Trump's Controversial Approach to Ending the Ukraine Conflict

Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelensky, and numerous global leaders share a common desire: to see the war in Ukraine come to an end. However, Vladimir Putin stands apart, viewing the conflict as a central pillar of his political, psychological, and economic strategy.

This fundamental imbalance has largely thwarted meaningful peace negotiations over the three and a half years since Russia launched its large-scale invasion of Ukraine. Despite this, Trump asserts he has a solution, claiming his negotiating skills combined with escalating economic pressure will leave Putin no alternative but to cease fighting.

Amid fluctuating public statements and shifting timelines—including contradictory White House remarks about the conditions for a Trump-Putin meeting—it is important to recognize that Trump’s policy towards Russia mirrors the established, yet ineffective, approach of successive U.S. administrations, including those of Joe Biden and Barack Obama. For over a decade, the United States has responded to Russian aggression with gradual economic sanctions and threats. The introduction of tariffs by Trump does not fundamentally change this strategy.

The prevailing rationale behind sanctions is that economic strain destabilizes regimes, potentially forcing leaders to alter their course. This could occur through widespread hardship sparking popular unrest or by alienating elites who might push for leadership change.

However, this theory often falls short in practice. Sanctions tend to impoverish ordinary citizens while elites remain wealthy, widening the gap between social classes. Instead of fostering resentment toward the regime or its leaders, this dynamic often unites society against the foreign powers imposing sanctions. The distant adversary becomes an abstract enemy, while domestic elites control media narratives, employment, and resources, making internal opposition more costly and less appealing. Additionally, severe hardships frequently cause people to disengage from political concerns entirely as they focus on day-to-day survival.