🔗 Share this article

At first, Donald Trump seemed to adopt a strong stance regarding the Ukrainian conflict. After making warnings of "severe ramifications" during the summer should Putin persisted blocking peace talks, Trump ultimately enacted major sanctions on the Russian two largest petroleum corporations, Rosneft and Lukoil. This decision substantially impacted the Russian leader's capacity to finance his military invasion in the region.

But, through his recently unveiled comprehensive peace proposal for the conflict, which was developed by US and Russian representatives excluding Ukraine's or EU participation, the former president has apparently reverted to his Russia-friendly stance.

Favoring Invasion

This proposal would essentially favor the Russian leader for occupying a sovereign nation while leaving the country's political freedom in peril. Although bold statements that "Ukraine's sovereignty will be upheld", large portions of the plan effectively undermine that very sovereignty. Seen as a Kremlin dream would certainly be a Ukrainian nightmare.

Demonstrating his corporate experience, the former president persists to treat the Ukrainian conflict as a basic border issue, like giving Putin a section of Ukraine's soil will please the president. However, Putin's war is not only about occupying a damaged area of deindustrialized territory in Ukraine's east. Instead, it's about Ukraine's political system – and the Russian leader's clear goal to eliminate it so it no longer functions as an enticing example for the Russia's population of the responsible government that his increasing autocracy prevents them.

Territorial Concessions

While freezing in place the currently divided oblasts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, the initiative would force the nation to surrender all of Donetsk region. In addition to benefiting Russia with territory that its military have been unable to capture in more than a lengthy period of conflict, this concession would make Ukraine's military defenses dangerously compromised.

The area is the site of the nation's well-known "defensive line", the fortified military defenses that constitute a critical barrier to enemy progress. Trump would have Ukraine surrender these positions, giving Putin a clear way to Kyiv in case he subsequently opt to resume the conflict.

Defense Restrictions

Furthermore, in a move that would make renewed conflict simpler for Russia, the plan would require Ukraine to cut the size of its military from their existing large number soldiers to a limit of this lower number. Importantly, the proposal sets no such constraints on Russian forces.

Seemingly as a accommodation to Russia's efforts to depict Ukraine's legitimate administration as Nazis, the proposal asserts: "All radical doctrine and activities must be rejected and banned." As if to highlight this element, it insists that "Ukraine will hold political contests in 100 days" of a truce. However, Trump places no condition that the Russian leader jeopardize his authoritarian rule by conducting elections in his own country.

Security Guarantees

Admittedly, the proposal makes the Russian Federation promise not to "attack bordering nations" and to "enshrine in law its position of non-violence towards Europe and Ukraine". Yet given that the Russian leadership has broken equivalent agreements in the past – such as the 1994 agreement, in which Russia committed to recognize Ukraine's territorial integrity in return for giving up its historical atomic arms, and the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, in which Moscow committed to a truce and a restoration of occupied areas in the region to the government – why should the international community have confidence in Russia this time?

This explains the Ukrainian government has been so insistent on western defense commitments. Although the proposal threatens a "decisive coordinated armed reaction" if Russia renew its aggression, and provides that "Ukraine will receive strong protection assurances", the specifics range from fuzzy to alarming. The initiative would not just prevent Ukraine accession to NATO but also preclude Nato members from stationing military personnel on Ukrainian territory, thereby preventing the peacekeeping contingent, presumptively commanded by Britain and France, on which Ukraine had been depending to stop Russia from replenishing his weakened troops, re-equipping, and reinvading.

International Response

Another side agreement according to sources would grant Ukraine with a similar to NATO defense commitment, in which any future "major, planned, and continuous armed attack" by the Russian Federation on the country "would be considered as an act of war endangering the peace and security of the allied countries." This implies a defense action. Yet in contrast to a capable national defense – Ukraine's most reliable protection against additional invasion – the credibility of the side agreement would rely on the commitment of Western powers, such as Trump, to respond through arms to Russia's hostilities, an action they have {not