Trump’s Ukraine Peace Plan: Territorial Concessions and NATO Exclusion Raise Questions

Donald Trump’s advisers have outlined a controversial strategy for resolving the ongoing war in Ukraine, suggesting a peace framework that involves significant territorial concessions to Russia and the exclusion of Ukraine from NATO membership. These proposals, central to Trump’s campaign pledge to end the conflict swiftly, have sparked widespread scepticism among analysts and policymakers.

Key elements of the proposed strategy include freezing current battle lines, halting military aid to Ukraine to pressure it into negotiations, and offering U.S. security guarantees instead of NATO membership. Trump’s team asserts that this approach could compel both sides to engage in talks, though critics question its feasibility and long-term impact.

Proposed Framework and Key Advisers

Several Trump advisers, including retired Army Lieutenant-General Keith Kellogg, Vice President-elect JD Vance, and former intelligence chief Richard Grenell, have put forth differing plans, all of which involve concessions to Moscow. Kellogg’s proposal, co-authored with Fred Fleitz, advocates freezing the front lines and linking U.S. military aid to Ukraine’s willingness to negotiate. The plan also suggests providing security guarantees to Kyiv as a substitute for NATO membership.

Vance, known for opposing military aid to Ukraine during his tenure as a U.S. senator, has proposed creating a heavily fortified demilitarised zone along the current battle lines. Grenell, meanwhile, has called for the establishment of autonomous zones in eastern Ukraine, though details of his plan remain vague.

Trump has yet to convene a central working group to finalise a comprehensive peace plan. Instead, his advisers have shared their ideas in public forums and directly with the president-elect. Ultimately, Trump’s team believes that any agreement would depend on direct negotiations between Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Challenges to Implementation

The proposals face significant obstacles. Zelensky, while open to negotiations to reclaim some occupied territories, remains committed to securing NATO membership for Ukraine—a key part of his “Victory Plan.” European allies and many U.S. lawmakers are also likely to resist any agreement perceived as rewarding Russian aggression.

Putin, on the other hand, appears to have little incentive to engage in negotiations. Analysts suggest that the Russian leader, having secured significant territorial gains, may prefer to wait for further concessions from a Trump administration. Eugene Rumer, a former U.S. intelligence official and Russia expert, noted, “Putin is in no hurry,” adding that Moscow’s demands for a truce include Kyiv abandoning its NATO ambitions and recognising Russia’s control over four partially occupied Ukrainian provinces.

The complexities of the conflict further complicate Trump’s promise to resolve the war within 24 hours of taking office. Critics argue that the proposed plans oversimplify the situation and fail to address the entrenched positions of both sides.

Potential Domestic and International Pushback

Domestically, Trump’s proposals could face resistance from Congress, particularly among his Republican allies who oppose additional military aid to Ukraine. This could undermine the Kellogg plan’s reliance on increased U.S. support to pressure Putin into negotiations.

Internationally, European allies have shown a willingness to enhance their support for Ukraine, aligning with outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden’s continued provision of military assistance. Such commitments could weaken Trump’s leverage in pushing Kyiv to the negotiating table.

Strategic Implications

Analysts have raised concerns about the long-term implications of Trump’s approach. Freezing the current front lines effectively legitimises Russia’s territorial gains, setting a precedent for resolving conflicts through force rather than diplomacy. Additionally, sidelining NATO membership could leave Ukraine vulnerable to future aggression and undermine the alliance’s credibility.

Despite these challenges, Trump remains steadfast in his pledge to prioritise American interests and restore peace. His spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, reiterated that Trump would “do what is necessary to restore peace and rebuild American strength and deterrence on the world stage.”

Image source: NATO.int

Read also:

Is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Really the Right Person to Lead America’s Department of Health and Human Services?