During the presidential election campaign, one of the boldest promises that Trump made was that he would end the war between Russia and Ukraine, not just on day one of his presidency, but even before because just the fact that was elected would bring both sides to the negotiating table. This is what he said in his debate with Kamala Harris on September 10, 2024.
Former President Donald Trump said if reelected he would end the war in Ukraine before his inauguration because he is respected by Ukraine and Russia’s leaders.
“That is a war that’s dying to be settled. I will get it settled before I even become president,” the Republican said during his debate with Vice President Kamala Harris on Tuesday. If I win, when I’m president-elect and what I’ll do is I’ll speak to one, I’ll speak to the other, I’ll get them together.”
“I know Zelenskyy very well and I know Putin very well. I have a good relationship and they respect your president, O.K., they respect me, they don’t respect Biden.”
He made other bold promises that he would solve many problems on day one but this one was particularly absurd because he was talking about two other countries. It is hard enough to control events in your own country, doing so with other countries is several orders of magnitude more difficult.
And sure enough, since his election he has floundered badly in his efforts to end the war and as a result he has backtracked considerably, as this timeline of his pledges up to March 30th show.
Over the past two months, the United States has been talking with both Ukraine and Russia – separately – to try to fulfil one of President Donald Trump’s main campaign promises: ending the war in Ukraine. Trump repeatedly touted that he would end the war within 24 hours of taking office if elected president, but there is no sign yet of a real breakthrough.
Trump has walked back from his pledge – first extending the self-imposed deadline to six months, then saying he was being “a little bit sarcastic” about the 24-hour timeframe.
More recently the president said in an interview with Newsmax that Moscow could be “dragging their feet” on a ceasefire deal.
Trump has made it clear that Ukraine will have to acquiesce to his hardline approach if it wants to continue to receive military support from the country.
And while Russia has said it agrees in principle to the US ceasefire proposals, it has consistently come up with “buts” and “only ifs” that undermine any deals.
Now he is throwing up his hands and saying that he might be willing to give Russia control over the Crimean peninsula to end the war (as if he can give away parts of other countries) or simply walk away from the whole mess altogteher.
According to sources cited by Bloomberg, the US may be willing to give Putin a strategic victory and to accept Russian control over the peninsula. In 2014, Russian special forces seized Crimea, which Putin annexed after a sham referendum.
US diplomatic recognition would violate the UN charter and the post-1945 consensus that countries cannot seize territory by force. Most states, including the UK, have refused to recognise Russia’s illegal takeover.
The possible concession to Moscow from the White House is likely to provoke criticism from the US’s one-time European allies and a furious backlash in Ukraine. It comes as Donald Trump said on Friday the US may “move on” if no peace deal can be agreed.
“Now if for some reason one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say you’re foolish. You are fools, you horrible people,” Trump declared, adding: “And we’re going to just take a pass. But, hopefully, we won’t have to do that.”
So much for the expert on the art of the deal. He is reduced to verbally abusing the leaders of the two countries as if they are children..
hasn’t he all but promised to seize territory by force, in canada and greenland? don’t think he’s caring much about the UN charter. i suspect any “lulls” in the chaos from this administration are just that. two to four years from now, if it takes that long, he’s going to start invoking nuclear weapons as a tool for getting the US what it wants. canada roll over or we start picking off cities, that kinda shit. his love of usable real estate might keep that from happening, but just-shy-of-nuke type bombardment may happen instead, especially to greenland where the country’s people could be slaughtered in a week. fingers cross’d the most outrageous possibilities do not come to pass, but they must be regarded as possibilities at this point.
I know I don’t have to tell you this Mano, but aside from dimwitted Russian trolls, everyone already knew this. The only party that can stop an invasion is the invader. A peace agreement with guarantees that what is left of Ukraine will be protected would be possible, but Putin would never allow it. Trump threatening Ukraine only helped Russia because he loves dictators and hopes to be the American Putin some day.
Surely you do not imply the SCOTUS is fickle? Oops, “Trump Fires IRS Commissioner After Three Days On The Job”.
This conflict MAY end when Putin dies. Not before.
Even if Ukraine manages to push back the Russian invaders to it’s 2003 treaty-negotiated borders (retaking Crimea), as long as Putin feels that Ukraine has historically been part of Russia there will always be a desire from Putin to absorb Ukraine into Russia. This isn’t very likely to happen anytime soon, but it’s the best case scenario.
What I don’t know, and I don’t know if anyone else knows, is whether this belief that Ukraine is really Russian is limited to Putin and his inner circle or if Putin’s successors will feel the same way about Ukraine. This could well be the start of generations of conflict.
At least the war distracted Trump a bit. Now he wants to fire the chief of the Federal Reserve.
I understand it’s the general belief in Russia. And the current war is certainly not the start of generations of conflict: there was a short-lived independent Ukraine during the Russian Civil War following WW1, and Stalin deliberately starved millions of Ukrainians in the 1930s, as a result of which some Ukrainian nationalists sided with the Nazis when they invaded in 1941 -- although the latter’s atrocities disilusioned most of them pretty fast.
Sorry, I failed to close a blockquote @6: the second paragrpah is my response to flex, not an embedded quote.
[Fixed it. -- Mano]
@4 flex:
Russia and Ukraine have already been going at it for generations, more or less recorded history. Who ever was running things in Moscow has always wanted to control Ukraine, either for defense or as a route for access to Europe.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t DT recently accuse Ukraine of being foolish enough to start a war with a stronger adversary? I’d say unbelievable, but I’m not that foolish….
Matt G: yeah, I don’t remember the “with a stronger adversary” bit; but I do remember him being the stupid one by saying that Ukraine started the war.