🔗 Share this article

Initially, Donald Trump appeared to embrace a strong approach regarding the Ukrainian conflict. Following making warnings of "serious ramifications" during the summer should Vladimir Putin persisted hindering peace talks, he ultimately imposed considerable penalties on Russia's two largest petroleum corporations, Rosneft and Lukoil. This decision substantially impacted Putin's capacity to support his military invasion in the region.

Yet, via his newly presented 28-point peace proposal for the conflict, reportedly developed by US and Russian diplomats lacking Ukraine's or European involvement, Trump has seemingly returned to his Russia-friendly approach.

Benefiting Aggression

Trump's initiative would essentially reward Putin for attacking Ukraine while leaving Ukraine's democracy in peril. Although bold declarations that "Ukraine's independence will be affirmed", significant aspects of the plan in reality weaken that same independence. Seen as a Russian ideal would probably be a Ukrainian nightmare.

Showing his business experience, Trump persists to consider the Ukrainian conflict as a mere territorial dispute, like giving Russia a section of Ukraine's soil will satisfy the president. However, Russia's military campaign is not only about controlling a damaged region of economically weakened territory in the Donbas region. Instead, it's about Ukraine's political system – and Putin's obvious desire to destroy it so it stops serves as an appealing example for the Russian people of the responsible leadership that his increasing authoritarian rule denies them.

Territorial Concessions

While freezing in place the already split oblasts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, Trump's proposal would require Ukraine to abandon the entire Donetsk region. Beyond benefiting the Russian Federation with area that its forces have been unsuccessful to capture in exceeding a ten years of warfare, this giveaway would render Ukraine's military defenses critically weakened.

This region is the location of Ukraine's much-vaunted "fortress belt", the fortified protective structures that are a key barrier to enemy progress. The proposal would have Ukraine leave these positions, leaving Putin a unobstructed route to Kyiv if he later choose to restart the war.

Military Restrictions

Furthermore, in a move that would enable additional hostilities more feasible for the Russian military, the plan would mandate Ukraine to cut the size of its troops from their existing 800,000 to 850,000 personnel to a cap of 600,000. Significantly, the plan sets no equivalent limits on the invading army.

Apparently as a gesture to Putin's efforts to depict the nation's chosen by the people government as extremists, the plan states: "Any extremist ideology and practices must be opposed and banned." As if to underscore this element, it requires that "Ukraine will hold political contests in 100 days" of a truce. Meanwhile, Trump sets no condition that Putin risk his dictatorship by allowing elections in Russia.

Security Assurances

To be sure, the plan makes the Russian Federation commit not to "attack neighboring countries" and to "establish in legislation its stance of non-violence towards the EU and the Ukrainian people". However given that Putin has broken similar accords in the history – for example the Budapest accord, in which the Russian government pledged to recognize the nation's sovereignty in exchange for surrendering its former Soviet atomic arms, and the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, in which Moscow committed to a ceasefire and a handback of occupied areas in the region to Kyiv – for what reason should anyone trust Russia now?

That is why the Ukrainian government has been so adamant on external defense commitments. Although the initiative promises a "decisive unified military response" should Russia resume its military campaign, and states that "Ukraine will receive reliable security guarantees", the specifics range from vague to troubling. The plan would not just deny Ukraine alliance membership but also prohibit Nato members from stationing troops on Ukraine's soil, effectively blocking the security presence, presumptively headed by Britain and France, on which Ukraine had been depending to stop Russia from rebuilding his diminished troops, re-equipping, and reinvading.

International Reaction

Another side agreement reportedly would offer Ukraine with a similar to NATO security guarantee, in which any subsequent "serious, deliberate, and sustained aggression" by Russia on the country "would be considered as an act of war threatening the peace and security of the allied countries." This implies a armed reaction. However unlike a capable Ukrainian military – the nation's best deterrent against renewed invasion – the success of the side agreement would rely on the willingness of Western powers, such as Trump, to react through arms to Putin's hostilities, an action they have {not