This partnership became much closer after Moscow launched its full-scale invasion in February of 2022. Washington realized that a Russian victory in Ukraine — meaning Moscow’s effective control of the country — would threaten core U.S. interests in Europe and beyond.
This prompted the Biden administration to lead a global effort to provide military and economic aid to Ukraine and to sanction Moscow and deny the flow of strategic materials to Russia. But as Ukrainians understand better than anyone, Biden’s team has been timid in arming Ukraine and permitting it to use U.S. weapons because it has been intimidated by Putin’s nuclear bluster. Consequently, the United States and NATO never armed Ukraine in a way to defeat Russian aggression.
Trump’s victory will certainly change the U.S. approach to this war. He has set the goal of negotiating a peace settlement or at least a stable ceasefire “in 24 hours.” While that may be excused as hyperbole, it underscores his intention to get something done fast. While we have seen no official plan yet, elements of his approach are in the public domain: territorial compromise; a moratorium on Ukraine joining NATO for at least 20 years; demilitarized zone between Ukrainian and Russian soldiers patrolled by preferably European peacekeepers; substantial arming of Ukraine to deter future Russian aggression. Those elements require major changes in the positions of both Russia and Ukraine.
But they represent only the bare beginnings of a negotiated peace initiative, and the way those elements are applied will determine whether Trump’s policy is a strengthening or a weakening of Biden’s merely adequate efforts. There are people in the Trump camp who seem not to understand that Putin declares that the United States is Russia’s “principal adversary,” and acts that way — whether conducting cyber-attacks on U.S. food and petroleum supply chains, or providing missiles for the Houthis to launch on international shipping and U.S. Navy ships in the Red Sea. They also fail to recognize that Russia is working closely with China, Iran and North Korea against the interests of the United States and its allies.
Fortunately, those people do not include Trump’s picks for Secretary of State, National Security Advisor, and Secretary of Defense. Moreover, Trump himself has demonstrated that he is not in line with his loud supporters who would simply like to end aid to Ukraine and let Putin have his way. Proof was in the go-ahead he gave Speaker of the House Mike Johnson to put the supplemental aid package for Ukraine to a vote last April; and Trump said at the time that the survival of Ukraine was important to the United States.
How Trump moves his peace initiative will depend partly on the reaction of other parties, in particular Ukraine and Russia. The public elements of Trump’s approach require significant changes in the policy of both Kyiv and Moscow. My view is that Moscow has waged a brutal war of aggression and should receive no reward in any peace deal; that means, of course, that Ukraine regains all its territory, including Crimea. But that is clearly not the view of the incoming president.
At this point, it appears that President Zelenskyy and his team recognize this new reality and may be willing to accept this as part of a provisional peace settlement that permits Kyiv to seek the return of Russian-occupied lands by diplomatic and legal means. There are no indications of flexibility on the Russian side. While it is true that Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said that Russia might we willing to join talks, Russian state-controlled media and senior figures (such as Federation Council Deputy Speaker Konstantin Kosachev) dismiss Trump’s proposals. Moreover, the Russian media have even “trolled” Trump after his election win by broadcasting salacious pictures of his wife. Not smart.
Perhaps the most important factor in the negotiations to come will be Trump’s pride. He sees himself as a strong leader and great negotiator. He and his team also recognize that Biden’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan knocked his approval ratings into the basement from which they never recovered. They do not want a replay of that with Trump on the losing end. A Trump-negotiated peace that enabled a Putin win in Ukraine would dwarf Biden’s failure in Afghanistan. That suggests Trump will do what is necessary to ensure the survival of a secure and economically viable Ukraine.
The article was originally published in The Economist.