Trump’s perspective on Ukrainian losses signals challenging times ahead

Following a trilateral meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and after the fall of Bashar al-Assad's dictatorship in Syria, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump proposed negotiations to Russian President Vladimir Putin to end Russia's war against Ukraine.

Trump emphasized that after Assad's regime collapse, Russia and Iran are in weakened positions - Russia due to Ukraine and its struggling economy, and Iran due to Israel and its military successes.

However, in the same statement, Donald Trump noted that Zelenskyy and Ukraine would prefer to strike a deal and end the madness, as they have senselessly lost 400,000 soldiers and many more civilians. Trump estimates Russian losses at 600,000 soldiers, either wounded or killed.

Trump emphasized the need for an immediate ceasefire and negotiations: "Too many lives are being so needlessly wasted, too many families destroyed, and if it keeps going, it can turn into something much bigger, and far worse. I know Vladimir well. This is his time to act. China can help. The World is waiting!"

This statement, of course, raises numerous questions, particularly about the reality in which the U.S. President-elect continues to operate and what might unfold in this world following Trump’s inauguration.

I would, of course, like to focus on the number of Ukrainian casualties mentioned by Donald Trump. Perhaps this figure lodged in his mind due to certain television programs or media reports he followed during his election campaign.

But what unsettled me wasn’t even that. What truly disturbed me was the word “needless”, which surely requires clarification.

What needlessness in Ukrainian losses is Trump referring to? Were the sacrifices that ensured Ukraine remains on the political map of the world, capable of fighting for its sovereignty, independence, and the safety of its citizens, needless? Were the sacrifices of Ukrainian soldiers, who prevented another Bucha across the country, liberated Kharkiv and Kherson, and are now halting Russian advances in the Donbas, needless? After all, we all clearly understand what Vladimir Putin seeks to achieve through this war.

Not to mention that when Donald Trump speaks of the “needless” loss of civilian lives, he must remember that these people were victims of Russian aggression - Russian bombings of Ukraine, attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure, civilian targets, hospitals, and kindergartens. This raises the question: what does he mean by the “needlessness” of these losses? Should all these people have simply agreed to let Russian troops enter their cities? Would there then, as Donald Trump seems to suggest, have been fewer civilian casualties?

However, it’s possible that the President-elect of the United States meant something entirely different - that the war itself is needless, and Vladimir Putin’s decision to start it has, of course, led to needless casualties on both sides. Had there been no war, there would have been no human losses. This interpretation could be somewhat agreeable, though again, it’s a matter of how Trump articulates his thoughts. As we know, it’s hardly news that he often expresses himself so controversially that the White House press office had to clarify his statements during his first presidency. Now, there is no such press office, and the fact that his advisors once tried to dissuade him from posting on social media is well known. Today, there seems to be no one capable of limiting Donald Trump, nor will there be, meaning we are bound to encounter more such statements, which we’ll have to reinterpret ourselves.

But there’s another question: when Donald Trump says that Ukraine and Zelenskyy would like to reach an agreement, he is clearly referring to his meeting with the Ukrainian and French presidents. But what kind of agreement does Donald Trump mean?

A just peace? A peace based on strength, as he mentioned in Paris? Or Ukraine’s capitulation to Russia, paving the way for the absorption of our state - if not now, then in the near future?

And when Donald Trump appeals to Putin, claiming to "know him well" - which, in my opinion, he does not - what is he expecting? That the Russian president will immediately agree to negotiations with Ukraine on terms acceptable to the newly elected American president and his team, terms that would preserve their political reputation? Or is he banking on terms like those we are currently hearing from the Russian president, his foreign minister, and Russian propagandists?

Terms that essentially demand Ukraine’s capitulation. Moreover, under the looming threat of Russia using its infamous Oreshnik, or perhaps something even more dire - something Trump hints at - not only against Ukraine but also against Europe and U.S. allies. Is it truly worth attending the grand reopening of Notre Dame if doing so creates the risk that this very cathedral could be destroyed by a direct Russian strike?

This is, of course, a rhetorical question, but I would prefer a non-rhetorical answer. And here lies the most crucial question - the question of Donald Trump’s entire presidency. What will the American president do after his inauguration? He believes that Russia is weakened by the war in Ukraine and the state of its economy. I have no doubt that his allies are telling him exactly this. I also think the situation with the Russian economy leaves much to be desired. However, none of us truly knows the extent of Russia's resources to continue the war in Ukraine or how Vladimir Putin himself assesses these resources.

So, if Vladimir Putin ignores all these calls from Donald Trump, continues the war, or proposes conditions that are catastrophic for the Ukrainian people and humiliating for the United States - their society, and even their president and administration - what will Donald Trump do in this situation?

Something or nothing? This is the main question, and we’ll begin to get the answer in January 2025. Not immediately, of course, but starting from January 2025.

However, I wouldn’t want anyone to doubt that very challenging times lie ahead. With such a worldview, with such an understanding of Ukrainian sacrifices - sacrifices necessary for our survival - we are facing tough times, a period of adjusting to reality.

No matter what the president-elect of the United States says, the sacrifices of Ukrainians in this war were neither needless nor in vain. We will always remember our heroes, not foreign politicians, even those who help us assess whether our sacrifices were meaningful or not.

Beyond American voters, even if they form a certain majority, there is God, who sees everything, knows everything, and whose judgment in history is far more significant than the opinions of any electorate or the support of any billionaires. We must remember this in the difficult months and years ahead.

Source

About the author. Vitaly Portnikov, journalist, laureate of the Taras Shevchenko National Prize of Ukraine.

The editors don't always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.