Ukraine - peace talks are on a road to nowhere

I don’t think the current US-managed Ukraine peace process is serious. I think the key players are working to very different agendas and many of their publically communicated positions are quite different to what they are actually working to achieve.

It is perhaps useful here then to take the different actors (the Trump administration, Russia, Ukraine and Europe) and to try and dissect their agendas.

Let’s start first with the Trump administration.

As he has shown with the Gaza peace process, President Trump wants a ceasefire, or something in Ukraine which he can sell as a peace to bolster his obsession now with securing the Nobel peace prize. That drive to secure the Nobel peace prize seems driven by an obsession with outdoing former President Obama, who did secure the coveted Nobel prize, albeit seemingly more or less just for breaking the glass barrier and being the first black POTUS. In Trump’s dash to secure his “peace” in Ukraine he is less bothered about the detail - Trump is not the details guy. Trump sees his job as setting the heads of terms, and it is for others to fill in gaps, and actually to deliver the lasting peace. If the peace fails to endure - actually because of the lack of detail - that would not be Trump’s fault but he can blame others for either not delivering the detail or in his mind/spin for not being serious about peace.

Trump wants the quick win, in effect. He is not really bothered to really understand the core drivers of the conflict - actually he seems to be easily swayed at this stage by the Russian narrative, which perhaps reflects the views of those around him in MAGA and the succesful information campaign waged by Russia over many years amongst the US, populist far right.

This willingness always to go along with the Russian view, some have argued is a reflection that Trump is a long term Russian asset - the pee pee tapes line. It might well not be though. It might just be a reflection that Trump likes to view the world through a prism of power, menace and wealth. He sees Putin as a powerful man, almost with a desire by Trump for emulation. Putin operates, in Trump’s views with almost no holds barred - he is willing to do almost anything to deliver on his agenda, to stay in power and to project his imperial ambition of Russia. He is willing to kill and I think Trump’s time as a NYC re-estate developer likely means he knows how mafia bosses operate - you mess with them at your personal peril.

Likely, like Putin, Trump views the world from the perspective that there are only a few great powers, and these great powers sit down and set the rules between themselves, they divide up the world into spheres of influence, and that others, including smaller countries have to just go along with the directions and whims of the great powers. And likely Trump only sees three real global great powers, the U.S., China and still Russia, because they are still the preeminent global nuclear powers. Trump does not view Europe as a global power, rather an irritant as its interests and values (rule of law, human rights, common European and rival market) are actually at odds often with Trump own interests and values. But Ukraine fits into the smaller, weaker country club, which has simply to accept the writ of the large, the U.S. and Russia. Brave Ukrainians outdid expectations by resisting the fullscale invasion and fighting on for close to four years, but this will ultimately be futile, in the Trump view of the world as it will inevitably be traded off on the greater power battle for spheres of influence. Trump views Ukraine as a pawn, to be traded to Russia so as to allow Trump to eventually get what he wants.

Trump likely also views all this through a business prism - there are advantageous deals to be made from this war. The war has indeed given the US leverage over the other key players - through Ukraine and Europe’s defendency on US weapons supplies, its ability to dial up or down sanctions, and for Putin, Trump’s ability to weaken and undermine Ukraine, and force it and Europe to potentially accept an unpalatable and potentially catastrophic deal for them both. So we have seen Trump force Ukraine to accept a hugely unfair and exploitative minerals deal - almost colonial in its terms. A similar deal was included in the Dim-Wit 28-point plan for the use of the immobilised CBR assets which saw the US rape Ukraine of reparations for the war. Trump also thinks that Russia will pay handsomely for a favourable deal, including for big deals to be signed to the U.S., and the family likely. Trump will charge Russia for bringing it back into the international business world, back into G8, et al, and will have scant cares about the concerns and indeed security interests of others, including both Ukraine and Europe.

Even on Europe, Trump has already extracted his forty pieces of silver. As, by raising real doubts in Europe’s minds about the strength now of the US security backstop for Europe - forget about NATO’s Article 5 defence, but even its willingness to continue to provide arms to help Ukraine defend itself and Europe, Trump was able to secure a highly advantage tariff deal earlier this year. JD Witkoff was dispatched the the Munich Security Conference to frighten the living daylights into Europe about the U.S. security backstop to Europe, and Europe realised soon after that best just to accept whatever tariff deal the US offered, in the hope that the U.S. would continue the arms supplies flowing. Europe just accepted the 15% tariff levied by the US with not reciprocity. This was the price Europe appeared willing to pay to buy off the U.S. and hope that it maintains a security backstop.

