🔗 Share this article

For a brief period, the former US president gave the impression to embrace a firm approach concerning Ukraine. Following delivering statements of "serious consequences" in August should Putin continued blocking ceasefire talks, Trump ultimately introduced considerable sanctions on the Russian primary oil companies, these major energy companies. This move substantially impacted Putin's capability to support his aggression in Ukraine.

Yet, via his latest detailed peace proposal for the conflict, which was developed by both nations' representatives excluding Ukraine's or European input, the former president has apparently returned to his Russia-friendly approach.

Benefiting Military Action

The former president's plan would effectively benefit Putin for attacking Ukraine while placing the country's democracy in peril. Although ringing proclamations that "The nation's autonomy will be affirmed", much of the proposal effectively weaken that essential sovereignty. This constitutes a Moscow's wish would certainly be a catastrophe for the nation.

Showing his real-estate experience, the former president seems to treat the war as a mere border issue, like ceding Russia a section of Ukraine's land will appease the ruler. But, Putin's war is not merely about dominating a destroyed region of deindustrialized territory in the Donbas region. Instead, it's about Ukraine's political system – and the Russian leader's clear desire to eliminate it so it ceases to functions as an appealing model for the Russia's population of the responsible leadership that Putin's growing autocracy denies them.

Land Surrenders

Although keeping in status the presently divided Ukrainian provinces of these areas, Trump's plan would require the nation to abandon the entire Donetsk region. Aside from rewarding Russia with territory that its military have been unsuccessful to seize in exceeding a ten years of fighting, this surrender would make Ukrainian defenses severely undermined.

Donetsk is the site of the nation's much-vaunted "defensive line", the entrenched protective structures that are a key obstacle to invading forces. The proposal would have Ukraine leave these fortifications, giving Russian forces a clear route to Kyiv in case he subsequently decide to restart the war.

Military Reductions

Furthermore, in a step that would enable future fighting more feasible for the Russian military, Trump would mandate the nation to cut the size of its troops from their existing approximately 800,000 troops to a maximum of six hundred thousand. Significantly, the proposal places no equivalent constraints on Russian forces.

Apparently as a concession to Putin's campaign to depict Ukraine's democratically elected government as Nazis, the proposal asserts: "Every extremist ideology and practices must be opposed and prohibited." Apparently to highlight this aspect, it insists that "The nation will hold elections in this period" of a ceasefire agreement. At the same time, Trump imposes no requirement that the Russian leader risk his dictatorship by holding democratic processes in his own country.

Security Commitments

Certainly, the initiative has Russia promise not to "enter bordering nations" and to "establish in legislation its stance of non-violence towards Europe and the Ukrainian people". Yet taking into account that Putin has breached comparable treaties in the past – including the 1994 agreement, in which Russia committed to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for giving up its historical atomic arms, and the previous peace deals, in which Moscow agreed to a truce and a handback of seized land in the Donbas to Ukrainian control – for what reason should the international community believe this commitment now?

That is why the Ukrainian government has been so determined on international protection assurances. Although the plan threatens a "immediate coordinated defense action" in case Russia renew its aggression, and states that "Ukraine will receive strong protection assurances", the particulars range from vague to alarming. The plan would not just deny the nation Nato membership but also prevent alliance nations from deploying troops on Ukraine's soil, effectively precluding the security presence, reportedly commanded by the UK and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been depending to deter Russia from rebuilding his reduced troops, re-equipping, and reinvading.

Global Reaction

A separate side agreement apparently would provide Ukraine with a similar to NATO defense commitment, in which any later "significant, deliberate, and continuous military assault" by Russia on Ukraine "will be treated as an attack threatening the tranquility of the allied countries." This implies a armed reaction. But in contrast to a strong Ukraine's armed forces – the nation's best deterrent against future Russian aggression – the success of the side agreement would depend on the dedication of Nato leaders, such as the US administration, to respond with force to Putin's hostilities, an action they have {not