adam zivo: trump's peace plan would set ukraine up for future russian invasion
the u.s. won't commit to directly intervening in ukraine, which would allow moscow to recuperate for another round
4 minute read
us secretary of defence pete hegseth shows a sheet of paper with a document containing a summary of president trump's conversation with vladimir putin on which the word truth is written in ink pen during his closing press conference at the end of defence ministers' meetings at nato headquarters on february 13, 2025 in brussels, belgium.
omar havana/getty images
the trump administration blindsided allies this week by announcing a moscow-friendly “peace plan” for ukraine. although details are still emerging, available evidence suggests that the plan will not bring lasting stability to europe and will, in all likelihood, only encourage russia to expand its neo-imperialist invasions over the coming years.
during a nato meeting in brussels on wednesday, united states defence secretary pete hegseth divulged that the americans will accept banning ukraine from nato and ceding most of its occupied territories to russia to conclude a peace deal. although the current frontlines would essentially be frozen, ukraine, according to leaked details of the supposed plan, would be expected to hand back territory it occupied, as a bargaining chip, in russia’s kursk region.
trump hasn’t ruled out continued support for ukraine, but he has suggested that kyiv hand over access to the country’s rare earth minerals in exchange. furthermore, hegseth told the crowd in brussels that european allies would be expected to supply a coalition of peacekeepers to protect ukraine’s new borders, without american troops.
these peacekeepers’ deployment would fall beyond the scope of nato, such that future russian attacks against them would not trigger nato’s mutual defence clause (article 5) and pull the u.s. directly into the fray. hegseth further added that the u.s. will deprioritize ukrainian and european security going forward and focus on counteracting china instead.
advertisement
concurrently, trump announced that he and russian president vladimir putin had had a “productive” hour-and-a-half-long call, wherein they had agreed to visit each others’ countries and discussed the “great benefits” their nations could see from someday working together. he also spoke with ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy afterward, who said it was “not very pleasant” that putin was called first.
trump initially said on wednesday that he and putin would soon have an in-person meeting in saudi arabia, without zelenskyy, but later clarified that this meeting would only feature other high-level russian and american officials, without either president. he further expressed a desire to readmit russia into the g7, arguing that moscow should never have been evicted after first invading ukraine in 2014.
the day after announcing the american “peace” plans, hegseth struggled to identify any concessions russia would have to make in return for receiving most of its demands from ukraine and the west. however, he walked back his earlier comments and stated that nato membership for ukraine could still be possible.
ukraine and its european allies have generally been horrified by these developments.
advertisement
they now fear that the u.s. and russia might negotiate directly, without their involvement, despite trump publicly promising that kyiv will be given a junior seat at upcoming peace talks. notably, france, germany, poland, spain and the united kingdom released a joint statement asserting that “ukraine and europe must be part of any negotiations.”
high-level european officials have complained that trump, despite styling himself as a commensurate dealmaker, significantly weakened ukraine’s negotiating position by making major concessions before peace discussions have even begun.
american security experts have also been alarmed. weighing in on trump’s wednesday call to putin, former trump national security adviser john bolton told american media that trump “effectively surrendered” to russia and that “they’re drinking vodka straight from the bottle in the kremlin.”
the mood in kyiv has been dismal, with many citizens feeling shocked and betrayed. while polling data from 2024 suggests that half of ukrainians support a quick peace deal, this support is evidently contingent on negotiating a deal that does not leave the country vulnerable to future dismemberment — only 20 per cent of polled ukrainians, for example, supported freezing the current frontlines and abandoning nato membership.
advertisement
however, in an unexpected twist, u.s. vice-president jd vance announced that, if putin fails to negotiate for peace in good faith, the u.s. could apply harsh economic and military “leverage” against russia, and that deploying american troops to ukraine remains “on the table.”
yet this bluster is hardly comforting, because the so-called peace deal that trump and vance want to implement would imperil ukraine’s future.
the russian economy is currently sputtering due to sanctions and astronomical military spending, the latter of which is eating up 41 per cent of the state budget and fuelling high inflation and interest rates (9.5 per cent and 21 per cent, respectively, in 2024). a peace deal that fails to give ukraine real security guarantees would likely just freeze the war until moscow can economically recuperate and launch a new invasion.
while the trump administration has promised to prevent this outcome, it’s hard to take their commitment seriously when the u.s. won’t commit to directly intervening in ukraine, at least in some capacity, in the event of the russians breaching a future ceasefire.
europe is currently too weak to deter russia alone. in 2024, the combined size of europe’s nine largest armies, excluding ukraine, was around one million soldiers, compared to the russian military’s 1.5 million. while trump is right that europe should take more responsibility for its own security and stop freeloading, he is recklessly overcorrecting and injuring american credibility.
advertisement
beijing’s policymakers already seem to believe that trump’s policies will help dismantle american hegemony. given that washington is acting so erratically, abandoning its allies (or launching unnecessary trade wars against them) and indulging adversaries like putin, it’s hard not to disagree.
not only is ukraine being stabbed in the back, the u.s. is shooting itself in the foot.
national post
share story
