Trump fucks up again. Ukraine negotiation goes sideways

[ChloeTzang]

Romania's former president calls Trump "butcher from the White House" for weakening Ukraine​

Former Romanian President Traian Băsescu has called US President Donald Trump "the butcher from the White House" and claimed he is systematically undermining Ukraine's defences so that Russia can attack the country unhindered. Băsescu believes that Vladimir Putin and Trump want Ukraine to surrender so that Russia can gain access to Moldova and the EU's eastern flank.

The butcher from the White House! Shamelessly lying, Trump explains to the world that Putin is not an aggressor and that he wants peace – that’s why he halted military and intelligence support to Ukraine. In reality, the ‘Butcher in the White House’ is deliberately weakening Ukraine’s defence so that Putin can launch unprovoked strikes on cities and critical infrastructure day and night. The goal of the Trump-Putin tandem is Ukraine’s capitulation. This opens the door for Russia to Moldova and the EU’s eastern flank." Băsescu added that Romania must provide Ukraine with the resources it needs to enable the country to survive and negotiate an acceptable peace.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/03/9/7502015/

 

[KimAwakened]

C'mon, Donny boy.

Not at all like you to be quiet about anything.

Just what is on those tapes..?

 

[ChloeTzang]

And now Rubio and Musk are antagonizing the Poles....

Rubio and Musk turn on Polish foreign minister in spat over Starlink use in Ukraine: ‘Be quiet small man’​

The Trump administration’s top diplomat joined DOGE chief Elon Musk in picking a fight with Poland’s foreign minister on Sunday as the three squabbled over Musk’s Starlink system and its use in Ukraine. Sunday’s three-way exchange was just the latest example of American foreign relations turning into a blame game as Marco Rubio, the secretary of State, reiterated the White House’s position that Europe was insufficient with its praise and gratitude after three years of US support for Ukraine’s defense.

Poland’s foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, responded to the Tesla and X/Twitter CEO on social media after Musk barked back at a self-identified MAGA fan who rebuked him and Donald Trump for not treating Russia as the aggressor in the conflict. Musk’s tweet highlighted that his Starlink satellite program was crucial to Ukraine’s defense, and in doing so speculated about the consequences of him turning it off.

Sikorski responded, apparently to the concept of Starlink being turned off, writing that Poland’s government was paying $50m a year for it and warning that Poland would seek another provider “if SpaceX proves to be an unreliable” partner. That set off Musk. He responded with an insult, calling Sikorski “small man”, and argued that no other telecom provider could match Starlink’s capabilities. He wrote: “Be quiet, small man. You pay a tiny fraction of the cost. And there is no substitute for Starlink.”

“To be extremely clear, no matter how much I disagree with the Ukraine policy, Starlink will never turn off its terminals. Without Starlink, the Ukrainian lines would collapse, as the Russians can jam all other communications! We would never do such a thing or use it as a bargaining chip,” he wrote.

His claim about the US using such a service as a “bargaining chip” is rather ill-timed, given that the White House ordered American intelligence agencies to cease real-time cooperation with the Ukrainian military within the past week. In response, Russia has renewed a deadly offensive against Ukrainian defensive positions and civilian centers.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/worl...S&cvid=42b11b95f08449beaac147d2495fc224&ei=14

 

[jomar]

And now Rubio and Musk are antagonizing the Poles....

Rubio and Musk turn on Polish foreign minister in spat over Starlink use in Ukraine: ‘Be quiet small man’​

The Trump administration’s top diplomat joined DOGE chief Elon Musk in picking a fight with Poland’s foreign minister on Sunday as the three squabbled over Musk’s Starlink system and its use in Ukraine. Sunday’s three-way exchange was just the latest example of American foreign relations turning into a blame game as Marco Rubio, the secretary of State, reiterated the White House’s position that Europe was insufficient with its praise and gratitude after three years of US support for Ukraine’s defense.

