President Zelensky and the West has spent three years bleeding Russia’s war machine dry, yet Trump's impatience risks turning this into another Afghanistan withdrawal disaster, where the enemy is gifted a win despite being on the brink of collapse. The truth remains: Putin is gasping for air, squeezed by a war he cannot afford and an economy that cannot sustain his delusions of empire—yet Trump stands ready with an oxygen mask labeled "appeasement."
In the high-stakes chess game of international politics, it appears Vladimir Putin is positioning himself to outmaneuver President Donald Trump, exploiting the latter’s eagerness for a swift resolution to the protracted conflict in Ukraine. Putin’s strategy hinges on the belief that Trump, driven by impatience and a desire for quick wins, is susceptible to manipulation through calculated gestures and flattery. The Russian leader knows that Trump is not focused on deterring and containing Russia for years but rather on delivering a fast-track deal that he can sell as a foreign policy triumph. And Putin is milking that knowledge for all it’s worth.
A prime example of this tactic unfolded on February 11, 2025, when Russia released American teacher Marc Fogel, who had been detained since 2021 on drug-related charges. This move was widely interpreted as a goodwill gesture, designed to curry favor with the Trump administration and pave the way for favorable negotiations. The release was orchestrated by Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, and upon Fogel’s return, he was welcomed at the White House, where he lauded President Trump as a “hero.” In reality, the release was not an act of benevolence but a carefully calculated signal—Putin was offering Trump a small, immediate victory in exchange for what he truly wanted: a seat at the table where the future of Ukraine would be decided.
However, beneath these overtures, Putin’s core demands remain steadfast. He insists on a non-aligned Ukraine with a constrained military, free from Western troops, and seeks international recognition of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and four other Ukrainian provinces. Most critically, Putin desires a comprehensive resolution that would lift Western sanctions and allow Russia to rebuild its military capabilities. In a speech on June 14, 2024, he emphasized that his proposal was not about a temporary ceasefire but a definitive settlement—one that would ensure Russia’s long-term reintegration into the global economy while leaving Ukraine weakened and divided.
The recent initiation of peace talks between the U.S. and Russia, notably excluding Ukrainian representation, underscores Putin’s confidence in steering the negotiations to his advantage. By engaging directly with Trump, Putin aims to sideline Ukraine and its European allies, thereby increasing the likelihood of a settlement favorable to Russian interests. If Trump is eager to claim a diplomatic breakthrough before the U.S. election, then Putin has every reason to sit back and let him play the role of peacemaker—on Russia’s terms.
This approach has raised alarms among U.S. and European officials. Critics argue that Trump’s willingness to negotiate directly with Putin, coupled with his apparent readiness to make concessions, could undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty and embolden Russian aggression. The exclusion of Ukraine from these critical discussions not only jeopardizes its territorial integrity but also risks fracturing the unity of Western alliances that have stood firm against Russian expansionism. The lesson of history is clear: when aggressors sense weakness, they do not negotiate for peace—they negotiate for victory.
Moreover, European leaders have expressed concern over being sidelined in negotiations that profoundly impact the continent’s security landscape. The UK has warned that any peace talks that exclude Europe will fail, underscoring the potential rift between the U.S. and its traditional allies. This division plays directly into Putin’s hands, as a fragmented Western front diminishes the collective bargaining power that has thus far been instrumental in countering Russian advances. By driving a wedge between the U.S. and Europe, Putin is positioning himself to dictate the terms of the post-war order in Eastern Europe.
The stakes are further heightened by the internal dynamics within the U.S. administration. While President Trump appears inclined toward a rapid deal, figures such as Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have suggested that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is “unrealistic,” signaling a potential shift in U.S. policy that could legitimize Russian territorial gains. Such statements not only undermine Ukraine’s position but also send mixed signals to allies and adversaries alike about the U.S. commitment to upholding international norms and territorial sovereignty. If Ukraine’s borders can be redrawn through brute force, what stops China from attempting the same with Taiwan? What prevents Iran from seizing greater influence in the Middle East?
In this complex interplay, President Volodymyr Zelensky and Western allies have, over the past three years, strategically positioned Putin into a corner, leveraging economic sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and military support to Ukraine. Russia’s economy has been strained by Western sanctions, its military has suffered staggering losses, and its diplomatic standing has been eroded. Allowing Putin to extract a favorable deal now would effectively snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, reversing the hard-fought gains achieved through sustained international pressure.
The proverb “give an inch, and they’ll take a mile” resonates profoundly in this context. Conceding to Putin’s demands, even partially, could embolden further territorial ambitions, not just in Ukraine but potentially in other regions where Russia has vested interests. It sets a dangerous precedent that aggressive actions can yield favorable outcomes if met with strategic patience and calculated diplomacy. If the West caves now, Moscow will have learned a dangerous lesson: that time, pressure, and a bit of flattery are all it takes to break the will of its opponents.
Furthermore, the potential lifting of sanctions as part of a peace deal carries significant implications. While it may offer immediate economic relief to Russia, it also removes a critical lever of accountability. Sanctions have been a pivotal tool in constraining Russia’s military capabilities and signaling international disapproval of its actions. Their removal without concrete assurances and verifiable actions could embolden not only Russia but other nations contemplating similar aggressive strategies. If Putin is rewarded for his actions, how long before another autocrat takes notes and follows the same playbook?
The reality is that Putin has been fighting a war of attrition, betting that he can hold out longer than Ukraine. His strategy hinges on exhaustion—on the West growing tired of funding Ukraine’s defense, on domestic political shifts in the U.S. and Europe, and on the possibility of a Trump administration more willing to cut a deal at Ukraine’s expense. But three years of Western resolve have placed him in the exact position where Zelensky and his allies wanted him—isolated, weakened, and forced to consider off-ramps. To throw him a lifeline now, when he is closest to the breaking point, would be a historic blunder.
As the adage goes, “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” The lessons from previous engagements with expansionist powers underscore the perils of appeasement and the importance of steadfastness in the face of aggression. If Trump proceeds down the path of quick diplomacy, he may inadvertently breathe new life into Putin’s war machine, allowing Russia to regroup, rearm, and return with greater ferocity. The world has seen this play out before—concessions made to aggressors do not bring peace, they only buy time for the next conflict.
In the theater of global politics, where the stakes are measured in human lives and national destinies, the allure of a quick fix must not overshadow the imperatives of justice, sovereignty, and lasting peace. The world watches as this high-stakes drama unfolds, hoping that the denouement aligns with the principles that have long underpinned international order. If Trump hands Putin a victory now, history will remember this moment not as a peace deal, but as an act of surrender disguised as diplomacy.
No comments:
Post a Comment