There is a crew within the Trump administration - JD Vance, Elbridge Colby et al - that I do think buy into the Reverse Nixonian here, so it is about giving Russia what it wants in Ukraine, and likely Europe, in exchange for a new longer term alliance with the US in its new hegemonic battle with China. I am not sure Trump buys this line - I think he is happy to cut big trade deals with China, and views Xi in a similar power rush agenda as Putin. But I think there is an agenda within some in the adminstration to deliver on this game plan - and if that means weakening Europe to gift Ukraine to Russia, and by so weakening Europe it just reinforces its dependency on the US. Then all well and good.

But in summary the Trump administration’s game plan is just to deliver a quick peace in Ukraine, whatever the cost to Ukraine, and Europe. And if that means forcing Ukraine to surrender yet more territory in Donbas and beyond to Russia, in exchange for weak security guarantees, then so be it.

And the harsh reality is that the Trump administration is not willing to give Ukraine the security guarantees that it needs to sell any deal domestically in Ukraine. The US is absolutely not wiling to fight for Ukraine, if Russia attacks again post any peace deal. The US approach I think is that in offering Putin a deal which is beyond even his expectations, and the offer of a bigger longer term alliance against China, plus lucrative business deals, that Russia would in fact take what it is being given in Ukraine, and hold back from further invasion. That is a total misunderstanding of Putin and Russia, naive beyond belief.

So what about Russia?

Let’s start at the start, first, Putin wants the whole of Ukraine, and nothing less. This is an obsession with Putin. Read the 5,000-odd word essay that Putin scripted in mid 2021 in the run up to the full scale invasion and was a call to arms for Russian troops who eventually took part in the invasion. He spells it out, Ukraine is Russian, Ukrainians are Russian, modern day Ukraine was a mistake of history and it has no rights to a sovereign, independent existence.

Second, Putin cannot believe his luck with the Trump presidency. Trump seems be willing to deliver exactly what Putin wants in Ukraine, a bad deal imposed on Ukraine, which could leave the way open to the political, social and economic collapse of Ukraine, even its military collapse providing then an opportunity for a final and succesful military conquest of Ukraine by Russia. Putin knows that the 28-point Dim-Wit plan was absolutely unacceptable to Ukrainians, and if Zelensky had accepted that and tried to implement that in Ukraine that he would have faced another revolution at home. And remember here that Ukraine had already had two revolutions in protest about its relationship with Russia, in effect - the Orange Revolution and the Euromaydan. Any such Revolution would be seized upon by Russia for further attack - no doubt. Indeed, under the terms of the 28 day plan, elections in Ukraine would need to be held within 100 days. They would require the lifting of martial law, likely then the collapse of frontlines with the inability to police mobilisation. Ukraine would be left defenceless. But Putin knows that which is why he is calling for elections after 100 days.

Putin knows though that he faces off against Europe and Ukraine which both see this as an existential fight - and are waging a desperate diplomatic battle behind the scenes to avoid a scenario where Trump forces Ukraine to accept a peace plan close to the 28-point plan. Putin there is trying to play Trump to shift the blame for any failure in peace negotiations to Ukraine and Europe, in the hope that in anger Trump then pulls ts military and intelligence support for Ukraine and Europe, then leaving the latter vulnerable to further and perhaps final attack from Moscow. So The Kremlin is also waging a PR and intelligence campaign to win the heart, mind and ego/vanity of Trump.

What about Ukraine?

The reality is, and whatever it’s leaders might say publically, Ukraine knows it cannot trust the US under Trump. It understands clearly Trump’s motivations and desire to throw it under the Russian bus, or more accurately tank. Zelensky knows the 28-point Dim-Wit plan is a disaster for Ukraine, and would render Ukraine unsustainable. Unsustainable in that accepting any such plan would leave Ukraine at risk of another revolution and further Russian attack, perhaps much more succesful second time around. Ukraine is willing to trade de facto loss of territory - as per current front lines - for security guarantees. But any deal over land would need cast iron security guarantees and it just does not trust the US to provide these as it ultimately knows that the Trump administration would sell it down the river for bigger Russian business deals. But Ukraine knows it is dependent still on US weapons supplies, if not finance, to help it sustain its defence. It is working with Europe to wean itself off US military supplies but realistically it’s full military autonomy from the US is still years down the line. But it is buying time, trying to appear still engaged in negotiations, tellig Trump whatever he wants to hear, blah blah, while at the same time hoping that time brings new options. Perhaps these options could be a worsening in the Russian economy driven by lower oil and commodity prices, or thru its own efforts via deep strike drone attacks on Russian energy infrastructure, to force Russia back.

