🔗 Share this article

At first, Donald Trump appeared to adopt a firm approach concerning the Ukrainian conflict. Following delivering threats of "serious repercussions" during the summer should Putin carried on blocking truce talks, Trump eventually imposed considerable restrictions on Russia's primary petroleum corporations, Rosneft and Lukoil. This decision significantly hindered Putin's ability to finance his aggression in Ukraine.

But, through his recently unveiled 28-point peace initiative for Ukraine, which was developed by both nations' officials lacking Ukrainian or EU participation, he has apparently reverted to his pro-Putin stance.

Rewarding Invasion

Trump's plan would effectively favor Putin for invading Ukraine while putting Ukraine's democratic system in danger. Although bold proclamations that "Ukraine's autonomy will be affirmed", significant aspects of the plan in reality weaken that same autonomy. Seen as a Moscow's wish would probably be a disaster for Ukraine.

Showing his real-estate background, the former president continues to treat the situation in Ukraine as a mere territorial dispute, implying handing Russia a section of Ukraine's territory will please the leader. Yet, Putin's military campaign is not simply about occupying a destroyed region of deindustrialized territory in Ukraine's east. It is about the nation's democracy – and Putin's clear intention to weaken it so it ceases to functions as an enticing model for the Russian people of the democratic government that his growing dictatorship denies them.

Territorial Surrenders

Although freezing in place the currently split regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, Trump's proposal would compel Ukraine to surrender the whole this eastern territory. Beyond rewarding the Russian Federation with land that its troops have been unsuccessful to capture in more than a ten years of warfare, this surrender would render Ukrainian defenses critically undermined.

The area is the location of the nation's highly-touted "fortress belt", the well-established protective structures that constitute a key impediment to enemy progress. The proposal would have Ukraine surrender these positions, leaving Putin a clear route to Kyiv if he eventually choose to renew the conflict.

Military Restrictions

Furthermore, in a step that would facilitate additional fighting more feasible for the Russian military, the plan would mandate Ukraine to reduce the numbers of its armed forces from their existing large number troops to a maximum of six hundred thousand. Significantly, the plan imposes no such constraints on Russia's military.

Seemingly as a concession to Putin's attempts to characterize Ukraine's democratically elected administration as radicals, Trump's proposal declares: "All extremist ideology and actions must be opposed and prohibited." Apparently to emphasize this aspect, it requires that "Ukraine will hold democratic votes in this period" of a ceasefire agreement. At the same time, the proposal imposes no obligation that the Russian leader risk his regime by allowing votes in Russia.

Defense Assurances

Admittedly, the proposal includes Russia promise not to "enter other states" and to "enshrine in regulation its stance of non-aggression towards Europe and the Ukrainian people". Yet considering that Putin has violated comparable treaties in the history – such as the 1994 Budapest memorandum, in which Russia promised to recognize Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for surrendering its historical atomic arms, and the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, in which Moscow committed to a halt in fighting and a return of captured land in the Donbas to the government – why should the international community have confidence in this commitment on this occasion?

This explains the Ukrainian government has been so insistent on western defense commitments. While the initiative warns of a "decisive joint military response" if Russia resume its invasion, and states that "Ukraine will receive reliable protection assurances", the details vary from unclear to troubling. The proposal would not only deny the nation Nato membership but also preclude alliance nations from positioning military personnel on Ukrainian territory, thereby blocking the reassurance force, presumptively led by Britain and France, on which Ukraine had been relying to deter Putin from restoring his weakened forces, restocking, and reinvading.

International Reaction

Another side agreement according to sources would offer the nation with a similar to NATO security guarantee, in which any future "serious, deliberate, and ongoing armed attack" by Russia on the country "would be considered as an assault endangering the tranquility of the allied countries." That suggests a defense action. But unlike a powerful Ukraine's armed forces – the nation's best deterrent against renewed hostilities – the credibility of the parallel accord would hinge on the dedication of Nato leaders, including the US administration, to respond through arms to Russia's hostilities, something they have {not