Trump Presents A New Paradigm For Peace In Ukraine

The re-election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency is viewed by many observers as a potential boon for Russian President Vladimir Putin and his war against Ukraine. On the contrary, America's political realignment may be a significant blow to the ideological foundation of Putin's dream of a "multi-polar world"—a paradigm shift that presents significant opportunities and challenges for America and the West.

Some analysts believe Russia has already won the overarching conflict; that the Russian mind-set is "zero-sum"—one winner, one loser—and that Putin will fight on until Ukraine and the West capitulate; that Russia only pays lip service to negotiations; that talk of sanctions and economic ostracization is meaningless given Russia's sacrifices and eventual victory over the Nazis.

This view implies limited options for the United States: end or sharply curtail military support for Ukraine and isolate America from the conflict entirely, effectively acknowledging Putin's victory; double-down and continue escalation until one side is vanquished; or, to use a Vietnam War idiom, "pull a Westmoreland"—withdraw and declare victory.

In contrast, Donald Trump promises to facilitate a negotiated end to the war "within 24 hours" of being sworn into office. However rhetorical, it is worth noting that America was engaged in no wars during President Trump's first term, nor was there any haste to become so. Patience and wisdom should prevail over a rush to judgement.

When Putin launched his "Special Military Operation" in Ukraine, he defined its purpose in pragmatic terms—the threat of NATO expansion with talk of Ukraine's entry; "de-Nazification" (essentially, regime change) and demilitarization of Ukraine; and absorption of the Donbas, if not the entire country. By the time of the Istanbul peace talks, however, Putin's willingness to negotiate major concessions confirmed that he'd failed on all counts: Sweden and Finland would expand NATO; the Ukrainian government was still in control; the Donbas was being hotly contested at a staggering cost of blood and treasure; and the Ukrainian Army, by size and battle experience, was proving to be the best in all of Europe.

The West's narrative surrounding the war in Ukraine, meanwhile, defined as the post-WWII global order with a more liberal world view, was increasingly influenced by U.S.-led globalism, "America First" populism, and widespread backlash against what many saw as excessively "woke" social ideology. In Putin's view, America had become a kind of franchiser of our brand of democracy, bullying adversaries to become franchisees.

Putin, whether ingenuously or expediently, declared this a threat to the identity of his nation; to its community sense of cohesion; and to the vision of a "sovereign democracy" uncoerced by the West's brand. He pivoted from the pragmatic toward a more ideological justification for the war. No longer a mere Special Military Operation, it became a defense of "holy Russia" against a decadent, overreaching West and a globalist, woke, agenda espoused by Washington and Brussels. Indeed, he implied the Ukraine war was a battle for Christian civilization itself.

Then came the 2024 U.S. presidential election. A political harbinger of a return to social conservatism and traditional values, Trump's reelection effectively moots Putin's new justification for war by eliminating a clear ideological enemy—the "woke boogeyman."

Putin continues to throw thousands of men into battle as Russia's economy faces structural challenges, while Trump's ascension realizes the victory that Putin now claims to fight for. What does the Russian leader do when the enemy of his enemy has won; when continued conflict with no credible answer to "why?" is untenable among his own population? He will look to make a deal.

Negotiating the end of war in Ukraine would not be unlike a high-stakes, geopolitical game of Texas "Hold 'em" poker. The players have been raising and re-raising their bets. Trump's election effectively calls Putin's latest raise. His message to Putin, whether in public or at a negotiating table: "Show us your hand." What are you still fighting for?

America's move toward MAGA traditionalism forces Putin's civilizational rationale for war to showdown. If he can no longer articulate cohesive reasons that reflect the new reality defined by Trump's victory, Putin's legitimacy, if not his life, are in jeopardy.

This new reality gives the Trump administration unexpected leverage in achieving a central foreign policy objective. It should enter any forthcoming negotiations with a sober understanding of Putin's threat, but without dismissing or underestimating his readiness, willingness, and imperative to reach a negotiated peace.

The United States, having renounced the excesses of liberal social ideology that Putin claims to fight against, has a chance to change the deck and reshuffle the cards. Peace and security for Ukraine and Europe for generations to come now depend on how the Trump card is played.

Andrew Favorov is co-founder of the Ukraine Future Business Council (www.ukrainefbc.org), a Washington, D.C.-based 501(c)(4) non-profit organization that works for constitutional and economic reforms in Ukraine that support Western democratic principles.