Poland’s foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, responded to the Tesla and X/Twitter CEO on social media after Musk barked back at a self-identified MAGA fan who rebuked him and Donald Trump for not treating Russia as the aggressor in the conflict. Musk’s tweet highlighted that his Starlink satellite program was crucial to Ukraine’s defense, and in doing so speculated about the consequences of him turning it off.

Sikorski responded, apparently to the concept of Starlink being turned off, writing that Poland’s government was paying $50m a year for it and warning that Poland would seek another provider “if SpaceX proves to be an unreliable” partner. That set off Musk. He responded with an insult, calling Sikorski “small man”, and argued that no other telecom provider could match Starlink’s capabilities. He wrote: “Be quiet, small man. You pay a tiny fraction of the cost. And there is no substitute for Starlink.”

“To be extremely clear, no matter how much I disagree with the Ukraine policy, Starlink will never turn off its terminals. Without Starlink, the Ukrainian lines would collapse, as the Russians can jam all other communications! We would never do such a thing or use it as a bargaining chip,” he wrote.

His claim about the US using such a service as a “bargaining chip” is rather ill-timed, given that the White House ordered American intelligence agencies to cease real-time cooperation with the Ukrainian military within the past week. In response, Russia has renewed a deadly offensive against Ukrainian defensive positions and civilian centers.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/worl...S&cvid=42b11b95f08449beaac147d2495fc224&ei=14

Egos and feelings. WTF are these even doing in the equation. The US has man babies in charge who are incapable of setting their shit aside and behaving like rational adults. Although it’s beyond clear that trump is sucking Putin cock, Rubio is sucking trump cock, and Musk is making out like a bandit.

 

[Deleted member 1215945]

View attachment 2510066

 

[Deleted member 1215945]

View attachment 2510069

 

[KimAwakened]

Donny boy, you know, don't you, that your main man's going to use those tapes, come what may sooner or later.

You may as well tell us all what's on them.

Are you hoping you're going to be dead by then? Of course, your main man may grant that wish.

 

[whiskeytangofoxtrot]

Donny boy, you know, don't you, that your main man's going to use those tapes, come what may sooner or later.

You may as well tell us all what's on them.

Are you hoping you're going to be dead by then? Of course, your main man may grant that wish.

Orange Geezus baptism

 

[ChloeTzang]

The lack of interest from the US in Ukraine's territorial sovereignty is telling. Makes it pretty clear what the US position is. They want Ukraine to capitulate, and freeze things in place at the very best - which, sadly, if agreed on, will just lead to a renewal of the war when Putin feels he is strong enough to attack again. It's very obvious Trump wants Ukraine to capitulate to Putin's demands and that he's in Putin's pocket and that all his bleating about death is just bullshit. He's certainly demonstrated that he's willing to sacrifice Ukrainians. Him and Musk bleating about Ukrainian lives lost is just play-acting for the camera. It's a diabolical betrayal, and America will never again be trusted by anybody. Trump is now a full accomplice with Putin in the attempt to conquer and partition Ukraine - reminds me a lot of Poland in 1929 and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. There is no legal or moral basis to any of Putin's claims or grievances against Ukraine.

Ukraine’s best course of action here might be to caveat their responses, and then be uncompromising on all details. The best course might be to not show up at all. Imposing capitulation on Ukraine will not bring peace. What Ukraine needs is more time to build up the Army, and more modern air defense systems, IFV's, ammo, drones and fighter aircraft while they continue to demolish Russia's industry and logistic through 2025. The Russian economy is months away from a complete breakdown, Russian logistics is crumbling and their Army is running down on manpower. Russian terror attacks on civilians have no bearing on the military outcome and in fact are good for Ukraine to use as an influencer. WW2 proved these kind of terror attacks serve no real military purpose. Horrible for the people on the receiving end, but valueless to the outcome of the war.

