🔗 Share this article

For a brief period, Trump seemed to embrace a resolute approach concerning Ukraine. After delivering threats of "significant ramifications" during the summer should Vladimir Putin continued obstructing truce talks, the former president ultimately enacted major penalties on Russia's primary oil companies, these major energy companies. This decision seriously hindered the Russian leader's ability to support his military invasion in Ukraine.

However, via his newly presented detailed peace proposal for the conflict, that was created by both nations' representatives lacking Ukrainian or EU involvement, the former president has clearly reverted to his favorable to Russia approach.

Rewarding Military Action

The former president's plan would in practice favor the Russian leader for occupying Ukraine while leaving the country's democratic system in peril. Although ringing proclamations that "The nation's sovereignty will be affirmed", much of the plan effectively compromise that same sovereignty. What represents a Moscow's wish would probably be a disaster for Ukraine.

Reflecting his corporate experience, Trump persists to consider the war as a mere land disagreement, like ceding Russia a portion of Ukraine's soil will please the leader. But, Putin's war is not only about controlling a destroyed area of deindustrialized territory in eastern Ukraine. Rather, it is about Ukraine's democratic governance – and the Russian leader's obvious desire to eliminate it so it no longer functions as an appealing model for the Russian people of the responsible governance that Putin's deepening dictatorship withholds them.

Land Concessions

Although freezing in place the currently separated regions of these areas, Trump's initiative would force Ukraine to abandon the whole Donetsk region. Beyond rewarding the Russian Federation with territory that its forces have been unable to seize in exceeding a ten years of fighting, this surrender would render Ukrainian defensive positions dangerously undermined.

This region is the place of Ukraine's highly-touted "stronghold system", the well-established protective structures that represent a critical impediment to enemy progress. The proposal would have the Ukrainian military leave these fortifications, giving Russian forces a clear path to the capital in case he eventually decide to restart the conflict.

Armed Forces Restrictions

Additionally, in a move that would make additional conflict easier for Russia, Trump would require Ukraine to cut the numbers of its armed forces from their present 800,000 to 850,000 troops to a cap of 600,000. Notably, Trump's plan sets no similar constraints on Russian forces.

Apparently as a gesture to Russia's campaign to portray the nation's chosen by the people leadership as extremists, Trump's proposal declares: "All extremist ideology and activities must be condemned and prohibited." Seemingly to highlight this aspect, it demands that "The nation will hold political contests in three months" of a ceasefire agreement. However, the proposal imposes no requirement that Putin endanger his dictatorship by holding votes in Russia.

Defense Commitments

To be sure, the initiative makes Russia pledge not to "enter other states" and to "enshrine in regulation its position of peaceful relations towards the EU and the Ukrainian people". But given that the Russian leadership has violated comparable accords in the past – such as the 1994 agreement, in which the Russian government committed to recognize the nation's borders in return for surrendering its historical nuclear weapons, and the Minsk accords, in which Russia agreed to a truce and a return of captured land in the region to Kyiv – why should the international community believe Putin on this occasion?

That is why Ukraine has been so insistent on external defense commitments. Although the plan warns of a "strong joint armed reaction" if the Russian Federation renew its aggression, and includes that "Ukraine will receive dependable security guarantees", the particulars vary from fuzzy to concerning. The plan would not just block the nation accession to NATO but also preclude member states from deploying troops on Ukrainian territory, thus preventing the peacekeeping contingent, reportedly led by Britain and France, on which Ukraine had been relying to stop Russia from restoring his diminished military, re-equipping, and reinvading.

Global Reaction

An additional parallel deal reportedly would offer Ukraine with a similar to NATO defense commitment, in which any future "serious, deliberate, and continuous military assault" by Russia on the country "would be considered as an act of war jeopardizing the stability and safety of the Western nations." That suggests a defense action. However unlike a strong national defense – the nation's most reliable defense against future invasion – the credibility of the side agreement would depend on the willingness of alliance members, including the US administration, to respond militarily to Putin's attacks, a response they have {not