🔗 Share this article

For a brief period, Donald Trump gave the impression to take a resolute position concerning Ukraine. After delivering statements of "severe repercussions" in August if Putin persisted obstructing ceasefire talks, Trump ultimately introduced substantial sanctions on Russia's biggest oil companies, Lukoil and Rosneft. This action significantly hindered Putin's capability to support his military invasion in Ukraine.

But, with his latest detailed peace plan for Ukraine, reportedly developed by both nations' diplomats lacking Ukrainian or EU involvement, he has apparently reverted to his favorable to Russia approach.

Favoring Invasion

This initiative would effectively reward the Russian leader for invading Ukraine while putting the country's political freedom in danger. Despite bold proclamations that "Ukraine's autonomy will be confirmed", significant aspects of the proposal in reality undermine that very sovereignty. Seen as a Kremlin dream would certainly be a disaster for Ukraine.

Reflecting his business experience, Trump continues to view the situation in Ukraine as a basic territorial dispute, as if giving Putin a part of Ukraine's soil will satisfy the leader. Yet, Russia's military campaign is not only about controlling a charred region of economically weakened territory in eastern Ukraine. Rather, it is about Ukraine's political system – and Putin's apparent desire to weaken it so it no longer acts as an appealing standard for the Russian people of the accountable government that Putin's deepening autocracy prevents them.

Land Giveaways

Although freezing in position the presently split oblasts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, Trump's initiative would force Ukraine to surrender the whole this eastern territory. In addition to benefiting the Russian Federation with land that its forces have been unsuccessful to occupy in exceeding a lengthy period of conflict, this concession would leave Ukrainian defenses severely undermined.

The area is the place of Ukraine's much-vaunted "fortress belt", the fortified military defenses that are a critical obstacle to invading forces. The proposal would have Ukraine leave these defenses, giving Putin a open way to the capital in case he subsequently decide to restart the hostilities.

Defense Restrictions

Furthermore, in a step that would enable future fighting simpler for the Russian military, Trump would require the nation to diminish the scale of its armed forces from their existing approximately 800,000 personnel to a maximum of 600,000. Notably, Trump's initiative sets no equivalent restrictions on Russia's military.

In what appears as a gesture to Putin's campaign to portray the nation's legitimate leadership as radicals, the plan declares: "Any extremist ideology and practices must be rejected and forbidden." Seemingly to underscore this element, it requires that "Ukraine will hold elections in 100 days" of a ceasefire agreement. Meanwhile, the proposal imposes no obligation that the Russian leader risk his dictatorship by holding votes in Russia.

Defense Guarantees

Admittedly, the initiative makes Russia pledge not to "attack neighboring countries" and to "enshrine in legislation its position of peaceful relations towards the EU and the Ukrainian people". But taking into account that Putin has broken comparable treaties in the past – such as the 1994 agreement, in which Russia committed to honor the nation's borders in return for giving up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons, and the previous peace deals, in which Russia agreed to a halt in fighting and a restoration of seized land in the region to Kyiv – for what reason should we have confidence in Putin now?

For this reason Ukraine has been so insistent on international defense commitments. Although the plan warns of a "immediate unified armed reaction" if the Russian Federation restart its aggression, and provides that "Ukraine will receive strong protection assurances", the particulars range from fuzzy to alarming. The plan would not only prevent the nation Nato membership but also prohibit Nato members from stationing forces on Ukraine's soil, thus precluding the peacekeeping contingent, reportedly commanded by the UK and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been relying to prevent Russia from replenishing his diminished troops, re-equipping, and resuming aggression.

International Reaction

Another side agreement reportedly would offer Ukraine with a similar to NATO security guarantee, in which any later "major, planned, and sustained military assault" by the Russian Federation on Ukraine "would be considered as an act of war threatening the stability and safety of the allied countries." This indicates a armed reaction. But different from a strong Ukraine's armed forces – Ukraine's most reliable defense against additional Russian aggression – the success of the side agreement would depend on the dedication of Nato leaders, including the US administration, to act with force to Russia's aggression, something they have {not