The problem with Donald Trump's peace plan for Ukraine
In 2019, President Trump suggested that the United States should buy Greenland from Denmark. When asked to explain the proposal, Donald Trump said that he saw it as “a large real estate deal”, and that it would make strategic sense for the United States to take over the ownership of Greenland as Denmark is carrying it at a great loss.
Lately, I’ve been thinking quite a bit about the suggestion that the United States could purchase Greenland in the light of the renewed discussions about Trump’s alleged peace plan for Ukraine. Both reveal a superficial understanding of the role that borders and territory play for nation-states and a tendency to understand geopolitics as a transactional struggle over “real estate”.
Baffled by Trump’s suggestion, the Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen explained that Denmark can’t sell Greenland, because it is not Denmark’s property. Greenland is the country of the Greenlanders, and it is up to them to decide their own fate. This response from the Danish Prime Minister reveals just one of the layers of complexity that are involved in these types of questions: there is people living in these territories. Even if we entertain the idea that Donald Trump could purchase Greenland, then surely he could not purchase the Greenlanders?
The situation in Ukraine is obviously very different and much more complicated than the farcical suggestion about Greenland. But when we look at what Donald Trump is saying today about how he will end the war in Ukraine, then it is the same mindset that is behind his suggestions. It is a simplistic understanding of politics where the war in Ukraine can essentially be reduced to a question of bargaining over real estate.
What is Donald Trump’s peace plan
It is admittedly hard to understand the details in Trump’s plan for how to bring about peace in Ukraine in record time, but the big picture idea seems to be that there should be an immediate cessation of hostilities, and once a cease-fire is in place there can be negotiations about a permanent peace deal. To bring about the cease-fire, Trump will threaten Zelensky with cutting all American support unless the Ukrainians immediately stop shooting. I guess in that case it will also be unnecessary with more American support, because the fighting has stopped, so the flow of American weapons will stop no matter what the Ukrainians do. It is not clear what Trump will do to motivate the Russians for a cease-fire. It seems to be just assumed that the Russians are ready for a cease-fire and serious negotiations despite Putin and other Russian officials consistently saying the opposite.
In Donald Trump’s understanding of the situation, Russia started the war because they wanted to take some land that they think rightfully belongs to them, and Ukraine doesn’t want to give them this land so they are fighting back. Both sides are motivated by a cost-benefit analysis of the situation, and Zelensky keeps sending more soldiers into battle because this land is valuable and can generate wealth. But if the United States stops sending military support to Ukraine, then that will change the cost-benefit relationship and Zelensky will understand that he is best served to take the deal that is on the table right now. And the Russians will obviously also take the deal, because the war is costing them a fortune, and they will get some land that they didn’t have before.
Why Trump’s plan won’t work
It is almost unnecessary to say that Trump’s plan won’t work. I’ve said in countless videos (e.g. here, here, here, and here) that one of the biggest mistakes we can make about this war is to assume that it is first and foremost a war about territory – or “real estate” as Trump might put it. Russia did not invade Ukraine because they wanted to steal some land in Eastern Ukraine, but it has ended up looking like that because the war turned out to be much harder to win for Russia than they originally thought.
Russia will not stop fighting just because the United States elects a president that has promised to cut the military support for Ukraine. This might be just what they need to win the war, so why would they stop fighting? They will probably pretend that they are ready for negotiations, because they will want Ukraine to get the blame for a failed cease-fire so Trump will go ahead and punish the Ukrainians. But they won’t actually stop.
Ukraine also won’t stop fighting because a cease-fire now will give the Russian army a possibility to replace their losses and reconstitute their forces for a stronger offensive later. The Ukrainians will therefore continue fighting, they will just have fewer resources to do it. And the European countries will not stop supporting Ukraine because the general understanding is that it is vital for the long-term security in Europe that Russia doesn’t win the war, and that the costs of a Ukrainian defeat will be many times bigger than the investments needed to support Ukraine now.
We will in other words be in a position where – in the case of a Trump victory – both sides want to continue the fight, but there will be an intense battle in the information space about making sure that the other side gets the blame.
The real problem is uncertainty about America’s policy
The real problem with Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine is not that it won’t work, because that part is predictable. The problem is the uncertainty it brings that no one knows what Trump will actually do when the plan doesn’t work, and the war continues despite him being elected president. It is possible that he will follow through on his promises of cutting the aid to Ukraine. But it is also possible that he will continue the military support for Ukraine or even increase it.
This creates an unfortunate uncertainty both in Ukraine and in NATO. In Ukraine, because it is impossible to make a strategy if you don’t know how many resources you will have at your disposal in six months. And in NATO because the things that Donald Trump has said that he will do, namely cutting the military aid to Ukraine, is something that most NATO countries consider devastating for their own security interests. We could potentially be facing a deep crisis in NATO as a result. But if the U.S. suddenly cuts the aid to Ukraine, then that will require a dramatic change in European policies, both in their support for Ukraine but also in relation to the United States.
There isn’t anything anyone can do about the uncertainty at this point. Nothing can persuade candidate Trump to put out a more realistic plan for his Ukraine policy, because it is an important part of his platform that he has some kind of quick fix solution to the war. But it is worth having this in mind, that a big problem with Trump’s Ukraine plan isn’t what he says he will do, but that no one knows what he will actually do when his stated plan turns out not to work.