Trump-style peace: pressure victim, help aggressor

I can just picture how successful New York real estate developers operate. How they negotiate when they want to buy a new piece of land: “I know, my friend, that you are wealthy and don’t need to sell this land. And you are doing it simply because I’m a cool guy, and you like me. That’s why I’ll give you the highest price—because you don’t need to sell, you aren’t under pressure from creditors, your kids don’t need to pay for expensive universities, and your wife hasn’t hired the best divorce lawyer. So here you go—twice the market price, and let’s shake on it.”

That’s how it works, right?

And what about the agreement on natural resources? If Trump were saying that Ukraine or the Ukrainian government refuses to negotiate and that’s why he’s being tough, that would at least make some sense. But no. He himself confirms that the Ukrainian government wants negotiations. And then he throws an agreement on the table in the style of “you owe us”—an agreement reminiscent of Spanish conquistadors negotiating with indigenous tribes. He wants to claim some kind of success at Ukraine’s expense during his presidency.

"Now they say: either you repay a debt that doesn’t exist, or we will cut off your Starlinks and stop selling air defense missiles so that Putin can improve his position on the battlefield and destroy your energy sector. So this is “peace through strength”?"

I don’t know if Zelensky will sign the agreement that Trump wants from us. Or if any agreement will be signed at all—one that could be completely rewritten in substance while remaining, in form, a victory for Trump. We don’t know if this deal can be turned into something reasonable.

And for the first time, I would understand if Ukraine tells Washington to go in the same direction as the Russian warship.

I understand that having American investments is important for us—it’s not just about GDP growth but also about lobbying power in the future. I also understand that for at least the next four years, we will have to deal with this version of the United States, and Trump isn’t going anywhere.

"But at the same time, I cannot accept an agreement where Ukraine is made responsible for compensations on illegitimate debts. Where Ukraine is put in the role of natives who hand over everything in exchange for trinkets. Where Ukraine is being pressured and blackmailed with even deeper entanglements with Putin. And all of this is justified using Russian propaganda narratives."

I have always supported external governance. But right now, it’s Washington that needs external governance, not Kyiv…

What would be acceptable to us is a future revenue-sharing arrangement from American investments. But definitely not debts to Americans based on nonexistent obligations.

So if the Ukrainian government tells the Americans to follow the Russian warship because they couldn’t get the agreement restructured—I will not criticize the Ukrainian government. I will support our side. Because that is real sovereignty.

"We are not fighting an anti-colonial war against Russia just to end up in colonial dependence on New York developers. We’ve had enough of Kyiv’s own developers and their greed."

At the same time, I would welcome an agreement if it is brought to a reasonable form and pertains solely to future royalty payments for the resources that Americans or their partners will extract.

I want the Ukrainian government to feel supported and have room to maneuver—even if that maneuver requires privately telling the Americans to get lost. Even if it puts further aid at risk. The United States is no longer our friend. That means we can speak to them harshly. They are no longer supporting democracy in Ukraine, nor are they promoting reforms. So why should we care about their feelings? Trump doesn’t like us, but he is dependent on American society. And we must use and rely on that dependency, understanding that Trump himself has motivations—both to support Ukraine and to present at least some kind of deal to his voters. Because so far, he has nothing to brag about. He has already failed his promised deportations. He has already failed to fight inflation. He has already been methodically rebuffed by the Canadians, Mexicans, Danes, and Arabs.

Trying to make up for all of that at our expense is not a great idea.

Source

About the author: Serhiy Fursa, investment expert, blogger.

The editorial team does not always share the opinions expressed by blog authors.