The deadline for a Ukrainian peace deal draws near. On July 14, President Trump gave Vladimir Putin 50 days to reach an agreement—but just two weeks later, he shortened that timeframe, demanding a ceasefire by August 8. If Moscow fails to make meaningful progress toward peace, the U.S. has said it will retaliate with sanctions on Russia and tariffs on its trade partners.
Trump, who announced a new sale of arms to Ukraine earlier this month, appears to be growing increasingly frustrated with the Russian president. That is understandable, given that Russia continues to bomb Ukraine despite Trump’s peace efforts.
Still, on the campaign trail, Trump promised peace in Ukraine, so peace in Ukraine is what he must deliver. He also promised to avoid World War III—which America’s escalated involvement in Ukraine makes more likely. While Trump has imposed a deadline in a bid to shorten the war, the more likely effect is to delay the inevitable victory of Russia, which may never secure a total triumph but holds enough military advantages to achieve its main war aims. Trump must not prolong the conflict to spite Putin.
The promise to swiftly end the Ukrainian war—in 24 hours, no less—was central to Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. Yet six months into Trump’s second term, the Ukraine war is anything but settled. The mainstream media has predictably lambasted Trump over this. CNN counted the number of times Trump made this promise on the campaign trail: 53, according to the liberal media outlet.
Trump, who is neither one to let an accusation go unanswered nor one to ignore media coverage of him, responded to these criticisms in April. In an interview with Time magazine, the president explained that he had “said that figuratively” and “as an exaggeration” and that his central point was that the war would be brought to an end.
Trump is famously fond of hyperbole; he probably did believe he could end the war quickly but not within 24 hours. In my view, these statements reveal a genuine desire for peace, but they also suggest that he may have underestimated the challenges of securing it.
Indeed, ending the war in Ukraine is no small order. Trump may very well want it to end, but do Ukraine and Russia? On some level, yes, in the sense that, for both sides, there are conditions under which the cessation of warfare would be acceptable. Russia would certainly agree to lay down its arms if, say, Ukraine opted to dissolve its national government and join the Russian Federation. And Ukraine would agree to peace if Russia were to abandon the land it has gobbled up since it invaded in February 2022. The chances of either of those scenarios playing out are virtually zero.
Trump’s challenge, then, is figuring out the conditions under which both sides would agree to peace. And while our president is renowned for his dealmaking prowess, he is in an unenviable position, as neither Russia nor Ukraine appears keen on agreeing to any peace deal that the other would also plausibly accept.
America, however, holds immense leverage over Ukraine, whose resistance to the Russian offensive would be impossible without hundreds of billions of dollars in U.S. aid. Even if Ukraine doesn’t want peace, Trump can push it to the bargaining table by threatening to cut assistance. That’s exactly what has happened. Meanwhile, Trump has floated considerable concessions to Moscow: no Ukrainian NATO membership; ceding Russian-controlled Ukrainian land; and lifting sanctions.
Is this because Trump is secretly doing the bidding of the Kremlin, as our perfidious media and intelligence agencies have attempted to convince us? Unlikely. Trump is a pragmatist; as such, he recognizes that while Ukraine’s resistance to Russian imperialism is righteous, the beleaguered nation is unlikely to regain significant amounts of lost territory. Ukraine’s dreams of fully expelling the Russians are just that—dreams, however justified and understandable they may be.
In short, Trump believes that despite the injustice of Russia’s invasion, there’s no point in prolonging the war that has proven immensely costly, both in terms of lives and U.S. taxpayer dollars.
On the campaign trail, Trump was confident in his ability to broker a deal with Putin. Much of this can be ascribed to the president’s confidence in his own dealmaking ability. When asked by Time magazine in April whether there could be peace with Putin, Trump responded, “I think with me as president…If somebody else is president, no chance.” In other words, Trump went into office believing that a peace deal with Russia was achievable—less because of Putin’s willingness to negotiate, and more because of his own skills as a negotiator and strong personality.
But as time passed and negotiations failed to secure peace, Trump has learned that Putin is less willing to settle the war than he previously expected.
This undoubtedly angers Trump. It isn’t just that he wants the war to end, it’s that his reputation is on the line as well. And you don’t reach the pinnacle of business and politics without caring about your reputation.
“I’m disappointed in President Putin,” Trump said in Scotland on Monday. “I’m going to reduce that 50 days that I gave him to a lesser number because I think I already know the answer to what’s going to happen.”
Trump’s frustration with Putin is understandable. Amid the ongoing negotiations, Russia has pounded Kiev and other parts of Ukraine with barrages of drones and ballistic missiles. According to data published by the Ukrainian air force, in July alone, Russia launched 6,443 drones into Ukraine—the most in a single month since the war began.
“We thought we had that settled numerous times, and then President Putin goes out and starts launching rockets into some city like Kiev and kills a lot of people in a nursing home or whatever,” Trump told European leaders. “And I say that’s not the way to do it.”
But why has Putin proven so intransigent? One might think that the generous terms offered by Trump would be sufficient and that Putin’s refusal to accept them reveals his implacable belligerence. But while the Russian president is ruthless, he isn’t irrational.
One possible explanation is that Putin believes Russia can continue to conquer territory. In June, Russia gained 234 square miles of Ukrainian land—up 20 percent from its May territorial gains. It controls around 20 percent of Ukraine, including more than two-thirds of the Donetsk region, where intense fighting has been taking place.
As critics of Western support for the war have pointed out, Russia is sure to defeat its smaller, weaker neighbor in a long battle of attrition. Putin might just be banking on that.
Trump’s frustration with Putin has already affected his course of action, as evidenced by the shortening of the deal deadline. Again, that is understandable. Our president has a big ego and doesn’t take too kindly to being slighted.
Personal grievances have influenced Trump’s approach to the conflict in the past as well. After Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky angered Trump during a televised February Oval Office meeting, Trump suspended military and intelligence aid to Ukraine for a week, demanded Zelensky agree to a 30-day ceasefire, and postponed the signing of the minerals deal. In this instance, the policy consequences flowing from Trump’s spite were minor. Extending a horrifically destructive war is another matter.Trump must deliver peace in Ukraine. Even if Putin is currently the chief obstacle to that aim, Trump should not prolong the war to spite him. There is no scenario in which Ukraine fully expels Russian forces from its territory. That is a tragedy, but it is a tragedy we must accept to prevent an even greater one.
Read the full article here
