Opinion Jayson Mcgowan 03/19/2025 0 Comments

Unfortunately, Trump is right in Ukraine

I rarely agreed with President Trump, but his latest controversial statements about Ukraine are often correct. It seems that they are only running out because the Western masses have been fed a fixed diet from misleading information about Ukraine for more than a decade. It is time to record the record on three main points that illuminate why Ukrainian President and former President Joe Biden – not only Russian President Vladimir Putin – bear a great responsibility for the outbreak of war in Ukraine.

First, as was recently documented through overwhelming criminal evidence, and even by the Kiev court, the right -wing Ukrainian militants were the ones who started violence in 2014 that raised the first invasion of Russia for the southeast of the country, including the Crimea Peninsula. At that time, Ukraine had a pro -Russian president, Victor Yanukovic, who won free and fair elections in 2010 with strong support from ethnic Russians in the southeast of the country.

In 2013, he decided to follow economic cooperation with Russia instead of Europe as it was previously planned. The pro -Western activists responded to the peaceful occupation in the Square of the Capital Square and government offices, until the president ultimately made great concessions in mid -February 2014, and after that they withdrew mainly.

Only at the time, the right -wing gunmen overlooking the scene began shooting at the Ukrainian police and the remaining demonstrators. The police re -fire on the militants, who brilliantly claimed that the police killed the unarmed demonstrators. Angry about this visible government massacre, the Ukrainians descended on the capital and purified the president, who fled to Russia for protection.

By deploying the forces on the Crimea and weapons to the southeast of Donabas, Putin’s deployment on the ethnic Russians who felt that their president had been overthrown. Although this back story does not justify the invasion of Russia, it explains that it is barely “unjustified.”

Second, Ukraine President Voludmir Zelinsky contributed to a broader war by violating peace deals with Russia and seeking military and membership aid. The deals, known as Minsk 1 and 2, were negotiated under his predecessor, its btro poroshenko in 2014 and 2015 to end the fighting in the southeast and protect the endangered forces.

Ukraine had to guarantee political autonomy limited in Donbas by the end of 2015, which Putin believes will be sufficient to prevent Ukraine from joining – or working as a military base for – NATO. Unfortunately, Ukraine has refused for seven years to fulfill this commitment.

Zelensky even a campaign in 2019 on a promise to implement agreements to prevent more war. But after his victory in the elections, it seems, apparently less concerned about the war’s war, than to look weak in Russia.

Instead, Zelinski increased arms imports from NATO countries, which was the last straw of Putin. Therefore, on February 21, 2022, Russia realized the independence of Donbas, deployed forces there for “peacekeeping”, and Zelinski demanded to give up his pursuit of military and membership assistance in NATO.

When Zelinski rejected again, Putin widespread his military attack on February 24.

Third, Joe Biden has decisively contributed to the escalation and sustainability of the fighting. In late 2021, when Putin mobilized the forces on the borders of Ukraine and demanded the implementation of Minsk’s deals, it seemed clear that unless Zelinski was available, Russia would invade to form a land bridge at least between Donbas and the Crimea.

Given that Ukraine was already dependent on US military assistance, if President Biden insisted that Zelinski comply with Putin’s request, it would have happened. Instead, Biden left Zelensky’s resolution and pledged that if Russia invaded, the United States will respond “quickly and decisively”, which Zelinski read as a green light for Putin’s challenge.

If Trump was president, he would not provide such an empty check, so Zelensky had no choice but to apply Minsk deals to avoid war. Even if Zelinski still rejects and provokes Russia for the invasion, Trump was deprived of the veto over peace negotiationHe gave his announcement, “There is nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.”

This pledge tragicly encouraged Ukraine to prolong the war in expecting decisive US military aid in the end, which then rejected Biden’s offer due to the fear of nuclear escalation. In this way, Biden has sparked false hopes in Ukraine, which led to the perpetuation of the war that has killed or afflicted hundreds of thousands in the past two years alone, during which the front lines have turned less than 1 percent of Ukraine.

The basic outlines of a deal to end the fighting are clear even if the details that must be negotiated, as Trump and Putin began to make a phone call. Russia will continue to occupy the Crimea and other parts of the southeast, while the rest of Ukraine will not join NATO, but will obtain security guarantees from some Western countries. The sad thing is that it was possible to achieve such a plan at least two years ago if only President Biden had made military aid conditional on Zelensky to negotiate the ceasefire.

The tragic thing, whatever the peace deal that emerges after the war, will be worse for Ukraine than the Mensk agreements that Zelinski abandoned with foolishness because of his political ambitions and its naive expectation to support the United States that restless.

Alan c. Cobman is a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, where he studies courses on military strategy and conflict management.