🔗 Share this article

Initially, the former US president appeared to take a strong stance on the Ukrainian conflict. After making threats of "severe repercussions" last August if Russia's president continued blocking peace discussions, the former president ultimately introduced substantial sanctions on the Russian two largest energy firms, Lukoil and Rosneft. This move substantially impacted Putin's ability to support his war effort in Ukraine.

Yet, with his newly presented comprehensive peace plan for the conflict, which was developed by American and Russian officials excluding Ukraine's or European input, the former president has seemingly gone back to his Russia-friendly position.

Favoring Military Action

The former president's initiative would effectively benefit the Russian leader for attacking Ukraine while placing Ukraine's political freedom in danger. Despite bold declarations that "The nation's autonomy will be affirmed", much of the proposal in reality weaken that essential independence. What represents a Russian ideal would certainly be a catastrophe for the nation.

Reflecting his real-estate background, the former president continues to view the war as a mere land disagreement, implying handing Russia a section of Ukrainian territory will satisfy the president. Yet, Putin's war is not only about occupying a damaged area of economically weakened land in eastern Ukraine. Rather, it is about Ukraine's democracy – and Putin's obvious desire to weaken it so it ceases to acts as an enticing example for the Russia's population of the responsible governance that Putin's deepening authoritarian rule denies them.

Territorial Surrenders

While keeping in status the currently split regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the initiative would compel Ukraine to surrender all of Donetsk province. In addition to benefiting Russia with land that its military have been unsuccessful to occupy in more than a lengthy period of fighting, this surrender would make Ukraine's defensive positions critically undermined.

The area is the site of Ukraine's well-known "defensive line", the entrenched protective structures that are a key impediment to invading forces. The proposal would have the Ukrainian military leave these defenses, providing Russian forces a clear way to Kyiv should he eventually opt to resume the hostilities.

Military Limitations

Furthermore, in a step that would facilitate future fighting simpler for Russia, the plan would mandate Ukraine to cut the scale of its troops from their existing approximately 800,000 soldiers to a cap of 600,000. Notably, Trump's initiative places no equivalent constraints on Russian forces.

Seemingly as a concession to Putin's efforts to characterize Ukraine's democratically elected leadership as Nazis, the plan declares: "All extremist ideology and actions must be opposed and forbidden." As if to emphasize this point, it requires that "Ukraine will hold elections in 100 days" of a ceasefire agreement. However, Trump imposes no condition that Putin jeopardize his authoritarian rule by holding elections in his own country.

Security Commitments

Admittedly, the initiative has Russia commit not to "enter other states" and to "establish in law its position of non-violence towards Europe and Ukraine". But considering that Putin has breached comparable accords in the previous instances – such as the 1994 Budapest memorandum, in which Russia pledged to recognize Ukraine's borders in exchange for surrendering its Soviet-era atomic arms, and the Minsk accords, in which Moscow agreed to a ceasefire and a restoration of seized areas in the region to Ukrainian control – for what reason should anyone trust Russia now?

This explains Ukraine has been so insistent on external security guarantees. While the plan promises a "strong coordinated defense action" should the Russian Federation resume its aggression, and includes that "The nation will receive strong security guarantees", the details vary from unclear to troubling. The initiative would not only prevent the nation accession to NATO but also prevent member states from positioning troops on Ukraine's soil, thus blocking the security presence, likely commanded by Britain and France, on which Ukraine had been relying to deter Russia from restoring his reduced troops, restocking, and reinvading.

Global Response

An additional supplementary accord reportedly would offer the nation with a alliance-like security guarantee, in which any later "serious, deliberate, and continuous aggression" by the Russian Federation on Ukraine "shall be regarded as an attack threatening the stability and safety of the Western nations." That suggests a armed reaction. Yet unlike a powerful national defense – the nation's primary deterrent against future invasion – the credibility of the side agreement would depend on the commitment of Nato leaders, including Trump, to act militarily to Putin's attacks, an action they have {not