🔗 Share this article

At first, Donald Trump seemed to embrace a firm approach concerning Ukraine. After delivering statements of "severe ramifications" last August if Vladimir Putin persisted obstructing ceasefire talks, Trump eventually imposed major sanctions on the Russian two largest energy firms, Lukoil and Rosneft. This decision seriously impacted Putin's capability to finance his aggression in the region.

But, via his recently unveiled 28-point peace plan for Ukraine, that was developed by American and Russian representatives without Ukraine's or European participation, the former president has apparently returned to his pro-Putin approach.

Favoring Military Action

The former president's initiative would effectively benefit Putin for occupying a sovereign nation while putting Ukraine's democracy in peril. Despite ringing proclamations that "Ukraine's sovereignty will be affirmed", large portions of the initiative in reality weaken that essential sovereignty. This constitutes a Russian ideal would likely be a catastrophe for the nation.

Demonstrating his business background, the former president seems to treat the war as a mere border issue, implying ceding Putin a part of Ukrainian soil will satisfy the ruler. Yet, Putin's military campaign is not simply about controlling a charred region of industrial-devastated area in eastern Ukraine. It is about the nation's democracy – and the Russian leader's apparent desire to weaken it so it ceases to acts as an appealing model for the Russian people of the responsible leadership that Putin's growing autocracy denies them.

Land Surrenders

Although freezing in place the already split oblasts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, Trump's plan would force Ukraine to abandon the whole this eastern territory. Aside from favoring Russia with area that its military have been unable to capture in exceeding a ten years of fighting, this concession would leave Ukrainian defenses severely weakened.

Donetsk is the location of Ukraine's well-known "defensive line", the fortified military defenses that constitute a essential impediment to enemy progress. Trump would have Ukraine leave these positions, giving Russian forces a unobstructed route to Kyiv in case he eventually decide to restart the conflict.

Armed Forces Restrictions

Additionally, in a move that would enable renewed conflict simpler for the Russian military, the plan would force Ukraine to cut the numbers of its troops from their current approximately 800,000 troops to a maximum of six hundred thousand. Notably, Trump's plan places no such restrictions on Russia's military.

In what appears as a gesture to Russia's efforts to characterize Ukraine's democratically elected government as radicals, the proposal declares: "Every radical doctrine and actions must be condemned and banned." As if to underscore this point, it demands that "The nation will hold democratic votes in this period" of a truce. Meanwhile, the proposal sets no requirement that Putin risk his authoritarian rule by allowing votes in Russia.

Security Assurances

To be sure, the plan includes the Russian Federation promise not to "attack other states" and to "establish in regulation its position of non-aggression towards the EU and the Ukrainian people". Yet considering that Putin has broken similar treaties in the history – such as the Budapest accord, in which the Russian government committed to respect the nation's borders in exchange for giving up its Soviet-era nuclear arsenal, and the Minsk accords, in which Moscow committed to a truce and a handback of captured areas in the Donbas to Kyiv – why should the international community trust this commitment now?

For this reason Ukraine has been so adamant on international protection assurances. While the initiative threatens a "decisive unified armed reaction" in case the Russian Federation restart its invasion, and includes that "Ukraine will receive strong security guarantees", the details range from vague to troubling. The proposal would not only block Ukraine Nato membership but also prevent alliance nations from deploying troops on Ukraine's soil, thereby preventing the peacekeeping contingent, reportedly led by the UK and France, on which the Ukrainian government had been depending to deter Russia from restoring his diminished forces, rearming, and attacking again.

World Reaction

A separate side agreement reportedly would grant the nation with a alliance-like security guarantee, in which any later "major, intentional, and ongoing armed attack" by the Russian Federation on Ukraine "would be considered as an act of war endangering the tranquility of the allied countries." This indicates a military response. But in contrast to a powerful Ukraine's armed forces – the nation's best protection against additional invasion – the credibility of the side agreement would rely on the commitment of alliance members, including the US administration, to act militarily to Putin's aggression, something they have {not