🔗 Share this article

Initially, the former US president seemed to take a firm position regarding the Ukrainian conflict. After issuing warnings of "significant ramifications" last August should Vladimir Putin carried on obstructing truce talks, Trump ultimately imposed considerable sanctions on Russia's biggest energy firms, Rosneft and Lukoil. This move seriously impacted the Russian leader's ability to fund his war effort in the region.

However, with his newly presented detailed peace initiative for Ukraine, which was developed by US and Russian representatives lacking Ukraine's or EU participation, Trump has apparently returned to his favorable to Russia stance.

Benefiting Aggression

The former president's plan would effectively favor the Russian leader for attacking Ukraine while putting the country's democracy in jeopardy. Despite strong statements that "Ukraine's sovereignty will be confirmed", significant aspects of the plan in reality weaken that essential independence. What represents a Moscow's wish would likely be a catastrophe for the nation.

Demonstrating his corporate past, the former president seems to consider the Ukrainian conflict as a simple land disagreement, like ceding Russia a portion of Ukraine's land will appease the president. Yet, Russia's military campaign is not merely about dominating a destroyed area of industrial-devastated land in Ukraine's east. It is about Ukraine's political system – and the Russian leader's obvious desire to destroy it so it stops acts as an attractive standard for the Russian people of the accountable governance that Putin's deepening authoritarian rule prevents them.

Territorial Concessions

Although maintaining in place the already divided regions of these areas, the proposal would force Ukraine to abandon the whole Donetsk province. Beyond rewarding Russia with land that its troops have been unsuccessful to capture in exceeding a lengthy period of fighting, this surrender would make Ukrainian defenses dangerously weakened.

This region is the place of the nation's well-known "stronghold system", the fortified military defenses that represent a essential barrier to Russian advances. The proposal would have Ukraine leave these fortifications, leaving Putin a unobstructed route to Kyiv in case he subsequently decide to resume the war.

Armed Forces Reductions

Furthermore, in a move that would enable renewed conflict simpler for the Russian military, the plan would require Ukraine to reduce the size of its military from their existing 800,000 to 850,000 troops to a maximum of 600,000. Notably, Trump's initiative sets no such constraints on Russian forces.

Seemingly as a gesture to Putin's campaign to depict Ukraine's legitimate government as Nazis, Trump's plan declares: "Every extremist doctrine and activities must be condemned and banned." Apparently to emphasize this element, it demands that "Ukraine will hold elections in three months" of a ceasefire agreement. At the same time, Trump places no condition that the Russian leader endanger his authoritarian rule by conducting elections in his own country.

Security Commitments

Admittedly, the initiative has the Russian Federation promise not to "invade bordering nations" and to "establish in legislation its position of non-violence towards the EU and the Ukrainian people". Yet considering that the Russian leadership has broken similar accords in the history – for example the 1994 Budapest memorandum, in which the Russian government pledged to honor Ukraine's sovereignty in return for surrendering its former Soviet nuclear arsenal, and the Minsk accords, in which Russia agreed to a halt in fighting and a restoration of captured land in the Donbas to the government – why should we believe Russia this time?

That is why Ukraine has been so adamant on international defense commitments. While the plan warns of a "immediate joint military response" should Russia restart its military campaign, and provides that "The nation will receive strong defense commitments", the details range from fuzzy to troubling. The initiative would not only prevent Ukraine accession to NATO but also prevent Nato members from stationing military personnel on the nation's land, thereby preventing the reassurance force, reportedly led by Britain and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been counting to deter Putin from replenishing his weakened troops, re-equipping, and attacking again.

World Response

An additional side agreement apparently would offer Ukraine with a Nato-style protection assurance, in which any later "serious, intentional, and sustained aggression" by Russia on the country "shall be regarded as an act of war jeopardizing the peace and security of the transatlantic community." This implies a military response. Yet different from a capable national defense – Ukraine's most reliable defense against additional Russian aggression – the effectiveness of the side agreement would rely on the willingness of Western powers, including Trump, to react with force to Putin's attacks, something they have {not