All Ukraine needs to do here is string the US along, keep haggling over the details and pushing for Russian concessions which will not be forthcoming, and use the time to hammer Russia's economy and kill Russians.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Ukraine’s Ceasefire Proposal Won’t Include Ground Combat, Kyiv Says​

A Ukrainian official said Kyiv is ready to start implementing limited ceasefire, but not for ground combat as it would simply allow Russia to regroup and intensify its assaults on Ukraine. Serhiy Leshchenko, an advisor to the head of Ukraine’s Presidential Office, addressed on television earlier remarks by US President Donald Trump that Kyiv is not ready for peace, saying that Kyiv “[has] a ceasefire plan” and is willing to compromise on areas like the Black Sea, over which Kyiv has an upper hand. “[Trump] says: Is there a ceasefire plan? We answer that we have a ceasefire plan. We propose to cease fire from the sky. We are talking about drones, missiles, ballistics,” Leshchenko said.

“And we also propose to cease fire at sea. We undertake not to attack. This, by the way, is paradoxical. After all, we have the initiative in our hands in the Black Sea. We also propose not to attack the energy sector,” he added. However, Leshchenko ruled out a ceasefire on ground combat as he said Moscow could recuperate its forces and relaunch assaults on Ukrainian positions. “But Ukraine also has something to answer. You want a truce – we are ready. However, not on land, where [Russian leader Vladimir] Putin will be able to take a truce for several months: treat the wounded, recruit infantry in North Korea – and resume this war,” Leshchenko said.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/48623

 

[ll74]

Ukraine’s Ceasefire Proposal Won’t Include Ground Combat, Kyiv Says​

A Ukrainian official said Kyiv is ready to start implementing limited ceasefire, but not for ground combat as it would simply allow Russia to regroup and intensify its assaults on Ukraine. Serhiy Leshchenko, an advisor to the head of Ukraine’s Presidential Office, addressed on television earlier remarks by US President Donald Trump that Kyiv is not ready for peace, saying that Kyiv “[has] a ceasefire plan” and is willing to compromise on areas like the Black Sea, over which Kyiv has an upper hand. “[Trump] says: Is there a ceasefire plan? We answer that we have a ceasefire plan. We propose to cease fire from the sky. We are talking about drones, missiles, ballistics,” Leshchenko said.

“And we also propose to cease fire at sea. We undertake not to attack. This, by the way, is paradoxical. After all, we have the initiative in our hands in the Black Sea. We also propose not to attack the energy sector,” he added. However, Leshchenko ruled out a ceasefire on ground combat as he said Moscow could recuperate its forces and relaunch assaults on Ukrainian positions. “But Ukraine also has something to answer. You want a truce – we are ready. However, not on land, where [Russian leader Vladimir] Putin will be able to take a truce for several months: treat the wounded, recruit infantry in North Korea – and resume this war,” Leshchenko said.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/48623

From my assessment, Ukraine's position isn't relevant

 

[ChloeTzang]

From my assessment, Ukraine's position isn't relevant

Yep. Trump is going to push for a total capitulation on Putin's terms and nothing Ukraine seeks for will be taken any notice of.

Ukraine hopes that talks with U.S. officials in Saudi Arabia will repair ties between Washington and Kyiv following last month's White House spat between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky. The Trump team wants to use Tuesday's meeting with a Ukrainian delegation in Jeddah to see if Ukraine is willing to make concessions to Russia to end the war started by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Reuters reported, citing unnamed American sources.

I suspect the Ukrainian reps will be sady disappointed. Trump has switched sides here. And Russia has no intentions of making ANY concessions. Putin thinks that with Trumps help he can pull this off. Russia is also making threatening noises about boots on the ground security guarantees - which right away are an indication that Russia will simply attack again when they are strong enough, and that anything Trump "negogiates" because "trusts Putin" is pointless. After all, Ukraine trusted America and Clinton in 1994 and where did that go. They trusted the Minsk Agreement as well, and where did that go?

"Russia has repeatedly made it clear that foreign military presence in Ukraine is absolutely unacceptable. Therefore, the idea of deploying Western military contingents in Ukraine under the guise of peacekeepers aims to undermine peace efforts... For Australia, joining the so-called coalition of the willing will bring serious consequences. Once again, we repeat, Western boots on the ground are unacceptable to Russia, and we will not remain passive observers,” the Russian embassy claimed.

