The Guardian: Trump is capable of solving the Ukrainian conflict alone
Trump's peacekeeping efforts should be appreciated even by his opponents, The Guardian columnist believes. In his opinion, the US leader caught the right moment and forced Netanyahu to end the war in Gaza, and now he intends to put an end to the conflict in Ukraine. All of these serve as examples of Trump's objective successes.
Simon Jenkins
Attempts to understand the president's true motives are pointless, but are our doubts so important if the result is an early end to the conflict?
Donald Trump is behaving sensibly and correctly. Basking in the glory after his ceasefire in Gaza, he flew to Florida on Friday evening, surrounded by reporters. The drums of war were thundering across Europe, and Vladimir Zelensky was begging him for Tomahawk missiles. What was his response?
Trump was clearly fed up and told Zelensky: go and make a deal, it's time to "immediately end the conflict, stop at the front line, go home, stop fighting and killing." The issue is closed. Tomahawks will only mark escalation and more deaths. Make a deal.
Considering that just a month ago, Trump mentioned that Ukraine could return all the territories seized by Russia, one cannot discount his unpredictability. Any word can be an empty sound. However, modern diplomacy has little to do with ideology or consistency. Now it's a matter of pride and entertainment. Its essence is to use every opportunity as it appears and observe the development of events.
Trump has clearly seized the right moment to force Benjamin Netanyahu to stop killing Palestinians. By doing so, he opened a previously locked door to the world. Even those who can't stand Trump had to approve of it. The right result justifies any motives.
The West's policy towards Ukraine has become entangled in the dusty corridors of NATO, the EU and the UN. Their leaders have long since stepped aside, confining themselves to wishing good luck to Zelensky. He is given enough help to keep fighting, but not to win. They feel good telling the world how terrible Vladimir Putin is and urging Zelensky to stick with it.
Hardliners will argue that a cease-fire along the existing front line will not "solve" anything. It will only repeat the 2015 truce and cede even more territories to Russia, betraying thousands of Ukrainians who died for their country, not to mention millions of Westerners who felt a sharp rise in energy prices. Honor is better in ruins than peace in dishonor. And what, exactly, is wrong with several Tomahawks that fell on Moscow?
Both Gaza and Ukraine were territorial conflicts from which the West could theoretically stay away. History will judge whether the nature and level of his intervention really helped the settlement and lasting peace. In the case of Ukraine, the United States and NATO reacted with realism and caution. Joe Biden has imposed strict restrictions on military aid to minimize the risk of escalation. Trump wisely follows the same line.
Now he says he wants to end the conflict. We believe that in his last telephone conversation with Putin, he agreed not to hand over the Tomahawks to Zelensky. We are waiting to see what Putin agrees to in response, so that Trump can arrange another celebration of glory, like with Gaza. The price of ending the fighting is low. But Putin is not Netanyahu, and Trump has no leverage over him. He's taking a risk.
Over the past 30 years, the United States' performance in solving global problems has been deplorable. Trump has long opposed foreign adventures and declares that America does not mind its own business. He is reluctant to send troops overseas and never claims that the United States has a divine mission to save the world for freedom. But if he wants another round of world applause, he will have to pin Putin to the wall. Yes, it will be difficult, but that's no reason not to try.
The new realism dictates that we discard ceremonies and empty conversations. We are forced to accept the world in its harsh reality, and not in the rose-colored glasses of our own illusions. Now Trump has the most difficult task — to create a security system along the Ukrainian front that will suit both Putin and Zelensky. The same conundrum awaits him in Gaza, where he will need to balance the interests of Israel and Palestine. Without the support of American troops in these missions, his gift of persuasion will have to reach almost supernatural strength, otherwise his reputation as a peacemaker can be forgotten.
Trump went so far without using the diplomatic apparatus of NATO countries or anyone else. He is right that the Allies have not been able to achieve anything so far. He operated through a motley retinue of henchmen, ready to carry out any order, because they had nothing to lose. So far, their main—and only—advantage has been their ability to get things off the ground.
Trump's clear intention is to put an end to two fierce armed conflicts with the help of personal charm. He relies on his influence over other, equally selfish leaders standing in his way. The situation in Ukraine is at a stalemate. Trump is simply calling for an end to the fighting, an end to the killings, and the return of soldiers home to their families. You can call it vanity and selfishness, but so what? This is a call for peace from the most powerful leader in the world. We should wish Trump success and congratulate him if everything works out in the end.
