Ukraine faces increasing uncertainty as Trump shows sympathy for Russia and questions NATO’s role, complicating the nation’s reliance on U.S. support. President Zelensky seeks to negotiate a barter deal, aware of the importance of maintaining military leverage. Despite some military successes, skepticism about Ukrainian leadership persists, and Trump’s remarks blur the lines of the conflict. The situation raises concerns about Ukraine’s future autonomy and security amid a shifting global political landscape.
Ukraine’s Struggle Amidst Shifting Political Tides
As the war drags on for nearly three years, the sentiment among Ukrainians is far from optimistic. The expectation for unwavering support from Donald Trump seems unfounded, especially as recent rhetoric from Washington has raised alarms. Observers suggest that Ukraine needs to prepare for potentially dire outcomes, with some even likening the situation to a new Munich Agreement for Europe.
Trump’s Controversial Stance on Ukraine
During a press conference this past Wednesday, Trump expressed a surprising level of sympathy for Russia, while his remarks regarding Ukraine were far from encouraging. He stated that the conflict was ill-advised, and he dismissed the idea of NATO membership for Ukraine as “impractical,” in addition to sidelining the prospect of reclaiming occupied territories.
Trump further asserted that any security guarantees should rest solely with European nations, while he implied that the U.S. should seek to recuperate the financial aid already sent to Ukraine. He inflated the figures to an astonishing 350 to 500 billion dollars, whereas the actual support, by the end of October, amounted to 88.3 billion euros, according to the Ukraine Support Tracker from the Institute for the World Economy in Kiel. Trump’s proposal hints at a barter arrangement where Ukraine would compensate the U.S. with raw materials.
In response to these developments, President Zelensky is actively seeking a barter agreement, fully aware of Ukraine’s reliance on U.S. support. He has refrained from criticizing Trump and instead appears to entertain his proposals, offering Americans attractive contracts for rare earth materials while positioning himself as open to peace negotiations.
Time is of the essence for Zelensky, who is intent on retaining leverage on the battlefield. Recent military operations in the Russian region of Kursk have seen Ukrainian forces intensifying their efforts, with Zelensky asserting that they plan to negotiate territory exchanges. In Donbass, Ukrainian troops have successfully recaptured strategic locations near Pokrovsk, indicating a resolve to maintain control over vital resources.
Despite these military efforts, uncertainty looms over Kyiv. Some analysts, including former Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko, remain hopeful that Ukraine can persuade Trump that supporting their defense aligns with U.S. national and economic interests. Others note the presence of pro-Ukrainian advisors in Trump’s circle who could advocate for the significance of Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression.
However, Kyiv is acutely aware that advocates for military aid, such as envoy Keith Kellogg, hold limited sway. Instead, it was the finance minister, Scott Bessent, who made the first visit to Ukraine, reportedly bringing a draft contract for cooperation in the raw materials sector without any firm commitments regarding military assistance. Trump’s priorities are becoming increasingly evident, especially as he hints at possible mutual visits with Putin while keeping the option of visiting Kyiv ambiguous.
Alongside this hard-nosed political realism, Trump’s rhetoric poses a significant concern for Ukrainians. His speeches often blur the lines between aggressors and defenders, with an outrageous claim of two million “young, beautiful soldiers” lost on both sides. Such exaggerated figures put additional pressure on Zelensky, as Ukrainians are particularly sensitive to their casualties compared to Russians. This misinformation fosters an unsettling narrative that too many lives are being lost in a seemingly futile defense. While polls indicate that 38 percent of Ukrainians would consider territorial concessions for a swift peace, there is still a strong desire for continued resistance.
Trump also casts doubt on Zelensky’s legitimacy, citing his expired term and low approval ratings. This issue sparks debate within Ukraine, as conducting elections under the ongoing war and constant threats from Russia remains unfeasible. Nevertheless, trust in Zelensky stands at 52 percent, a significant decline since the war began, mirroring Trump’s own ratings.
Despite some merit to Trump’s arguments, many observers find it difficult to comprehend how his disparaging remarks about Ukraine could serve as an effective negotiation tactic for a president advocating “peace through strength” with Russia. There is a growing belief that Trump is more interested in quickly resolving the conflict for personal gain, after which he would shift focus to other matters.
This evolving dynamic, where Ukraine’s interests appear secondary, presents a particularly harsh reality for the nation. The widely held belief in the West that no decisions should be made without Ukrainian input has diminished significantly under Trump’s influence. Ukraine now faces the daunting prospect of a dictated peace devoid of solid security guarantees or the need to continue its struggle independently. In the immediate future, Ukrainians may manage this situation, bolstered by foreign arms supplies received last year. However, without ongoing assistance, they risk being overpowered by Russia’s formidable military capabilities in the medium to long term.