Nah, just keep fighting and drone-bomb the Russian Army into oblivion.

https://english.nv.ua/nation/russia...ial-ukraine-peacekeeper-mission-50496666.html

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/article301779744.html

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

After all, Ukraine trusted America and Clinton in 1994 and where did that go.

There are 6 points in memorandum. Russia broke its promise to not invade Ukraine. Which promises have been broken by the US?

 

[ll74]

There are 6 points in memorandum. Russia broke its promise to not invade Ukraine. Which promises have been broken by the US?

Which promises are being broken by changing our posture towards Ukraine?

Many

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Which promises are being broken by changing our posture towards Ukraine?

Many

The question is which promises if any in the 1994 memorandum have been broken by the US?

 

[ll74]

The question is which promises if any in the 1994 memorandum have been broken by the US?

So far, none. But changing posture will result in all of them being broken.

You are being a pedantic fuck while the US is dishonoring our relationship with Ukraine.

Being technically correct is not the matter of discussion worth having except to those who wish to ignore our moral obligations and those who wish to be friends with our adversaries who seek our destruction

 

[MajorRewrite]

There are 6 points in memorandum. Russia broke its promise to not invade Ukraine. Which promises have been broken by the US?

What promise could possibly be more important than to not invade?

How far are you willing to twist yourself into a pretzel in service of Trump’s capitulation to Putin?

 

[ChloeTzang]

(Actually) Russia is at it's Most Fragile, Right Now​

By Benjamin Cook​

The European military logistics and capability required to penetrate Russian lines and send them into chaos isn’t big. It’s the requirement for ‘leadership’ - which is immense. Remember, the EU (1993) is a post-Soviet (1991) organization built to foster compromise, not leadership and determination.

Russia's position in its ongoing war in Ukraine exhibits significant fragility across multiple critical dimensions, including severe military setbacks, deepening economic pressures, worsening demographic crisis, and unsustainable equipment losses. Despite evidence of Russian resilience—such as limited economic adaptation and persistent territorial control—these strengths are increasingly overshadowed by systemic vulnerabilities. A modestly sized but well-organized military coalition could exploit Russia's thinly stretched lines, triggering a prolonged military crisis. Recent history has repeatedly shown Russia's weaknesses in responding swiftly and effectively to unexpected offensives or deep penetrations of its defensive lines.

I. Military Setbacks

● Stalled Advances: Recent reports indicate Russian military progress has dramatically slowed. In early 2025, Russian forces required nearly six days to conquer an area equivalent to Manhattan, a significant deceleration due to increased casualties, recruitment challenges, and logistical issues. (The Times, 2025) Gen Ben Hodges has pointed out many times that in March of last year Russia was only 60 miles outside of Pokrovsk. A year later they are not inside Pokrovsk.
● Equipment and Manpower Constraints: Analysts emphasize Russia’s incremental gains have come at immense costs, highlighting severe constraints in equipment and personnel. (The Times, 2025)
● Reliance on Civilian Vehicles: Due to substantial losses of military hardware—over 20,000 units since February 2022—Russian troops increasingly resort to civilian vehicles on the front lines, underscoring critical shortages. (The Insider, 2024) There are areas of the zero-line where all of the Russian military vehicles around are burned and destroyed. The only operational vehicles are civilian.
● Equipment Churn vs. Production: Russia struggles significantly to replenish military hardware, losing equipment faster than it can be repaired or manufactured. For example, annual production of infantry fighting vehicles (around 200 units per year) and limited artillery production facilities starkly contrast against thousands lost on the battlefield. (Institute for the Study of War, 2024)

II. Economic Strains

● Impact of High Interest Rates: Russia's central bank maintains a high benchmark interest rate of 21% to combat inflation. This strategy, while stabilizing the currency, has increased borrowing costs, spurring a 20% rise in corporate bankruptcies and exacerbating liquidity shortages across multiple sectors. (The Moscow Times, 2024; Reuters, 2025)
● Decline in Entrepreneurship: The ongoing war and economic downturn have resulted in Russia losing approximately 1.4 million small and medium enterprises (42%) over five years. This reduction significantly weakens long-term economic prospects. (Arxiv, 2023)

