🔗 Share this article

At first, the former US president gave the impression to embrace a resolute approach concerning the Ukrainian conflict. After issuing warnings of "severe repercussions" last August if Russia's president continued hindering truce discussions, he finally introduced major restrictions on the Russian primary energy firms, Rosneft and Lukoil. This action significantly impacted Putin's capacity to support his military invasion in the region.

But, through his latest 28-point peace initiative for the conflict, which was created by both nations' diplomats excluding Ukraine's or EU involvement, the former president has clearly reverted to his Russia-friendly position.

Favoring Invasion

The former president's initiative would in practice favor the Russian leader for occupying a sovereign nation while placing Ukraine's democracy in danger. Although ringing proclamations that "Ukraine's autonomy will be confirmed", much of the initiative actually weaken that very sovereignty. What represents a Russian ideal would likely be a disaster for Ukraine.

Reflecting his real-estate experience, the former president persists to treat the war as a basic border issue, as if giving Russia a portion of Ukraine's land will satisfy the president. But, Russia's war is not simply about occupying a damaged swath of industrial-devastated area in the Donbas region. Rather, it is about Ukraine's democratic governance – and Putin's apparent desire to destroy it so it no longer functions as an enticing example for the Russian citizens of the democratic governance that his increasing autocracy prevents them.

Border Giveaways

While keeping in place the presently separated Ukrainian provinces of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the initiative would force the nation to surrender all of this eastern territory. In addition to rewarding the Russian Federation with land that its troops have been unsuccessful to capture in over a ten years of conflict, this surrender would render Ukraine's military defenses severely compromised.

This region is the location of the nation's highly-touted "stronghold system", the well-established protective structures that constitute a key obstacle to invading forces. The proposal would have Ukraine leave these fortifications, leaving Putin a clear path to the capital should he eventually decide to resume the conflict.

Defense Reductions

Then, in a move that would facilitate additional hostilities more feasible for the Russian military, the plan would require Ukraine to reduce the size of its military from their current large number troops to a limit of six hundred thousand. Significantly, the proposal imposes no equivalent constraints on Russia's military.

Apparently as a concession to Russia's campaign to depict Ukraine's chosen by the people government as extremists, Trump's plan states: "Every radical belief system and actions must be condemned and forbidden." As if to underscore this point, it demands that "The nation will hold elections in three months" of a truce. However, Trump sets no obligation that the Russian leader endanger his authoritarian rule by conducting elections in Russia.

Protection Guarantees

Certainly, the plan has Russia pledge not to "invade bordering nations" and to "establish in law its policy of non-aggression towards European nations and the Ukrainian people". However given that Putin has broken equivalent agreements in the history – including the 1994 agreement, in which the Russian government promised to recognize the nation's territorial integrity in return for giving up its historical nuclear weapons, and the Minsk accords, in which Russia promised to a truce and a handback of seized territory in the region to Ukrainian control – why should we believe Putin now?

That is why Ukraine has been so adamant on international security guarantees. Although the initiative promises a "decisive joint military response" in case the Russian Federation renew its invasion, and includes that "The nation will receive dependable defense commitments", the particulars vary from fuzzy to alarming. The plan would not only prevent Ukraine Nato membership but also prohibit member states from positioning military personnel on the nation's land, thereby preventing the security presence, presumptively led by the UK and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been depending to deter Russia from rebuilding his reduced military, restocking, and attacking again.

Global Concern

Another supplementary accord apparently would provide the nation with a Nato-style security guarantee, in which any future "significant, planned, and ongoing military assault" by the Russian Federation on Ukraine "would be considered as an act of war endangering the stability and safety of the allied countries." That suggests a defense action. But in contrast to a strong Ukrainian military – the nation's best deterrent against renewed Russian aggression – the success of the parallel accord would hinge on the willingness of Nato leaders, including the US administration, to react through arms to Putin's hostilities, an action they have {not