President Trump's Ukraine policy has arrived at what Joe Biden frequently referred to as “an inflection point.” Weeks after Volodomier Zelensky unconditionally accepted the U.S. proposal for a ceasefire, Vladimir Putin still refuses to do so, instead adding conditions and caveats that are clearly unacceptable to Ukraine and its European allies and go well beyond what the Trump team proposed.
Having pocketed Trump’s effusive public flattery bordering on adulation–his 2014 invasion of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine was “genius”--Putin now seems intent on humiliating him the way Trump and J.D. Vance did in their Oval Office tag-team attack on Zelensky. Putin is almost openly mocking the absurdity of Trump’s repeated campaign promises to end the war within a day of taking office, and his claim that the 2022 invasion would never have happened had he been there to prevent it. Putin seems to be telling Trump and the world that only he is the alpha male who decides Ukraine’s fate, not Trump or any other American president. Trump’s embarrassment is deepened because of his reliance on Putin’s assurances that he was ready, even eager, to end the war. Trump, for the second time, may find himself denying that he was “duped” by one of the two global dictators he has openly admired–Xi Jinping’s dissembling and deception on the origin and spread of Covid in 2019 was the first. Trump’s reliance on Xi’s word cost the lives of 1.3 million Americans, halted America’s economic rebound, and contributed to his 2020 election loss. Yet, Trump still considers Xi his “friend.”
Trump’s inflection point can now go in one of three directions. He could do what he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have indicated Trump would do–abandon U.S. efforts to arrange a ceasefire and leave it to the warring parties either to find a way to reach a settlement of some kind or to continue with another endless war. Or, he could do what he has done in other situations when his course has been obstructed and frustrated–that is, back down from his threat to pursue a ceasefire and allow Putin to dictate the course of eventual negotiations, with the U.S. relegated to a titular role as host and passive supporter of Ukraine’s defeat. Either course would constitute a victory for Putin and vindication of his intransigence. It would also be a major repudiation of Trump’s campaign commitments, the failure of his desire for recognition as the world’s peacemaker, and the defeat of his quest for a Nobel Peace Prize. If Nobel awarded a Neville Chamberlain prize for appeasement, Trump would be the leading candidate for his performance on Ukraine. As for a place of honor on Mount Rushmore alongside Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and T. Roosevelt, Trump would have to settle for his image on a Russian mountain with the likes of imperialists Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and Putin.
Trump could surprise everyone by executing one of those sudden changes of mind and policy reversals for which he is famous and make the morally correct and strategically sound decision on Ukraine. Instead of a having a pro-Putin ceasefire and final settlement, Trump could commit the United States to provide the weapons and intelligence support that will enable Ukraine not only to survive a war of attrition, which was the Biden policy, but actually to prevail in its valiant resistance to Russia’s aggression. That 180 degree turnaround would be a shock to both Putin and China’s Xi and set back their expansionist plans, potentially to the point of inducing regime change in Moscow and Beijing. That would be a Nobel-worthy achievement for Trump.
When Rubio reinforced Trump’s frustration with ceasefire negotiations, he took pains to remind everyone that “this is not our war, we didn’t start it.” That was inconsistent with his message as a U.S. Senator that Russia’s aggression against Ukraine poses not only a danger to the peace of Europe but is an affront to the entire system of international law that has kept global peace for 80 years after World War II. Trump can either preserve that system or join the Putins and Xis of the world in destroying it.
Joseph Bosco served in the office of the secretary of defense, 2002-2010 and participated in the discussion of the U.S. response to Russia's invasion of Georgia in 2008.