III. Demographic Crisis

● Population Decline Accelerated by War: Russia’s demographic issues, characterized by declining birth rates and an aging population, have sharply worsened due to heavy military casualties. Estimates suggest Russia may lose up to 1.8 million troops to achieve its strategic goals in Ukraine, disproportionately affecting the working-age male population. (Wikipedia, 2024)
● Impact on Future Generations: The ongoing conflict, casualties, and resulting economic uncertainties further depress birth rates, intensify emigration, and threaten long-term economic stability.

IV. Internal Dissent and Social Stability

● Emergence of Opposition Movements: Internal dissent grows as opposition groups, such as the Freedom of Russia Legion led by Maximilian Andronnikov, actively seek regime change. These groups amplify internal tensions and instability. (The Sun, 2024) Not to mention growing instances of mutiny and desertion at the company level.
● Propaganda and Public Sentiment: The introduction of new school textbooks justifying the invasion reflects government anxiety about internal opposition and reveals ongoing concerns over public loyalty and national morale. (Reuters, 2025)

V. Counterarguments Highlighting Russia's Resilience

● Economic Adaptability: Despite sanctions, Russia’s economy has demonstrated some resilience, largely through trade relations and support from non-Western countries, partially mitigating anticipated economic collapse. (Financial Times, 2025)
● Territorial Control: Russia maintains significant territorial holdings in Ukraine, providing strategic leverage for potential future negotiations and long-term conflict management. (The Times, 2025)
● Military Revitalization Efforts: Russia’s ongoing military reconstitution aims to rebuild capabilities substantially by 2030, reflecting a long-term strategy for continued conflict or deterrence. (Financial Times, 2025)

Recap and Analysis:

Even considering Russia's points of resilience, its overall strategic position remains profoundly fragile. A well-coordinated, modest-sized military coalition could effectively penetrate Russian defenses, causing long-term disruptions to its military operations. Europe must urgently confront this reality and significantly upgrade its defensive/offensive capabilities. Yet, European leadership has consistently failed to act decisively, instead relying on American security assurances. (This is not a peacekeeping force I am suggesting. This is a pacification force. Make no mistake, Europeans would be killing Russians in Ukraine.)

While JD Vance’s speech in Munich may have lacked "diplomatic nuance", one of his core arguments holds truth: Europe's strategic vulnerability stems significantly from self-inflicted policy choices. Germany's abandonment of nuclear energy in favor of geopolitically risky and environmentally dirtier energy sources exemplifies how social ideologies have severely compromised Europe's strategic security. Such policies have inadvertently signaled to Russia clear vulnerabilities—effectively serving as a "green light" for aggression. Combined with Europe's chronic underinvestment in defense, these policy missteps have made the continent dangerously dependent and vulnerable. (The entire EU structure is a problem.)

In conclusion, Russia’s position, although superficially resilient in certain respects, is fundamentally fragile. Europe's continued inaction exacerbates these vulnerabilities. It is imperative that Europe demonstrates the leadership and courage required to assume responsibility for its own defense and to mitigate ongoing threats from Russia. It's time for Europe to grow up. Defend itself.

No matter what you think of Trump, if Europe is motivated to spend 3% of GDP on defense and comes to Ukraine's DIRECT aid, his ridiculous words and actions will have a positive outcome. The icing on the cake is that he is counting on Europe to fail. Make him wrong.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

So far, none. But changing posture will result in all of them being broken.

You are being a pedantic fuck while the US is dishonoring our relationship with Ukraine.

Being technically correct is not the matter of discussion worth having except to those who wish to ignore our moral obligations and those who wish to be friends with our adversaries who seek our destruction

Chloe implied that the US broke a promise made in 1994. I’ve seen others make the same claim. If you don’t like the question, tough shit.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

What promise could possibly be more important than to not invade?

How far are you willing to twist yourself into a pretzel in service of Trump’s capitulation to Putin?

