Last week, negotiators from the Trump administration presented Ukraine with a stark choice: “Take this deal or the next one will be worse.”
It’s tough to grasp how that’s even possible.
The proposed 28-point peace plan could ultimately weaken Ukraine, ceding significant territory to Russia, which hasn’t been able to seize it despite substantial military support.
If this agreement pushes Ukraine to the front lines, it would reinvigorate the Russian military, emboldened by U.S. backing, while Ukraine would face a daunting situation with military strength dwindling to under 600,000 personnel. Many fighter jets are stationed outside the country.
And, for all that, Ukraine would only receive vague assurances—point five states: “Ukraine will get reliable security guarantees.”
But how solid are those assurances? Particularly when Ukraine is restricted from joining NATO? It doesn’t really inspire confidence, and both President Putin and President Zelenskiy are well aware of this.
While it’s commendable for President Trump to seek an end to violence, one has to wonder why he and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff seem swayed by Russian narratives.
Putin insists Ukraine will eventually falter, but it’s worth noting that Kiev has persevered for over four years, diminishing its adversary and inadvertently aiding the West by slowing down the Russian advance.
Yes, the conflict may appear stagnant, but a Russian triumph isn’t a foregone conclusion, and any victory they achieve might be costly.
Despite Putin’s claims, sanctions are likely to take their toll and could provoke unrest within his authoritarian regime.
At 73, time is not on Putin’s side, and his aspirations for a new Russian Empire seem increasingly unrealistic.
Ukraine was expected to falter quickly, yet its drones and missiles have inflicted serious damage on critical infrastructure.
Interestingly, it’s European nations footing the bill for those weapons, boosting U.S. military manufacturers in the process. As President Trump emphasizes, Ukraine “holds the cards” with support from the U.S. and the EU—so why not leverage that?
lever action
This isn’t about advocating for endless conflict or igniting World War III. Support for Ukraine doesn’t necessarily lead to that outcome, even if some Russian propagandists push for complete capitulation.
Pushing back on President Putin isn’t “escalation”; it’s about seeking a fair resolution.
Just recently, the U.S. sanctioned major Russian oil companies, and the approval of Patriot Launcher upgrades for Ukraine indicates a more assertive stance. These measures are just beginning to take effect.
Putin has already rebuffed an offer in Alaska, suggesting there’s desperation prompting this push for negotiation.
Ideally, the U.S. should use its influence to negotiate better terms—freezing the current lines and ensuring that Russia doesn’t gain any territory it doesn’t control. If troops need to reposition in Poland, Ukrainian forces shouldn’t be limited.
Instead of vague assurances of “security,” a physical U.S. military presence in Ukraine could act as a deterrent.
Mr. President, we know you’re not fond of former President Biden or former President Zelensky.
But let’s set aside personal feelings; this is about future conflicts or achieving peace.
To clarify, although this may be seen as Biden’s war, it will ultimately hinge on Trump’s peace initiative.
History shows that when a peace-loving nation concedes to a powerful adversary, it often leads to further demands. If Russia is allowed to recover under this unfair peace arrangement, it will likely attempt to consume the rest of Ukraine in a few years and could threaten Europe.
As the president understands well, “America First” stretches beyond borders. An assertive Russia only strengthens China and undermines global stability and prosperity.
risk and reward
Europe and Ukraine met recently to discuss amendments to the agreement. Mr. President, you noted that the 28-point framework can indeed be adjusted—that’s a positive step.
Ukraine’s push for some flexibility doesn’t rule out an agreement; in fact, it’s essential for negotiations.
Future generations won’t view this imposed treaty as a triumph; rather, it will be seen as a capitulation.
Unless this “peace” plan becomes more equitable, President Trump’s legacy may face scrutiny.
There’s no Nobel Prize for Appeasement. Advocate for peace without giving Ukraine or warmongers rewards.
