🔗 Share this article

At first, Donald Trump gave the impression to adopt a resolute approach regarding the Ukrainian conflict. Following issuing statements of "severe consequences" last August in case Vladimir Putin persisted hindering truce talks, the former president eventually introduced major penalties on Russia's two largest petroleum corporations, these major energy companies. This action substantially impacted Putin's ability to support his aggression in the region.

Yet, through his recently unveiled detailed peace proposal for the conflict, reportedly drafted by US and Russian representatives excluding Ukraine's or EU involvement, Trump has seemingly returned to his Russia-friendly stance.

Rewarding Invasion

The former president's plan would in practice reward the Russian leader for attacking a sovereign nation while leaving Ukraine's democratic system in jeopardy. Despite strong declarations that "Ukraine's sovereignty will be affirmed", significant aspects of the initiative effectively compromise that same sovereignty. Seen as a Kremlin dream would likely be a Ukrainian nightmare.

Reflecting his business experience, Trump seems to treat the war as a basic land disagreement, like giving Russia a part of Ukraine's soil will please the ruler. However, Russia's war is not only about occupying a damaged area of industrial-devastated area in Ukraine's east. It is about Ukraine's democracy – and the Russian leader's apparent goal to weaken it so it no longer acts as an appealing example for the Russian citizens of the accountable governance that Putin's growing autocracy denies them.

Border Giveaways

Although keeping in status the already split Ukrainian provinces of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, Trump's initiative would compel the nation to give up all of this eastern territory. In addition to rewarding the Russian Federation with area that its forces have been failed to seize in over a decade of fighting, this surrender would make Ukrainian defensive positions dangerously undermined.

This region is the location of the nation's much-vaunted "defensive line", the entrenched protective structures that constitute a critical obstacle to invading forces. The proposal would have Ukraine surrender these positions, providing Putin a open path to the capital in case he subsequently decide to renew the war.

Armed Forces Reductions

Furthermore, in a step that would enable future conflict easier for Russia, Trump would mandate the nation to diminish the size of its troops from their existing approximately 800,000 soldiers to a maximum of this lower number. Significantly, Trump's proposal sets no similar constraints on the invading army.

Seemingly as a concession to Putin's campaign to depict the nation's democratically elected government as extremists, the proposal states: "Any Nazi ideology and activities must be condemned and banned." As if to highlight this aspect, it insists that "Ukraine will hold political contests in 100 days" of a ceasefire agreement. At the same time, the proposal imposes no condition that Putin risk his regime by holding votes in Russia.

Defense Commitments

Certainly, the initiative includes Russia promise not to "invade neighboring countries" and to "incorporate in legislation its stance of non-aggression towards Europe and the Ukrainian people". Yet taking into account that the Russian leadership has broken comparable agreements in the past – for example the Budapest accord, in which Russia promised to respect the nation's territorial integrity in return for giving up its former Soviet atomic arms, and the Minsk accords, in which Moscow promised to a truce and a handback of seized areas in eastern Ukraine to the government – for what reason should we trust Russia on this occasion?

That is why the Ukrainian government has been so adamant on external defense commitments. Although the initiative promises a "strong unified military response" in case Russia renew its invasion, and states that "Ukraine will receive dependable protection assurances", the specifics range from fuzzy to troubling. The proposal would not just deny the nation Nato membership but also preclude Nato members from deploying forces on Ukrainian territory, thereby blocking the reassurance force, reportedly headed by European powers, on which Ukraine had been depending to stop Putin from restoring his diminished troops, restocking, and resuming aggression.

International Reaction

An additional supplementary accord according to sources would offer Ukraine with a Nato-style defense commitment, in which any future "major, deliberate, and sustained armed attack" by Russia on Ukraine "would be considered as an assault threatening the tranquility of the Western nations." This implies a military response. Yet in contrast to a strong national defense – Ukraine's best defense against future hostilities – the effectiveness of the parallel accord would rely on the willingness of alliance members, such as the US administration, to act with force to Putin's hostilities, an action they have {not