Ukraine will not meet face-to-face with Russia. And here's why

Does Putin want a ceasefire? For Ukraine, this is a trap.

The barbaric shelling of Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities once again proves that Putin's real goal is not a ceasefire, but the surrender of Ukraine. He believes that shocking the world with cruelty is necessary to achieve this.

On the contrary, Ukrainians are shocked by the so-called numerous "peace initiatives."

Confusing are also Volodymyr Zelensky's statements about Russia's presence at the "second peace summit." Moreover, for the vast majority of Ukrainians, negotiations with Russia are tantamount to surrendering national interests and only mean postponing new aggression. Because Moscow's goal remains the same under any government: the destruction of the Ukrainian state and nation. There is ample evidence of this in history and in the present.

Most Ukrainians support the fight for victory, namely, the restoration of the territorial integrity of our state, including Crimea and the occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Ukrainians believe that Ukraine should obtain membership in the EU and NATO so that future generations do not have to fight the same enemy.

Trump changed the game for Putin

Why do I emphasize these axioms? Earlier, I wrote about Putin's desire to conclude a ceasefire today and under any conditions. According to many commentators, this sounds overly optimistic because heavy fighting is ongoing on the front lines, Ukrainian defense forces are forced to abandon certain villages, half of the energy industry has been destroyed, and aid from allies is arriving slowly.

We already know that Ukraine will not be invited to NATO during the summit in Washington (July 9-11). This could affect the prospects for ending the war, as Kremlin sees NATO's indecision as an opportunity to achieve all the goals of the "special military operation". Another concern is that Donald Trump could win the presidential elections in the United States, and then there will be uncertainty about further support for Ukraine, instead of challenges that he will attempt to "end the one war for day".

We will focus on "Trump's problem" because it directly relates to the Kremlin's attempt to conclude a ceasefire as soon as possible. Speaking at a press conference in the capital of Kazakhstan, Astana, on July 4th, Putin said, "The fact that Mr. Trump as a presidential candidate says he is ready and wants to stop the war in Ukraine, we take quite seriously."

For the Russian dictator, Trump's return to power is a real game-changer - a factor that will change the rules of the game. Fortunately for us, not everything will be so simple, and again "the emperor" may make a fundamental mistake in his calculations.

Let's start with the fact that it is 2024, not 2016, when Donald Trump shocked Europe and the world with his words and actions. Over the past four years, the United States, EU, the entire West, and Ukraine have done much to prepare for his second term.

There is no reason to fear another one-on-one meeting between Trump and Putin, during which they could allegedly divide the world into two parts as a result of a "new Yalta." For several reasons, Trump will no longer be able to blackmail Europeans with the prospect of America leaving NATO ("exit from Europe"). Formally, this was initiated to stimulate greater European investment in their own security, but in reality - to obtain a convenient excuse to withdraw from the Alliance and allow Europe to surrender to Russia. It was calculated that Moscow would then break its alliance with Beijing, which remains Trump's primary enemy and a key geostrategic rival to the United States.

Why the USA won't leave Europe?

Firstly, Europeans are prepared for such a scenario. They are slowly but steadily increasing their defense budgets, revitalizing their military-industrial complexes, and assisting Ukraine. Nearly all European states understand that Ukrainian stability and determination in victory are the most reliable guarantees of their own security.

If Trump suddenly tells Europeans that "America is leaving," their response would likely be, "Well, while it would be easier to manage our collective security with the U.S., we are prepared to take care of ourselves." Trump wouldn't have much to counter that.

Secondly, the phrase "completely withdrawing from Europe" would mean that Europe would automatically shift from being American allies to potential competitors, even adversaries. Emmanuel Macron made this clear in his April speech at Sorbonne University. He warned that Europe could die if it doesn't take care of "reliable European defense" and European preferences in purchasing military equipment.

This makes sense because when investing heavily in defense and armaments, it's better to consider the interests of domestic producers rather than feeding "Uncle Sam."

Thirdly, former U.S. presidents and their "advisors" fail to grasp that Ukraine and Europe in general are not like Afghanistan, where the U.S. could withdraw without significant consequences for its global role, strength, and security. America is vital to Europeans (and Ukrainians), but a strong alliance with Europe is equally if not more essential for the U.S. Americans cannot afford to multiply competitors and enemies endlessly.

Fourthly, there is no argument for the U.S. to withdraw from NATO and stop supporting Ukraine. Attempting to "separate Russia from China" by paying for Ukraine's bill, the eastern wing of NATO, and all of Europe ("new Yalta") cannot be a serious reason for doing so. The real aim of such an operation is to strengthen Trump's personal power, dismantle liberal democracy in the U.S., abandon existing alliances, and change the world order dominated by the "club of autocrats."

Trump and some of his supporters are using propaganda about "excessive aid" to Ukraine at the expense of "ordinary Americans". This is a lie, because the absolute majority of these funds work for the US military industry. In fact, the question for the Americans is this: are they willing to pay for the restoration of the Russian Empire?

