President Donald Trump, along with much of his administration, is clearly frustrated with the slow pace of peace talks to end the Russo–Ukrainian War. Trump has, at various times, castigated both Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky for refusing to truly seek peace. Trump’s frustration has been matched by Vice President J.D. Vance, who has personally argued with Zelenskyy and recently said that Russia was “asking for too much.” Likewise, Secretary of State Marco Rubio spearheaded the idea that the Trump administration could walk away from mediating between the two sides.
But since that time, Trump has sought to organize a meeting between Zelensky and Putin in Istanbul, and has even floated going there himself to oversee the talks, in a last-ditch effort to secure peace between two sides the administration seems to believe do not want it.
The Trump administration’s desire for peace is understandable—but so is their belief that both sides are not seeking it. While some of the Russian government’s demands, such as the recognition of Crimea as Russian territory, are reasonable, others are complete non-starters. Among these is the amorphous “denazification” of Ukraine, which seems akin to demanding some sort of constitutional regime change in Kiev, something the United States likely would not sanction and which would not be accepted by Ukraine’s population. Likewise, Putin’s actions—such as bombing definitively civilian areas and, as Trump has discussed in private, killing children—do not indicate he is interested in finding peace.
Unfortunately, this should not be a surprise. Russia is winning the war. Some voices in the West have tried to argue otherwise, or at least have tried to portray the war as a stalemate. While this was once true, it is no longer: Russia is slowly, but consistently, taking more land in Ukraine, inch by inch. Short of a miracle for the Ukrainian armed forces, there is no feasible way that most of the occupied territories, particularly the Donbas and Crimea, will ever leave Russia’s control.
This, among other facts, is something the Ukrainian side has stubbornly refused to accept, which has also caused annoyance with Kiev in the Trump administration. Claiming that all of Ukraine’s land would be reconquered was once an understandable attempt at raising morale, but it has now become an albatross for peace talks. Crimea and the majority of the Donbas have been fully integrated into the Russian Federation. But Zelensky’s peace plans have completely ignored this reality. His 10-point “peace formula,” which he marketed for years, included the restoration of all of Ukraine’s conquered territories and Russia agreeing to be held accountable by international courts—two utter impossibilities.
Zelensky’s newest plan, from earlier this year, was a response to the Trump administration’s aforementioned framework. While it dropped demands to get back all of Ukraine’s territory—though without accepting Russian control—it once again included an American-backed security guarantee. This was particularly galling, as practically every major foreign policy official in the Trump administration, including Trump himself, had repeatedly shut down the possibility of an American-backed security guarantee.
Part of the Ukrainian government’s intransigence comes from political necessity. Zelensky has put himself in an impossible situation: Accepting the loss of about 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory would effectively end his political career and, after years of promising total victory, could engender some sort of revolution in the capital. It will almost certainly create a stab-in-the-back narrative dominating the years to come, which could induce further political chaos in the country. Nor is Europe in a position to come to Ukraine’s aid if demanded by a security guarantee. The most Ukraine will get is the recently signed minerals deal, which Zelensky, correctly, has deemed not to be a true security guarantee. Yet Trump is not responsible for Zelensky having put himself in such a difficult political position, and is certainly not responsible for his political future in Kiev.
Zelensky did heed Trump’s demand to meet with Putin in Turkey, although Putin did not. But even if Putin had, it is unlikely either side would have agreed to an end. Neither has reason to do so: Ukraine is not losing at a fast enough pace to jolt the Ukrainian establishment into seeking peace, and Russia is not winning at a slow enough pace to make them desire a quick end to the war. If Ukraine squints, they can still see a way to get back more land. If Russia squints, they can still see a way to burst through Ukraine’s defenses. Until one (or both) sides can no longer see such eventualities, neither will truly want peace.
And while this moment most probably will eventually come, there is no way of knowing how or when; it could take months or years. And already, the war has been a huge distraction, eating up much of the energy and momentum of the first few months of the administration. This is likely what caused Rubio to make his initial threat of walking away.
But the administration has yet to follow through on that threat, as the minerals deal signing and the constant updates about the pace of peace negotiations demonstrates. Peace may seem tantalizingly close, which could be a reason why the administration, though it has threatened to swear off playing a mediating role, is still keeping its foot half in the negotiating room. But it is abundantly clear that neither side is interested in truly ending the war. As a result, it’s time to walk away entirely so long as Russia and Ukraine remain unable to compromise and articulate a mutually acceptable vision for a settlement.
Read the full article here
