Image: Russia’s President Vladimir Putin
Did anyone pay attention? If he wins, Donald Trump says he will bring about the cessation of hostilities in Ukraine between his election and inauguration, a period of about eleven weeks. In so doing, Trump might just destabilise the West and reshape the global order.
If Trump simply pulled all American financial and military support from Ukraine, Russia’s victory would be inevitable and quick. But in order to garner credit for the outcome he would likely wish to shape the transaction.
Putin wants two things from the war, despite all the hysteria about revanchist Soviet or Tsarist ambitions: to keep Ukraine out of NATO; and to keep the areas Russia now occupies. Putin now considers the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts, and the Crimean peninsula, to be Russian. According to J.D. Vance, meeting Russia’s demands could be acceptable to Trump.
Setting deadlines in negotiations creates an asymmetry, and were Putin to think that this was just an opening position, and that Trump was desperate for a deal, he might additionally seek the relief of sanctions on fossil fuel sales, shipping, and access to the global financial system. Such a gambit would greatly complicate any negotiations, and concessions from Trump on these measures would be a major shock.
President Zelenskyy would be in an untenable position if Trump pursed a deal along these lines. Ukraine has consistently maintained that the fighting would only cease when all pre-2014 Ukrainian borders were restored, Russia had agreed to reparations, and the Russian leadership faced accountability for war crimes. To accept the loss of eastern Ukraine and to submit to a demand for neutrality would be in effect a surrender.
It seems unlikely that Zelenskyy could survive in the presidency long enough to participate the negotiations, if, that is, Trump thought to include Ukraine. The likely political, social, and economic disruption and chaos in Ukraine following a sudden cessation of hostilities on Russia’s terms could verge on the catastrophic. Giving up territory and relinquishing NATO ambitions would require an immensely divisive vote on changes to the Ukrainian constitution. Ukraine could be left a diminished rump after years of sacrifice and deaths.
Amid the physical destruction, widespread recriminations and attribution of blame would spread. Cries of betrayal and futility could divide and fracture society and politics. Disgruntled, demobilised veterans and the return of displaced citizens could further destabilise Ukraine. Inevitably, there would be anger directed towards the treachery of the allies, and America in particular. Political violence and lawlessness could become rampant. In similar historical situations, the prospects of reactionary and revolutionary forces emerging is not uncommon.
Were Trump to pull the rug out from under Ukraine for a deal with Putin, the consequences for Ukraine could be ugly.
Trump’s transactional approach would pose a further complexity; which parties would be at the table in any such negotiation? Certainly the Americans and Russians, maybe the Ukrainians, but what about the Europeans?
The terms of any settlement with Russia would be of critical importance to European security and unity. The Europeans lack the industrial, and in particular military production, capabilities to keep Ukraine’s defence viable. European strategy toward the war would be in tatters. This would leave a number of historically dominant centrist political parties in Europe electorally vulnerable to non-traditional challengers. EU members would be divided on policy towards Ukraine and Russia. Yet, Europe would be stuck with any deal Trump negotiated.
Trump’s peacemaking could trigger a series of seismic geopolitical shocks. It could torpedo the western alliance and lay waste to the global rules-based order. The concepts of international law on which the EU’s treaty arrangements and institutions are based would be undermined, and leave the European project seriously weakened.
Through aggressive invasion Putin would have acquired additional territory and coerced NATO over Ukraine’s membership. If Trump permitted Russia to remained poised and victorious on Europe’s eastern flank it would be devastating for the Europeans. Even NATO’s survival might be in doubt as disillusionment would run deep over America’s commitment to the alliance, and the transatlantic relationship generally. Could NATO survive?
Peace on the above terms would represent the total hollowing out of a group of cherished ideals concerning international norms and laws, and be a repudiation of the concepts of sovereignty and territorial inviolability. The terms Trump would need to offer Putin would probably shatter the western consensus on the global order and shake the unity of the European Union. Ukraine would be left in chaos and ruin. However, for Trump to accomplish his goal of a cessation of hostilities in Ukraine before inauguration, no other credible scenarios present themselves.
The tight timeline Trump has imposed on himself would give Putin an upper-hand in any negotiations. If he is elected, Trump still might be persuaded to adopt a more considered, collective, and extended approach to resolving the conflict. Perhaps there’s time for the Europeans and Ukraine to sway Trump. But, it’s not something to count on.
Putin’s initial war aims were the quick subjugation of Ukraine and the installation of a pro-Russian, anti-NATO regime. He failed. Russia has suffered significant costs since. The US sought a demonstrable case of the virtuous western democracies humiliating and weakening an authoritarian adversary through a proxy war. They’ve failed as well.
Trump’s repeated insistence that he can end the conflict seems to have been simply treated as more inflated rhetorical swagger by the cognoscenti and media. It might be just braggadocio, or it might not. Trump’s aversion to war seems sincere.
The implications of him carrying out his promise are grave. A Trumpian intervention along the lines described above, while saving untold lives, would probably produce a major geopolitical upheaval that no-one on either side anticipated.
And that’s war.
Copyright Mike Scrafton. This article may be reproduced under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence for non-commercial purposes, and providing that work is not altered, only redistributed, and the original author is credited. Please see the Cross-post and re-use policy for more information.
Also published in John Menadue’s Pearls and Irritations.