whether Friday’s invasion of Estonia will change Trump’s attitude towards Russia.

His government, after all, did not appear to be influenced by the letter sent by Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia last week, where they demanded that Trump’s plan be re -examined to stop part of the US military aid.

“Many of our European allies are among the richest countries in the world,” a White House official even said. “They are absolutely capable of funding these programs if they wish.”