In May 2023, during a CNN Town Hall meeting, Donald Trump, deeply invested in his campaign to reclaim the presidency, claimed that the ongoing war in Ukraine could be brought to an end within 24 hours if he were in charge. He argued that his approach would involve meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to reach a resolution. Trump also asserted that if he had been president during the 2022 invasion, Putin would never have dared to act.
However, since his election win in November, Trump has provided little detail on how exactly he plans to achieve this promised peace initiative. Meanwhile, the situation on the ground remains complex. Russia has repeatedly expressed interest in talks, but on terms favorable to them, such as hosting discussions in Slovakia—a country with close ties to Russia. Ukrainian President Zelensky believes that the only way to drive Russian forces from Ukraine’s occupied territories is through diplomacy, not military action.
While Ukraine continues to fight hard and sacrifice many lives, it is clear that the country wants the conflict to end. Estimates suggest tens of thousands of Ukrainians and Russians have lost their lives, with casualties continuing to rise at a horrific pace. Ukraine, however, has shown incredible resilience in its fight.
The question of Trump’s peace initiative is still unanswered, and the tension over how to approach the conflict grows. Some NATO allies fear that any settlement that appears to favor Russia could embolden Putin, leading to more aggression in the future. After all, Putin’s history suggests that when he gets away with one act of aggression, he is likely to push for more.
Trump’s stance on NATO has often been critical, particularly of European nations not meeting their defense spending targets. As NATO’s largest financial contributor, the United States plays a pivotal role in the alliance’s strength. If Trump returns to power, his approach to NATO could have significant implications, especially if NATO members challenge his foreign policy decisions.
The Kremlin, under Putin, is in a desperate position, and while Trump hopes for a swift resolution, it’s unclear how he could end the war without giving in to Putin’s demands. Any peace deal must not reward Russia’s aggression or undermine NATO’s unity. The stakes are incredibly high for Europe, as the security of NATO members is at risk if Putin is allowed to succeed.
The peace talks, if they happen, should be handled with caution. The world needs to ensure that such negotiations do not signal that Putin’s territorial expansion is acceptable. History shows that when territorial violations are overlooked, they often lead to further conflict.
It’s essential that any peace process is underpinned by a clear sense of justice. The West must not allow Putin to gain more territory or power as a result of this war. While the desire for peace is universal, peace at any cost would be dangerous, and a solution must not come at the expense of international stability.
The ultimate goal is to end the suffering and violence in Ukraine without compromising on core values. The world cannot afford to let Putin’s aggression succeed, and Trump must carefully consider the broader implications of any peace initiative he proposes. Peace is possible, but it must be achieved without rewarding the very aggression that has caused so much destruction.
