🔗 Share this article

For a brief period, Donald Trump seemed to take a resolute stance on the Ukrainian conflict. After delivering statements of "serious repercussions" during the summer in case Putin persisted obstructing ceasefire negotiations, Trump ultimately enacted major penalties on Russia's primary petroleum corporations, Lukoil and Rosneft. This action seriously impacted Putin's ability to fund his war effort in the region.

Yet, with his recently unveiled 28-point peace proposal for Ukraine, which was drafted by American and Russian diplomats lacking Ukrainian or EU participation, the former president has apparently reverted to his favorable to Russia position.

Rewarding Military Action

Trump's initiative would in practice favor Putin for occupying Ukraine while putting Ukraine's democracy in jeopardy. Although ringing statements that "Ukraine's autonomy will be affirmed", large portions of the proposal effectively weaken that essential sovereignty. What represents a Russian ideal would certainly be a catastrophe for the nation.

Demonstrating his business experience, Trump seems to treat the Ukrainian conflict as a simple border issue, implying ceding Putin a part of Ukrainian soil will appease the ruler. Yet, Russia's war is not merely about dominating a charred region of economically weakened land in the Donbas region. It is about the nation's democracy – and the Russian leader's obvious intention to eliminate it so it no longer functions as an enticing standard for the Russian people of the accountable government that his growing dictatorship prevents them.

Border Concessions

Although keeping in position the already split regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the initiative would require the nation to give up the whole Donetsk province. Aside from rewarding Russia with territory that its military have been failed to occupy in more than a lengthy period of fighting, this surrender would leave Ukraine's defenses dangerously weakened.

This region is the location of the nation's much-vaunted "fortress belt", the fortified protective structures that are a critical obstacle to Russian advances. Trump would have the Ukrainian military leave these fortifications, providing Putin a clear way to the capital should he later choose to restart the conflict.

Defense Reductions

Then, in a action that would enable additional hostilities more feasible for the Russian military, Trump would force Ukraine to cut the size of its armed forces from their current approximately 800,000 troops to a maximum of 600,000. Notably, Trump's plan places no similar limits on Russian forces.

Apparently as a accommodation to Putin's campaign to depict the nation's democratically elected government as radicals, the plan states: "All Nazi doctrine and practices must be rejected and banned." Seemingly to highlight this aspect, it insists that "The nation will hold political contests in 100 days" of a truce. At the same time, Trump places no obligation that Putin risk his authoritarian rule by holding democratic processes in Russia.

Protection Assurances

To be sure, the plan includes the Russian Federation promise not to "attack other states" and to "enshrine in regulation its stance of non-aggression towards European nations and the Ukrainian people". But considering that Putin has broken similar accords in the previous instances – for example the 1994 Budapest memorandum, in which Russia promised to honor Ukraine's territorial integrity in return for relinquishing its former Soviet nuclear weapons, and the previous peace deals, in which Russia committed to a truce and a return of occupied territory in the Donbas to Kyiv – why should anyone trust Russia this time?

This explains the Ukrainian government has been so adamant on international security guarantees. While the initiative promises a "immediate coordinated military response" in case Russia renew its military campaign, and states that "The nation will receive reliable defense commitments", the specifics range from fuzzy to concerning. The proposal would not only prevent the nation Nato membership but also prohibit alliance nations from deploying troops on Ukraine's soil, thus blocking the security presence, presumptively commanded by the UK and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been depending to deter Putin from rebuilding his reduced military, re-equipping, and resuming aggression.

World Reaction

Another parallel deal apparently would offer the nation with a alliance-like protection assurance, in which any subsequent "significant, planned, and continuous military assault" by the Russian Federation on the country "would be considered as an act of war jeopardizing the peace and security of the transatlantic community." This implies a defense action. But unlike a strong Ukraine's armed forces – Ukraine's most reliable protection against renewed hostilities – the effectiveness of the parallel accord would hinge on the dedication of Western powers, like the US administration, to respond through arms to Russia's attacks, an action they have {not