🔗 Share this article

For a brief period, Donald Trump seemed to take a strong stance regarding Ukraine. After making statements of "serious repercussions" last August if Russia's president carried on obstructing ceasefire discussions, Trump ultimately imposed considerable sanctions on the Russian primary energy firms, these major energy companies. This move seriously impacted the Russian leader's capacity to finance his aggression in the region.

Yet, via his recently unveiled comprehensive peace initiative for the conflict, that was developed by both nations' representatives lacking Ukrainian or European input, he has clearly gone back to his Russia-friendly stance.

Benefiting Invasion

Trump's proposal would in practice benefit the Russian leader for attacking a sovereign nation while leaving the country's democratic system in peril. Despite bold declarations that "Ukraine's independence will be upheld", large portions of the proposal in reality compromise that very autonomy. What represents a Moscow's wish would certainly be a Ukrainian nightmare.

Demonstrating his corporate past, Trump continues to consider the Ukrainian conflict as a simple territorial dispute, like ceding Russia a part of Ukraine's territory will satisfy the president. However, Putin's invasion is not only about controlling a damaged region of economically weakened territory in Ukraine's east. Rather, it is about Ukraine's political system – and the Russian leader's obvious goal to weaken it so it ceases to serves as an attractive standard for the Russian citizens of the democratic governance that his growing autocracy prevents them.

Border Concessions

While freezing in status the currently split regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, Trump's initiative would compel the nation to surrender the entire Donetsk province. Aside from rewarding Russia with land that its forces have been unsuccessful to occupy in more than a ten years of warfare, this surrender would make Ukraine's defenses critically undermined.

This region is the site of the nation's highly-touted "stronghold system", the entrenched military defenses that represent a key impediment to enemy progress. The proposal would have the Ukrainian military surrender these positions, giving Putin a unobstructed path to Kyiv should he later choose to restart the war.

Military Reductions

Additionally, in a step that would enable future hostilities simpler for Russia, Trump would mandate Ukraine to diminish the scale of its military from their current approximately 800,000 troops to a cap of 600,000. Significantly, the proposal imposes no such restrictions on Russia's military.

In what appears as a concession to Russia's efforts to portray the nation's legitimate administration as radicals, Trump's proposal states: "Every radical belief system and actions must be rejected and forbidden." Apparently to emphasize this element, it insists that "The nation will hold political contests in 100 days" of a peace deal. However, Trump sets no condition that Putin jeopardize his authoritarian rule by allowing votes in his own country.

Defense Commitments

Admittedly, the proposal makes Russia commit not to "enter other states" and to "incorporate in regulation its policy of non-aggression towards European nations and Ukraine". Yet given that the Russian leadership has violated equivalent treaties in the history – for example the 1994 agreement, in which Russia promised to respect the nation's territorial integrity in exchange for giving up its former Soviet atomic arms, and the Minsk accords, in which Russia promised to a halt in fighting and a handback of occupied land in the Donbas to Ukrainian control – why should anyone trust Russia on this occasion?

For this reason Ukraine has been so adamant on external defense commitments. Although the plan warns of a "strong joint defense action" in case the Russian Federation restart its invasion, and provides that "Ukraine will receive dependable protection assurances", the details range from vague to troubling. The plan would not just block the nation accession to NATO but also prevent Nato members from deploying forces on Ukraine's soil, thereby precluding the peacekeeping contingent, presumptively commanded by Britain and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been counting to stop Putin from rebuilding his weakened forces, restocking, and attacking again.

World Reaction

An additional side agreement apparently would grant Ukraine with a Nato-style defense commitment, in which any later "significant, planned, and sustained armed attack" by the Russian Federation on the country "will be treated as an assault endangering the peace and security of the Western nations." That suggests a military response. Yet different from a strong national defense – the nation's best deterrent against additional hostilities – the credibility of the supplementary deal would rely on the willingness of alliance members, such as the US administration, to act with force to Russia's attacks, something they have {not