It’s confusing I think for many listening to the various spins coming out of the latest Ukraine peace talks not to think that a peace is close at hand as all the messaging is that “talks are going well,” “substantial progress is being made, more than at any of the other talks,” but that “we all thank President Trump for leading the way.”
Unfortunately, the reality is far distant from the above perception.
The level of spin seems directly related to the size of Trump’s ego, and his almost sociopathic drive to get a peace, any peace, over the line, to bolster his own pitch for the coveted Nobel Peace Prize. Details - as to whether the peace will actually work, or last - are for others to sort out, and if the peace fails, Trump will inevitably side-step the blame.
President Zelensky is fighting for the very survival of his country, and millions of his compatriots’ lives are on the line. US support is critical to holding the line in the east and limiting the success of the still near-nightly Russian missile and drone attacks.
But Zelensky’s Oval Office ambush and almost constant threats from Trump and the many sycophants around him mean that this US support is constantly at risk. US officials this week are thought to have threatened to pull critical U.S. support for Ukraine unless Zelensky signed up to the Witkoff-Dimitriev 28-point plan.
That plan was a disaster for Ukraine, as I and others have written, as it would erase Ukrainian sovereignty and leave the country facing an uncertain outlook. The challenge for Zelensky et al has been trying to buy time with the Trump team, somehow get them to climb down for what has seemed like support now for the Russian agenda.
But how to message all this without getting on the wrong end of Trump? The angle is to engage in talks, show willingness, and seriousness, message as to how well everything is going while at the same time arguing intensively over each specific point. It’s about showing willingness and trying to shift the blame for an eventual failure in talks to Russia, and by so doing, hoping to keep the US support flowing.
The Witkoff-Dimitriev plan had a lot of points – 28 – but actually it’s much simpler in my view. It’s about a settlement where the status quo on the front line is accepted, and de facto (never de jure) Ukraine accepts the loss (for the time being) of territories occupied by Russia, but where land remaining under Ukrainian control is safe, secure and able to develop economically. The best chance of that is with NATO and EU membership, and the full deployment of the $330 billion in immobilized CBR assets to Ukraine.
But if the US and others in NATO are not willing to stomach NATO membership for Ukraine, then it is providing Ukraine with sufficient assurance that it will be safeguarded from future attack. It’s about land for security and prosperity in effect.
The fact that the US is dragging its feet on NATO membership suggests that any Article 5 like assurance will not really be that. If you are not willing to accept Ukraine into NATO - essentially because you don’t want to go to war with Russia over Ukraine – then why would Ukraine take any reassurance from an Article 5 assurance outside of NATO?
The harsh reality is that the US et al have already decided that they are not willing to go to war with Russia over Ukraine. So, in the end it boils down to giving Ukraine the tools to defend itself – which is why the debate over the size of Ukraine’s armed forces is so important.
But rather than the size, it’s the capability and financing which is the key. The West should assure to Ukraine that they will give it the State of Israel guarantee, that they will get the full range of NATO conventional kit to be able to defend itself. Israel there does far more, with far fewer troops. Early EU accession for Ukraine will also help by underpinning Ukraine’s future economic development and enabling it to better sustain higher defense spending and ensuring its own security.
So, in the end it boils down to giving Ukraine the tools to defend itself – which is why the debate over the size of Ukraine’s armed forces is so important.
The Europeans get all the above, and they are playing the same game as Ukraine with Trump. Europe was slow to coming in fully behind the Ukrainian position but I think JD Vance’s MSC performance earlier in the year made them understand that a) the US security backstop for Europe is no longer there; and given b) Russia represents the bigger existential threat to Europe, then c) the key to Europe’s defense is Ukraine holding out against Russia as long as possible for Europe to develop its own autonomous defense capability.
Europe will develop that capability within a 3–5-year timeframe, but to buy them time, they need Ukraine to hold out and for the US to continue to sell arms to Europe and Ukraine in the interim, sufficient to hold up Russia.
The Europeans must have viewed with horror the Witkoff-Dimitriev plan, as they would recognize that it meant the capitulation of Ukraine. And likely the terms were so unpalatable to Ukraine that they would see a political coup in Kyiv, perhaps the collapse of the front lines, and a potential for total victory by Putin over Ukraine.
That outcome would make the existential threat from Russia to Europe immediate. Hence, the Europeans quickly got their act together, again, to try and insert themselves into the negotiation process to try and moderate the terms of the 28-point plan, which could be somewhat more amenable to Kyiv.
Likely Europe and Ukraine also know that each revision towards a Ukrainian position of the 28-point plan makes it less likely that Putin will accept that plan. It makes it more likely that Putin will walk away, absolving Ukraine from the blame but keeping US arms flowing.
The Witkoff-Dimitriev plan was clearly a Kremlin construct, even though the Kremlin has been denying knowledge ever since. It’s like a “fire in the hole” document, which has seen US differences with Ukraine and NATO allies laid bare, showing division in the NATO alliance already much to the benefit of Moscow.
That Witkoff et al fell for this is the remarkable thing - showing zero understanding of just how the Putin regime operates. Many would suggest they are now Russian assets, so eager to accept and force the Russian narrative on Ukraine.
It feels here that as the 28-point plan is revised somewhat in favor of Ukraine, the Kremlin will pull away again, playing hard to get again with the Trump administration and secure that the latter will impose little real sanction on Russia.
The Kremlin understands that Trump wants a peace deal so badly that he will continue to bow to Russian interests. They will continue to play hardball, which I guess Ukraine will try and use to its advantage.
I cannot wait to read the autobiographies which will eventually be written on this era and when world leaders finally get to say what they really think of Trump.
Reprinted from the author’s @tashecon blog. See the original here.
The views expressed are the author’s and not necessarily of Kyiv Post.