Backing Zelensky to deliver a crushing defeat to Putin would position Trump as the man who succeeded where Biden only failed—turning a stand-off into a triumph for Western democracy.
It
is a fine line between a handshake and a chokehold, and President-elect Donald
Trump, in dealing with Russian President Vladimir Putin, would do well to keep
both hands firmly behind his back. The last thing the world needs right now is
a peace deal crafted by a man infamous for stirring more chaos than calm—a
spectacle as dangerous as allowing a fox to guard the henhouse. In 2024, with
Vladimir Putin’s ambitions still lurking ominously close to NATO’s doorsteps,
any inclination toward appeasement would not just be misguided but perilously
naive.
One
of the reasons why many Republicans, myself included, chose to throw our
support behind Trump for another term was his notorious ability to cut through
the noise. Trump, despite all his bluster, often follows through on his
promises, a rare quality in politics. He doesn't pretend to speak the language
of diplomacy that cloaks weakness under the guise of dialogue. But when it
comes to Putin, the stakes are different—dangerous, even. Russia is actively
committing war crimes in Ukraine, as recently reported by both Human Rights
Watch and several investigative outlets, and no amount of sweet-talking will
suffice. The atrocities that Putin's forces are committing—most notably, the
Wagner Group's involvement in unspeakable acts across Africa and Eastern Europe—are
war crimes by any standard and demand justice, not peace talks.
In
Ukraine, Putin's ambitions are no secret. Since February 2022, when Russian
troops first crossed the border, his designs on Ukraine have been clear: to
seize and keep the territories that bring him closer to restoring what he sees
as Russia’s rightful empire. Yet, Putin’s aggression isn’t just about Ukraine;
it’s about challenging the Western alliance and testing the resilience of NATO.
If Trump attempts to broker a peace deal—a move that might initially be seen as
pragmatic—he risks sacrificing the very core of the West’s values and paving
the way for further Russian expansionism. It would be akin to buying a wolf a
leash and hoping it suddenly loses its teeth.
It
bears repeating: Vladimir Putin is not merely a head of state; he’s an
unrepentant thug. His handling of opposition figures—poisonings, mysterious
deaths, detentions—is a macabre dance of state-sponsored murder and repression.
And if his recent actions in Ukraine weren't enough to demonstrate his cold
ambition, his support of Wagner Group mercenaries running riot across African
nations should erase all doubts. The Wagner Group’s involvement in places like
Sudan and the Central African Republic is as insidious as it is telling.
Putin’s use of a proxy militia to expand influence is a tool of geopolitical
thuggery—one that relies on fear, violence, and economic intimidation.
Trump’s
chance to make a mark here is straightforward: do not play Putin’s game.
Empower President Zelensky, and you empower the entire Western world to
maintain its stance against authoritarianism. There’s an old saying: "Give
a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him
for a lifetime." In this context, it means equipping Ukraine not just to
survive today but to stand as a bastion against Russian aggression long-term.
No shortcuts, no half-measures. To let Zelensky and the Ukrainian people wrest
their own victory out of Putin’s grasp would not only embarrass the Kremlin but
also send a stern message to other rogue actors on the global stage.
Zelensky,
a man who once played a president on television before taking on the role in
real life, has demonstrated grit and bravery that should be rewarded. His
defiance against a much larger adversary is David and Goliath, but without
divine intervention. He needs support—not someone stepping in and drawing a
line through his battlefield in pursuit of illusory peace. A forced armistice
would cut Ukraine’s legs out from under it, while a strong show of support
might just allow them to put Russia back in its place.
Make
no mistake—letting Putin get even a sniff of victory would be disastrous for
the United States and for Trump’s legacy. The president-elect can be
unpredictable, but even his most outlandish critics would acknowledge that he
cares about winning and optics. The optics of empowering a nation like Ukraine,
which is defending its sovereignty against an overbearing autocrat, could play
very well on the global stage, particularly among the Western allies. The
Republican base has a tendency to favor strength, and what could be stronger
than making Putin retreat with his ambitions in tatters? Allowing Zelensky to
humiliate Putin isn't just a good geopolitical move; it's a winning ticket for
Trump to prove that he’s capable of putting America—and, by extension, the
ideals of liberty—first.
Furthermore,
there’s a long game at play. A humbled Putin, weakened by a failed conquest of
Ukraine, will find himself increasingly isolated. Russia’s economic outlook has
already taken a nosedive due to sanctions, and internal unrest continues to
bubble beneath the surface. History tells us that wounded dictators are
dangerous, but they’re also vulnerable. Letting Ukraine deal a heavy blow would
force Putin to retreat, lick his wounds, and, ideally, deter similar acts of
aggression in the future. The West has spent years dealing with Russia as if it
were a bear to be tranquilized and tamed, but it might be time to realize that
showing strength is the only language that authoritarian leaders truly
understand.
Trump,
known for his desire to stand up to foreign aggressors when America’s interests
are involved, should recognize that Ukraine's struggle is intrinsically tied to
American interests. If Putin is allowed to maintain control over Ukrainian
territories, it will inevitably embolden him to test other borders. NATO’s
collective security—and America’s credibility—hinges on a clear and resolute
stance against land grabs and breaches of international norms.
Of
course, none of this is to suggest that Trump should engage in reckless
provocation. No one is advocating for a direct military confrontation between
NATO and Russia—everyone understands the risks inherent in such a scenario. But
a clear policy of strength, bolstered by real support to Ukraine, will signal
that the West is not about to let one autocrat’s ambitions go unchallenged.
Trump must seize this opportunity to empower President Zelensky, not because
it's politically convenient, but because it’s the right and strategic thing to
do.
If
Putin were to be handed a humiliating defeat, the ripples would be felt far
beyond Eastern Europe. It would send a resounding message to countries like
China and North Korea that expansionist policies are no longer tolerated, and
the West will not sit idly by while international norms are flouted. It would
bolster Trump’s position as a leader who can wield real influence over global
affairs—a position that would serve him well, especially when dealing with
similar authoritarian threats.
Ultimately,
Trump must avoid the siren call of a premature peace deal that might look good
in a headline but would undermine the resilience and spirit of an ally fighting
for its survival. The old saying, “The road to hell is paved with good
intentions,” seems particularly apt here. Peace deals are usually the end goal,
but not when they’re a mere mask for capitulation to evil. By backing Zelensky
fully, Trump can demonstrate that his “America First” ideology means standing
with those who share America’s values—freedom, resilience, and the unyielding
right to self-determination.
So,
as Trump prepares to take office, there should be no illusions: the path to
greatness is not by appeasing tyrants but by standing up to them. Putin is a
man who deserves to be humbled, not heralded. Perhaps it’s time Trump helps
Zelensky give the Russian leader what he’s long deserved—a much-needed taste of
failure. And who knows, perhaps a little humiliation might do wonders for
Putin’s next propaganda routine—assuming anyone’s still listening.
No comments:
Post a Comment