🔗 Share this article

At first, the former US president seemed to take a strong position regarding Ukraine. After issuing statements of "severe consequences" during the summer if Putin carried on hindering truce negotiations, he eventually enacted considerable sanctions on Russia's two largest energy firms, Rosneft and Lukoil. This move significantly hindered Putin's ability to support his military invasion in Ukraine.

But, via his recently unveiled 28-point peace proposal for Ukraine, reportedly created by both nations' representatives without Ukraine's or EU input, Trump has apparently gone back to his favorable to Russia approach.

Benefiting Military Action

This plan would in practice favor the Russian leader for occupying Ukraine while leaving the country's democratic system in peril. Despite bold proclamations that "The nation's independence will be affirmed", much of the initiative actually compromise that essential sovereignty. This constitutes a Russian ideal would certainly be a catastrophe for the nation.

Reflecting his real-estate experience, Trump persists to view the situation in Ukraine as a mere land disagreement, as if handing Putin a part of Ukraine's land will appease the leader. Yet, Putin's invasion is not only about controlling a charred area of economically weakened area in Ukraine's east. Instead, it's about Ukraine's political system – and the Russian leader's apparent desire to destroy it so it no longer acts as an appealing example for the Russian people of the democratic leadership that his deepening dictatorship denies them.

Land Surrenders

Although maintaining in status the presently split oblasts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the initiative would force Ukraine to give up all of Donetsk region. Aside from rewarding the Russian Federation with land that its forces have been unsuccessful to occupy in exceeding a ten years of fighting, this giveaway would leave Ukrainian defenses severely compromised.

This region is the place of Ukraine's highly-touted "defensive line", the well-established military defenses that constitute a key barrier to enemy progress. Trump would have Ukraine surrender these positions, giving Russian forces a unobstructed way to the capital in case he later choose to restart the war.

Military Limitations

Furthermore, in a move that would facilitate future hostilities easier for Russia, Trump would force the nation to reduce the numbers of its troops from their existing approximately 800,000 troops to a maximum of this lower number. Notably, Trump's proposal sets no similar constraints on Russian forces.

Apparently as a concession to Russia's efforts to characterize the nation's chosen by the people administration as Nazis, the proposal declares: "Every radical doctrine and practices must be condemned and forbidden." As if to highlight this point, it demands that "The nation will hold elections in three months" of a ceasefire agreement. Meanwhile, Trump imposes no requirement that Putin endanger his authoritarian rule by allowing votes in Russia.

Protection Assurances

Certainly, the plan makes Russia pledge not to "attack other states" and to "enshrine in law its stance of non-violence towards the EU and the Ukrainian people". Yet given that Putin has broken comparable treaties in the history – such as the 1994 agreement, in which Russia pledged to respect the nation's territorial integrity in return for giving up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons, and the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, in which Russia committed to a ceasefire and a return of occupied territory in eastern Ukraine to Ukrainian control – how should we have confidence in Putin on this occasion?

This explains the Ukrainian government has been so insistent on international defense commitments. Although the proposal promises a "decisive coordinated defense action" if the Russian Federation restart its invasion, and provides that "The nation will receive reliable security guarantees", the particulars include vague to alarming. The initiative would not only prevent Ukraine Nato membership but also prevent Nato members from deploying military personnel on Ukraine's soil, effectively blocking the security presence, likely commanded by Britain and France, on which Ukraine had been relying to stop Russia from restoring his weakened forces, re-equipping, and resuming aggression.

Global Response

A separate parallel deal apparently would offer the nation with a similar to NATO defense commitment, in which any later "serious, intentional, and continuous aggression" by Russia on Ukraine "will be treated as an assault threatening the peace and security of the allied countries." That suggests a military response. But unlike a strong Ukrainian military – Ukraine's primary deterrent against future hostilities – the effectiveness of the side agreement would hinge on the willingness of Nato leaders, including the US administration, to respond through arms to Putin's aggression, an action they have {not