Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

If the Trump administration does not broker a ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine soon, it may give up the whole enterprise in search of easier diplomatic success. That was the sentiment which U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio conveyed in remarks to the press on Friday, announcing a broad framework with “more specific outlines of what it might take to end the war.”

“We are now reaching a point where we need to decide and determine whether this is even possible or not,” related Rubio. “If it’s not possible — if we’re so far apart that this is not going to happen — then I think the President’s probably at a point where he’s going to say, ‘Well, we’re done. We’ll do what we can on the margins. We’ll be ready to help whenever you’re ready to have peace. But we’re not going to continue with this endeavor for weeks and months on-end.’”

In other words, President Trump wants to resolve the conflict “very soon — and I’m talking about a matter of days, not a matter of weeks,” he added. “The Ukraine war is a terrible thing, but it’s not our war.”

Trump administration officials have met multiple times with both Ukrainian officials and Russian President Vladimir Putin but with very little success. Putin will not accept any war outcome that preserves a sovereign, independent Ukraine, while Ukraine refuses to be annexed or left defenceless against Russian aggression.

The War Inherited By the Trump Administration

In February 2022, Russian forces launched an unprovoked, multi-prong blitzkrieg into Ukraine, hoping to decapitate its government and collapse its fighting resolve within a few days or weeks. In this attack, they were encouraged by the apparent weakness of President Joe Biden, whom they thought would be unlikely to take firm action to punish their naked aggression. The Ukrainian military surprised nearly everyone by not only surviving the initial onslaught but also inflicting significant losses upon Russia, which helped them to secure additional Western support.

More than three years later, what began as a blitzkrieg movement has morphed into a gruelling war of attrition. Russia’s Soviet-style military may have failed its first tank thrusts, but the current style of combat is more suited to its inhuman inclinations and gives the greater advantage to the nation with the greater landmass and population.

In other words, if left to fight it out between themselves, Russia will likely prove victorious in the end, and both Russia and Ukraine know that. Considered as a zero-sum contest with only two parties, Russia has no incentive to end the war, so long as it is willing to pay the price in human lives — which, under Putin’s authoritarian control, it is.

This is where diplomatic pressure comes in — or, at least, where it should come in. By sanctioning Russia’s economy, nations that are not participating in the fighting can inflict additional costs on the country, changing their calculus and giving them other incentives to seek peace. Providing aid or credible pledges of aid to Ukraine has the same effect. If the goal is to end the war quickly, then additional pressure on Russia seems like the surest way to do so.

Yet, strangely, the Trump administration to date has only placed serious pressure on Ukraine, not Russia. The recent announcement, that the clock is running out on America’s involvement, pressures Ukraine, not Russia. America turning its back on the war, so that Russia can carve up its neighbour’s territory at leisure, is exactly the outcome Russia wants. Now, the U.S. is announcing that Russia will get its way, just so long as it doesn’t make any concessions over the next “days, not …weeks.”

Efforts at Diplomacy By the Trump Administration

There is a logic to Trump’s urgency, at least in terms of opportunity cost. If our diplomats aren’t making headway with Russia and Ukraine, then let’s put that on the back-burner and focus their attention in other areas where we might make progress. Other areas of focus might include the ongoing trade negotiations with practically every country in the world, preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, or kicking Chinese influence out of Latin America. Perhaps there is even more progress to be made on the Abraham Accords, which normalised relations between Israel and four Arab nations during Trump’s first term.

There is also a clear political advantage to racking up easy wins instead of wallowing in thorny quagmires. But the rhetoric and posture of the Trump administration virtually guarantee that it will find no win on this issue at all.

The only risk for Putin is that Trump ultimately concludes that Russia is at fault for the failed negotiation. “If Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine, and if I think it was Russia’s fault — which it might not be — but if I think it was Russia’s fault, I am going to put secondary tariffs on oil, on all oil coming out of Russia,” Trump declared last month. (Trump made these comments when he was “very angry” at Putin for undermining negotiations. By contrast, Trump canceled a mineral deal with Ukraine and froze military aid after a single meeting went sideways.)

Experts suggest this consideration — convincing Trump that he wants peace — was behind Putin’s announcement of a 30-hour ceasefire over Easter Sunday. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky countered that Putin should instead agree to the 30-day ceasefire proposed by U.S. diplomats, terms that Ukraine has agreed to but Russia has not. “That is what will reveal Russia’s true intentions,” Zelensky wrote. “Because 30 hours is enough to make headlines, but not for genuine confidence-building measures. Thirty days could give peace a chance.”

In any event, even Russia’s conduct over those 30 hours did little to inspire confidence, according to Ukrainian sources. By Sunday evening, Ukraine reported that Russia had violated its own, declared ceasefire more than 2,000 times, “including dozens of assaults across the front lines, hundreds of attacks with artillery and explosive drones, and the killing of Ukrainian troops in an ambush near the eastern city of Toretsk.” Zelensky shot back with Trump’s favourite weapon, his phone. “Either Putin does not have full control over his army, or the situation proves that Russia has no intention of making a genuine move toward ending the war.”

For its part, Russia blamed Ukraine for violating the ceasefire and insisted its own soldiers had not done so. Ukraine responded that it had only acted defensively. “If Russia is now suddenly ready to truly engage in a format of full and unconditional silence, Ukraine will act accordingly — mirroring Russia’s actions,” wrote Zelensky. “Silence in response to silence, defensive strikes in response to attacks.”

Leaders on both sides are clearly posturing to win the favour of President Trump, whose apportioning of blame and guilt could bring serious consequences to either country. “If, for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say: ‘You’re foolish, you’re fools, you’re horrible people.’ And we’re just going to take a pass,” Trump said Friday.

It’s difficult to see why Russia would agree to any deal under such conditions. But will this result in serious consequences for Russia? According to the Trump administration’s arbitrary timetable, we will likely have the answer to that question within days.

___

Republished with thanks to The Washington Stand. Image courtesy of Unsplash.