Why Trump is wrong on Ukraine

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visiting the White House on February 28th, 2025. Photo: Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock

President Donald Trump’s recent pronouncements on the Russia-Ukraine war represent a dangerous shift in American foreign policy rhetoric that threatens both Ukrainian sovereignty and broader global security interests. Over the past month, Trump has increasingly parroted Russian talking points while proposing vague solutions that fundamentally misunderstand the nature of this conflict.

Perhaps most alarmingly, Trump has begun repeating demonstrably false claims that Ukraine somehow instigated the war with Russia. He has even characterized President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a “dictator.” These statements fly in the face of established facts and even contradict the views of most American voters, who correctly recognize that Russia initiated this unprovoked full-scale invasion of its sovereign neighbour, as a number of polls have shown.

These factual distortions are not mere rhetorical flourishes but represent a fundamental misreading of the conflict’s origins and ongoing dynamics. When a president begins legitimizing Russian propaganda, it undermines America’s moral authority and weakens the international resolve to oppose aggression.

Trump’s suggestion that he could swiftly negotiate peace through concessions rather than pressure demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of Russian objectives. The Kremlin has consistently maintained its maximalist goals in Ukraine. Far from showing a willingness to compromise, top Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin himself, have repeatedly affirmed that their fundamental objectives remain unchanged. Just this month, Putin explicitly stated that “Russia is not going to give in to anyone.”

Given this reality, Trump’s proposed approach of using “carrots rather than sticks” – offering sanctions relief and other concessions – appears dangerously naive. How exactly does Trump expect to convince Russia to abandon its territorial ambitions while simultaneously removing the very pressures designed to make those ambitions unsustainable? History has shown that appeasing territorial aggression rarely results in lasting peace but instead emboldens further expansionism. This is a fact that Ukrainians are aware of, as Russia has broken a number of ceasefires between 2014 and 2022. There should be little doubt that any apparent concessions Russia may make now will only be to allow it to recuperate its army and invade again in the future.

Equally troubling is Trump’s suggestion that cutting military support to Ukraine would somehow hasten peace negotiations. This fundamentally misunderstands the power dynamics at play. Reducing Ukraine’s defensive capabilities would not foster constructive dialogue; it would simply strengthen Russia’s negotiating position while leaving Ukraine vulnerable to further territorial losses and civilian casualties. Ending intelligence sharing with Ukraine has the same effect, giving Russian soldiers the upper hand and preventing Ukraine from taking successful defensive opportunities (let alone counteroffensive actions).

We must remember an essential truth that often gets lost in these discussions: this war could end tomorrow if Russia simply withdrew its forces from Ukrainian territory. Ukraine is not the obstacle to peace — Russian aggression is. Placing the burden of concession on the defending nation rather than the aggressor represents a profound moral failure and a dangerous precedent for international relations and global security.

Perhaps most disturbing is the casual suggestion that Ukraine should cede territory to Russia in exchange for “peace”. Such proposals ignore the horrific realities of Russian occupation. Over the past three years, Russian forces have committed systematic war crimes in occupied territories, including murder, torture, rape, and forced deportation of Ukrainian children. These are not isolated incidents but represent a deliberate strategy to terrorize and subjugate the Ukrainian population.

Asking Ukraine to accept Russian control over these territories will not deliver peace — it condemns Ukrainian civilians to continued brutality under occupation. A “peace” achieved through territorial concessions to an aggressor that has demonstrated such disregard for human rights and international law is no peace at all. It merely rewards and legitimizes Russia’s violations of international norms, all the while abandoning Ukrainians to suffer under a brutal occupation and emboldening Russia to take similar actions in the future.

For over a century, American leadership has been defined by opposing tyranny and supporting the principles of sovereignty, democracy and human rights. Trump’s recent rhetoric represents a troubling departure from these foundational values. By echoing Russian propaganda, proposing naive negotiation strategies, advocating reduced military support, and suggesting territorial concessions, Trump is effectively proposing American complicity in Russian aggression.

The stakes extend far beyond Ukraine’s borders. The international rules-based order – which has maintained relative global stability since the Second World War – depends on consistently enforcing its core principles. If America signals that territorial aggression will ultimately be rewarded with legitimized land grabs, we invite similar challenges worldwide from other authoritarian regimes watching this conflict closely.

A truly responsible American policy must continue supporting Ukraine’s defensive capabilities while maintaining (and increasing) economic pressure on Russia. Genuine negotiations will become possible only when the Kremlin recognizes that its military objectives are unattainable. Trump’s alternative approach would not bring peace; it would merely pave the way for future conflicts by signalling that might makes right in the international arena.

America must choose whether to stand for its professed values or abandon them in favour of expedient but illusory “deals”. The Ukrainian people deserve our continued support in their fight for sovereignty and freedom against Russian aggression.

Joshua R. Kroeker is an independent researcher, founder of the boutique analytic firm Reaktion Group, an analyst at the political analysis project R.Politik, and an editor at RANE. He holds degrees from the University of British Columbia in Canada, Heidelberg University in Germany and St Petersburg State University, Russia.

Please support New Eastern Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.

Donald Trump, Russian invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine, US foreign policy, US-Ukraine relations, Volodymyr Zelenskyy