Trump's freedom of maneuver is very limited

This dilemma is best illustrated by the situation of those "praying for Trump" in Europe, especially in Hungary under the leadership of Viktor Orbán. The withdrawal of the USA from NATO will also mean a radical change in its security situation and the need to find new alliances.
Will all EU countries choose the European model of collective security (and it will certainly appear), or will they choose Russia and China as well? After Orbán's recent trip to Moscow, it became obvious that his "ideological brotherhood" with Trump is just a cover to cover the real brotherhood (dependence) on Russia.
America's allies from Southeast Asia: South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines and Australia are closely monitoring Trump's attitude towards NATO and Ukraine. Taiwan is aware that it is the first target of Chinese imperialism, which is advancing at an accelerated pace.
America, during the first term of Trump and during the presidency of Joe Biden, did a lot to convince its Asian allies of the reliability of security guarantees and the readiness to provide a military response to the aggression of the PRC and its North Korean vassal.
"US withdrawal from Europe" and refusal to support Ukraine will nullify these guarantees. And there is no empty space in international politics. Britain has already offered South Korea its own security guarantees.
Two key conclusions can be drawn from the analysis of the US strategic situation (parts of its main elements) at the beginning of Donald Trump's likely second term. The freedom of geopolitical maneuver of Joe Biden's successor is limited, because the collapse of the alliance system so far has benefited only Russia and China. The American government system is not so weak that it cannot see this and successfully oppose it.
In addition, blackmail by severing the alliance between the US and Europe will not work. It will automatically encounter organized resistance from most European countries, especially the strongest of them: Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy. Even key US allies in Asia will not accept that. Therefore, any blackmail will only be a bluff.

Ukraine will not remain face to face with Russia

Now about Ukraine, peace conditions and Russia's unstoppable desire for a ceasefire. We can only hope that Trump, in case of victory, will really talk about wanting to end the war "in one day". Putin will jump for joy and "interest". And what concrete steps should Ukraine and the rest of the world expect?
It is clear from the statements of members of Trump's entourage (and those who want to join the new administration) that no "peace plan" exists. Moreover, even his ideas are not visible. Don't make such loose judgments about the price Ukraine must pay for Putin's "friendly deal" for peace. Putin announced them: renouncing Crimea, agreeing to the annexation of unoccupied parts of Donetsk, Zaporizhia, Luhansk and Kherson regions, non-bloc status, agreeing to limit the number and armament of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. And what Putin calls "denazification".
Why can't such conditions be accepted? Because a large part of Ukrainians and military personnel of the Defense Forces of Ukraine will not agree to this. And this is a decisive factor for the future of Ukraine. This is not understood only by politicians who are detached from reality.
I will state a rebellious thesis for many. Ukraine will not remain face to face with the aggressor. The results of recent elections for the European Parliament, elections in Britain and France show that the administration's likely attempt to force Ukraine to make peace on Russian terms will be met with determined resistance by most European members of the Alliance.
Macron's famous statement about the permissibility of deploying French troops in Ukraine had two addressees: Putin and Trump and his followers in the Republican Party. In February of this year, they worked hard to prevent us from getting weapons from the US. Macron and the General Staff of the French Army conducted an analysis of the consequences that the loss of Western aid would lead to for Ukraine and came to the following conclusion: the EU and the countries on the eastern wing of NATO will become targets of Russian aggression. And that is a direct threat to the national security of the Republic of France.

Why Putin Wants a Ceasefire

Europeans (especially those from the eastern and northern parts of the continent) are faced with a choice: either to turn their backs on Ukrainians alongside Russians and Americans, or to continue the fight against Russia alongside Ukrainians. They will likely choose the latter option.

The reasons for such a potential decision by Europeans are understandable: a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Ukraine's defense forces are holding back the Russian Federation's offensive and have a chance to defeat the enemy with Western support. If Ukrainians are deprived of support, they could lose, and then Russia will inevitably attack the eastern flank NATO states. And it's not certain that Trump's America will protect them.

This scenario seems unlikely to us. Given Trump's unpredictability, he may make various "unconventional decisions" in international politics. These decisions could contradict the fundamental interests of the United States and its allies. However, the decision-making systems of the US and NATO have many safeguards against such unpredictable political figures.

Our concern is Trump's belief that he can end the Russo-Ukrainian war with his decision. He doesn't know how to do it, but he is convinced that he will find a way; this is merely wishful thinking. But even Trump's own wish is not sufficient for this.

The successful vote in the US Congress for $61 billion in aid to Ukraine was a real shock to Putin. Half of the Republican congressmen supported the decision, and two-thirds of Republican senators voted in favor. Putin was convinced that Trump had complete control over the Grand Old Party (as the Republican Party is called) and that his most loyal supporters in Congress would block the passage of the rescue legislation.

Today, Russia cannot be sure of anything regarding Trump and his administration. This administration could reject a security agreement with Ukraine and reconsider its support for Ukraine's NATO membership. Or it might not, thereby confirming that Ukraine's victory is a policy goal for the US.

That's why Putin is in a hurry. He is trying to consolidate the current state of occupation and obtain Ukraine's agreement to such a decision. Putin hopes this will be a reason for Trump to "end the war in one day" and encourage further negotiations. Putin sees no other serious cards to play, neither on the front lines, nor in the economy, nor on the international scene.

The task of the Ukrainian authorities is not to agree to any ceasefire or negotiations with the aggressor that would make Putin think he can act from a position of strength.