Why Should Ukraine Trust Donald Trump After Being Let Down by Barack Obama?

The Trump administration has assured that a possible peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia would “fully safeguard Ukraine’s sovereignty.” This is of course a good thing in principle, but it appears in a strange light given that Ukraine’s sovereignty was, in theory, already secured by the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

In that agreement, Ukraine gave up the Soviet nuclear weapons stationed on its territory, and in return the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom promised not to use or threaten to use economic or military means to coerce Ukraine or alter its borders. France and China later joined them.

As a result of these great powers’ “commitment,” Ukraine interpreted the memorandum as guaranteeing its security and handed over the nuclear weapons in its possession to Russia. This led, in 2014, to Putin deciding to risk Western reactions and annexing Crimea to Russia.

* * *

Putin’s gamble paid off, as the Crimea operation—carried out by Russian soldiers known as “little green men”—did not lead to practically any consequences. This was despite Russia clearly violating the Budapest Memorandum, using as a pretext the obvious falsehood that Ukraine’s government was illegitimate.

At that time, the United States was led by Barack Obama, who did impose some sanctions on Russia but decided not to intervene further in the aggression. In doing so, he ended up convincing Vladimir Putin that no strong U.S. counterreaction should be expected from a military attack, even when he violated existing international agreements that were interpreted as security guarantees.

* * *

The question, then, is what now guarantees that Ukraine will receive sufficient Western support under a new agreement, should Russia at some point decide to continue its military campaign? Would Donald Trump or one of his successors act like Obama did in 2014? In other words, if a new attack occurred, would political condemnations combined with some sanctions and limited military aid again be considered sufficient?

Given all this, I fully understand why Trump’s assurances do not appeal to Zelensky and other Ukrainians. And instead of the agreement he is now proposing, Ukraine demands for its security NATO membership—which Trump’s peace proposal forbids—since it would at the very least significantly increase the risk for Russia that the West might use military force if it embarked on a new offensive.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Is the EU a Real Player in World Politics—or Just a Paper Tiger?
Peace in Ukraine Would Be a Risk to Putin
Why Do Russians Tolerate Broken Infrastructure?

Turning Points in the War in Ukraine and the West's Responsibility

For a while, there was an interesting situation in the war in Ukraine: the Russians were advancing in the eastern parts of the country at the same time as Ukraine's offensive towards Kursk was making deeper inroads into Putin's realm. Although the latter operation has proven to be a success—and still is—the Russian advance towards the eastern Ukrainian transportation hub of Pokrovsk has been considered highly concerning from Ukraine's perspective.

Apparently, the Ukrainians share this concern, as they have transferred a small elite force to the area, which seems to have been able to halt the Russian advance with a counteroffensive—or even push them back. Time will tell whether the Russians will be able to continue their advance or if this was the end of it, at least for now.

Another piece of news from Ukraine concerns the new types of weapons that Zelensky's army has received. The first of these is a long-range missile/drone, soon to be followed by a ballistic missile. It remains to be seen how Ukraine will make use of these weapons.

The second new weapon in Ukraine's arsenal is a "dragon drone", capable of burning a long stretch of terrain by dropping incendiary materials onto the enemy like a flamethrower. One can only imagine what it must feel like for Russian soldiers in the trenches when attacked by such a device.

Of course, it remains to be seen what impact these new weapons systems will have on the course of the war. And at what point the Russians will develop their own dragon drone, turning the fight into an even more hellish experience for the Ukrainians.

* * *

The other question, of course, is how the war will progress. Right now, it seems that a quick resolution is not on the horizon, in either direction. And so, soldiers from both Russia and Ukraine will continue to be fed into the jaws of war—while Putin's army continues its terrorist attacks on civilian targets.

All in all, the war demonstrates to the entire world the absurdity of Russian imperialism, which is the cause of this idiotic conflict. The United States and the United Kingdom also have some soul-searching to do, as they, along with the Russians, convinced the Ukrainians during their independence that their sovereignty would be guaranteed even without nuclear weapons.

They have not done so but have instead allowed the Russians to freely practice their terrorist power politics towards Ukraine. They have shown that international agreements are worth little more than the paper—or nowadays, perhaps the computer memory—they are written on. This, to say the least, is shameful.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
The Role of Ukraine Aid in the Elections of Thuringia and Saxony, Germany
Turning Points in the War in Ukraine: New Threats and Unexpected Allies
Ukrainian Offensive Encircles Russian Forces, Echoes of Past Defeats