🔗 Share this article

Initially, Trump appeared to take a firm position concerning Ukraine. After delivering warnings of "severe consequences" in August should Putin persisted blocking peace negotiations, the former president finally introduced major sanctions on the Russian two largest energy firms, these major energy companies. This move significantly impacted the Russian leader's ability to support his aggression in Ukraine.

But, through his newly presented detailed peace initiative for Ukraine, reportedly developed by both nations' diplomats lacking Ukrainian or European input, he has clearly gone back to his favorable to Russia position.

Favoring Invasion

This plan would in practice reward the Russian leader for invading Ukraine while putting the country's democratic system in danger. Despite strong statements that "The nation's autonomy will be upheld", significant aspects of the proposal in reality undermine that essential autonomy. This constitutes a Russian ideal would certainly be a catastrophe for the nation.

Showing his real-estate background, the former president seems to treat the Ukrainian conflict as a mere land disagreement, like handing Russia a part of Ukraine's territory will please the president. However, Putin's military campaign is not only about dominating a destroyed region of industrial-devastated land in the Donbas region. It is about Ukraine's democracy – and Putin's apparent intention to destroy it so it no longer functions as an attractive example for the Russian citizens of the accountable governance that his growing dictatorship withholds them.

Territorial Surrenders

Although keeping in position the already split oblasts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the initiative would require the nation to abandon all of Donetsk region. Beyond benefiting Russia with land that its forces have been unable to seize in over a lengthy period of warfare, this concession would leave Ukraine's defensive positions dangerously weakened.

This region is the location of the nation's highly-touted "stronghold system", the fortified defensive positions that are a critical barrier to enemy progress. Trump would have Ukraine abandon these fortifications, providing Russian forces a open way to the capital in case he later choose to restart the war.

Armed Forces Reductions

Then, in a action that would enable renewed fighting simpler for Russia, the plan would force the nation to reduce the numbers of its troops from their present 800,000 to 850,000 troops to a maximum of 600,000. Significantly, Trump's proposal sets no equivalent restrictions on Russian forces.

In what appears as a concession to Russia's attempts to depict the nation's legitimate leadership as extremists, Trump's proposal asserts: "All radical doctrine and activities must be condemned and prohibited." Apparently to highlight this element, it demands that "The nation will hold elections in this period" of a truce. At the same time, Trump sets no requirement that Putin endanger his authoritarian rule by holding elections in his own country.

Defense Commitments

Admittedly, the initiative has the Russian Federation promise not to "enter other states" and to "establish in law its policy of non-violence towards the EU and Ukraine". Yet given that the Russian leadership has broken equivalent accords in the previous instances – including the 1994 Budapest memorandum, in which the Russian government pledged to recognize the nation's sovereignty in exchange for giving up its former Soviet nuclear weapons, and the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, in which Moscow agreed to a halt in fighting and a handback of captured land in the Donbas to the government – for what reason should the international community trust this commitment on this occasion?

This explains the Ukrainian government has been so determined on western protection assurances. Although the initiative warns of a "decisive unified armed reaction" should Russia resume its military campaign, and includes that "The nation will receive reliable protection assurances", the details range from unclear to alarming. The proposal would not only deny the nation Nato membership but also prohibit member states from positioning troops on Ukrainian territory, thus preventing the security presence, reportedly headed by Britain and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been counting to deter Putin from rebuilding his diminished troops, rearming, and resuming aggression.

International Response

Another side agreement reportedly would offer Ukraine with a Nato-style defense commitment, in which any later "significant, intentional, and sustained military assault" by the Russian Federation on the country "would be considered as an attack jeopardizing the peace and security of the transatlantic community." This indicates a military response. But in contrast to a powerful national defense – Ukraine's most reliable protection against additional invasion – the effectiveness of the side agreement would hinge on the commitment of alliance members, like the US administration, to act with force to Putin's aggression, something they have {not