The Elusive Quest for Peace: Trump’s Claims and the Russia-Ukraine Conflict

The 95% Solution and Its Challenges

Recently, former President Donald Trump made headlines by claiming that a deal to end the war between Russia and Ukraine was “95% done.” This declaration followed a weekend meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. While such optimism might seem refreshing, one must consider the complexities and remaining hurdles in the path to peace. The claim, however well-intentioned, overlooks a critical obstacle: obtaining Vladimir Putin’s agreement. Given the ongoing hostilities and Russia’s entrenched stance, it seems unrealistic to believe that a deal is imminent.

The Nature of the Remaining 5%

To understand the gravity of Trump’s assertion, revisit the context of the ongoing conflict. The 5% that remains is not merely procedural but involves significant geopolitical stakes. As Zelenskyy himself appeared to react with a mix of disbelief and amusement to Trump’s insistence that “Russia wants to see Ukraine succeed,” it becomes evident that Trump’s pronouncement may echo a pattern of overoptimistic rhetoric regarding a swift resolution to the war. This echoes his 2016 campaign promise to end the conflict within 24 hours, a claim that now appears almost farcical in light of the realities on the ground.

Ongoing Hostilities and Their Implications

As if to punctuate the distance between rhetoric and reality, news emerged shortly after Trump’s statements that Russia accused Ukraine of attacking one of Putin’s residences with long-range drones. Ukraine, in turn, dismissed this as “another lie from the Russian Federation,” emphasizing the continued cycle of accusations and counterclaims. Rather than a sign of two nations edging towards peace, such incidents highlight the persistent hostility and distrust that define the current state of affairs.

The Quest for a Meaningful Peace Deal

The landscape of diplomatic efforts has been increasingly turbulent since the US peace plan that leaked in November, which many viewed as an ideal scenario for Putin. Despite attempted deadlines for peace—promising resolution by Thanksgiving or Christmas—these projections have proven to be more hopeful than realistic. As the conflict drags on, Russian officials assert that peace will only come once its “root causes” are addressed, presumably including elements of influence over Ukraine. This vague but ominous wording suggests motives that would undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty, complicating any negotiations.

Ukraine’s Resilience Amidst Adversity

Facing one of its most challenging winters, Ukraine finds itself in a precarious position. While the population is prepared for difficult compromises to secure peace, complete capitulation remains off the table. The resolve to defend the nation persists, even in the face of austere conditions. However, with Putin’s unwavering maximalist goals in place and Trump showing no signs of exerting pressure on the Kremlin, the prospect of a lasting peace feels distant.

The Role of Western Allies in Diplomacy

The diplomatic maneuverings of Ukraine’s European allies reveal a concerted effort to keep Washington engaged with Kyiv and protect critical US assistance, particularly in intelligence sharing. Amidst this landscape, Zelenskyy’s allies have also been advocating for US-backed security guarantees. These assurances are seen as essential for strengthening Ukraine’s position once a peace deal is finalized, although their specifics remain nebulous.

The Complexity of Security Guarantees

Trump recently announced progress on these security guarantees, but clarity is lacking regarding their practical implementation. Russia is unlikely to permit any meaningful commitments that might involve Western troops or NATO-like assurances in Ukraine. As a result, the guarantees would need to be imposed on Russia instead of being a negotiated component of peace. Such a scenario raises questions about the willingness of the US and Europe to escalate tensions, especially given their current reluctance to engage in direct conflict with Moscow over Ukraine.

Trump’s Approach to Diplomacy

Trump’s engagement with Zelenskyy raises eyebrows. His preference for accommodating autocrats like Putin casts a shadow over the sincerity of his commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty. The stark contrast in treatment between Zelenskyy and Putin during their meetings underscores this dynamic. While Zelenskyy received no official welcome in Miami, Putin enjoyed a personal greeting from Trump, sending a message about the former president’s diplomatic priorities.

The Uncertainty Ahead

Should Russia eventually agree to a ceasefire, the challenges of ensuring compliance loom large. Without a valid agreement and ongoing hostilities, Ukraine faces two discouraging paths: one where it may manage to continue fighting but remains beholden to unpredictable shifts in Russia’s political and economic stability, and another where deteriorating conditions compel Kyiv to accept harsh terms dictated by Moscow.

Despite the promising rhetoric, the path to peace appears to be fraught with obstacles that cannot be overlooked, and the realities of the battlefield continue to defy hopeful declarations.