Note here when we talk about security guarantees, I think Ukraine understands Trump will never allow its NATO membership, or will be given any real Article 5 like assurance. But I think what Ukraine wants is a State of Isrsel style guarantee, that the West agrees to provide Ukraine with the full array of conventional military kit (F35s, whatever) to allow it to defend itself. But even here I think Ukraine does not trust the US enough to trade territory for the offer of continued and sustained military supply in the event of future attack by Russia. There is simply no Ukrainian trust of the Trump administration. So why trade de facto loss of territory? Ukraine is playing for time in negotiations with Trump, perhaps hopeful he will bore of these, and then opening a window for Europe to take a lead and perhaps then try and force a peace framework more amenable to Ukraine.

What about Europe?

After almost three years giving lip service in terms of support for Ukraine, the seminal moment for Europe in this war was JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Council in February 2025. From that speech Europe realised that the US security backstop for Europe was no more. NATO was dead and Europe could not rely on the US to honour the Article 5 commitment to European defence. But they also realised that the threat was now with Russia’s attack on Ukraine was existential to Europe, and its defence but they were increasingly at risk now of facing that threat without US backing. Europe recognised it needed defence autonomy from the U.S., it would need to be responsible for its own defence. But after years of neglect and free riding, even if it stepped up military spending and investment in rebuilding its own military industrial capability, it could be fives years or more before it is ready to defend itself. Europe understood there that it needed to buy time in the interim and the strategy is now two fold: First, provide warm words to President Trump, says whatever he wants to hear to encourage him to still sell weapons to Europe both for it and for Ukraine. Second to help Ukraine to hold the line against Russia for as long as possible - Ukraine has become Europe’s front line against Russia. It is now imperative for Europe that Ukraine holds out as long as possible. And Europe here is absolutely understanding of the Ukrainian position on the evolving peace talks brokered by Trump. Europe, is also, and likely as distrusting of Trump in this peace process. And this distrust by Europe of Trump likely mov3dminto overdrive with the publication over the past few days of the new National Security Strategy for the US by the Trump administration, see below.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf

This latter document makes for a truly extraordinary read for the European mainstream as the Trump administration all but calls for their defeat at the hands of the fair right movements in Europe - the AfD, Reform in the U.K., and FN in France et al. No wonder that the Kremlin has reacted with joy over the new U.S. NSS, at it appears that both see Europe as the enemy. Europe, as defined by the EU, is about respect for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. All appear to be anathema to both Putin and Trump. But Ukraine is fighting for these same European values, and the European mainstay now realist that if the are going to survive being squeezed in the vice the Trump and Putin administrations which seems to what the same things, then Ukraine is their best chance, and a crucial ally. The very survival of the European project - the EU - could well now depend on the outcome in Ukraine. Not only is the threat from Russia to Europe existeniral but the survival of Ukraine is. And this is why we are now seeing Europe look to make some extraordinary decisions, unfortunately at the eleventh hour, as steps now being made to retool the €200 billion plus in immobilised CBR assets in Europe for the defence of Ukraine. And remarkable here that we could the EC resort to emergency rules overriding unanimous decision making in the EU to use qualified majority voting to override opposition on the CBR Reparation Loan idea by the likes of Belgium, Hungary and Slovakia. This is survival stuff now for the EC/EU but needs must. Meanwhile, Europe continues to give lip service to Trump peace efforts on Ukraine while all the time doing everything in their power to derail them. And this s the combined efforts of the European big powers, the U.K., France, Germany, Poland, etc al, doing all they can now to support Ukraine.

I guess the question for Ukraine, and Europe, is is it all just too late. Has Europe failed to properly read the threat from Putin for a decade or more, failing to act when it could during the Biden presidency, appearing complacent initially towards the second Trump term, and only now appearing perhaps it is all too late.