The US has not invaded Ukraine. Russia did. Russia broke its promise. The US did not. People shouldn’t falsely claim the US broke a promise in the 1994 memorandum.

 

[ll74]

Chloe implied that the US broke a promise made in 1994. I’ve seen others make the same claim. If you don’t like the question, tough shit.

Our change in posture has effectively broken our promise. You're ok with that.

You don't need to try to make a pedantic argument to state that you are fine with our posture change.....own it.

Simple state that you are fine with our realignment that abandons our support of Ukraine and supports Russian positions.

 

[Deleted member 1215945]

Nah. I blame Trump for Trump. He's scum. To quote, "disgusting, a liar, with no conscience."

I was utterly and completely wrong about him. His decisions have directly led to the unnecessary deaths of hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers in the last couple of days, not to mention civilians targeted in terror attacks.

He's downright evil.

View attachment 2508815

He is here now, at this time, to do the Devil’s work. He is everything I attempt to highlight in Memes. Discussion with MAGAts is useless. They’re brain dead when it comes to recognizing the MAGAt NAZI’s true intentions and goals. World domination at any and all costs. I’m surprised that no one caught on when the MAGAt said in paraphrase that the U.S. will be completely different in four years. That was not a comment but an ominous warning.

View attachment 2510307

Disgraceful. Resist.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Trump won’t restart military aid to Ukraine—and no peace talks will change that​

When Trump cut off intelligence sharing and weapons deliveries to Ukraine, administration officials insisted it was leverage for peace negotiations. The evidence tells a different story.

If one ignores the obvious moral fallacy of exerting pressure on the victim of an unjust and unprovoked war of aggression and not the aggressor, the US has several tools available. Trump could employ diplomatic, economic, and military means to get its message across. Focusing on the latter, the US could have targeted broader military capabilities like its ability to conduct long-range strikes, offensive operations, defensive operations, command and control, sustainability, and more. The Trump administration could have chosen a “surgical” approach, targeting individual weapon systems, including F16, ATACMS, HIMARS, MLRS, artillery, air defense, MANPADS, armored fighting vehicles, anti-tank weapons, mine clearance systems, intelligence, early warning, and much more. Stopping only one of them would have left room to increase the pressure on Ukraine—the victim—for alleged “lack of compliance.”

The Trump administration could have chosen a gradual approach. Instead, it cut off all support altogether.

Trump chose “overwhelming force” against a former partner that has contributed with military support to most of the US’ recent military operations. A partner that gave up its nuclear arsenal based on a US promise to support its sovereignty and independence. A country that has protected NATO members when the Alliance – under US leadership – was unable to respond. The US is using brute force against a country that has improved US security by reducing the military power of Russia. A country that wants a just and lasting peace more than anyone else. The Trump administration has intentionally undermined Ukraine’s ability to defend its cities and stop Russia’s attempt to defeat and subjugate the country.

In contrast, Putin and other Kremlin officials have explicitly rejected making any concessions in future peace negotiations or accepting any US, European, or Ukrainian peace proposals. On 6 March, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs rejected the possibility of a negotiated ceasefire. There is no evidence that the US is pressuring Putin to compromise, in contrast to the demands placed on Zelenskyy. Trump’s recent message that he is “strongly considering large-scale sanctions and tariffs on Russia until a ceasefire and peace deal with Ukraine is reached” is hollow, given the level of trade between the two countries. While President Zelenskyy has repeatedly signaled Ukraine’s willingness to negotiate and make concessions, the Trump administration claims that Ukraine – not Russia – does not want peace and has “asked the Ukrainians not to sabotage it.”

Trump’s approach to this war involves a broader strategy. As US Special Representative for Ukraine and Russia Keith Kellogg said, the US needs to “reset relations with Russia” to ensure US national interests. To accept a reset, Putin demands Ukraine.

This is reflected in Trump’s alignment with Putin’s false claims, disinformation, and de,ands:

• Responsibility for the war. Putin has persistently tried to shift the blame for the full-scale war from Russia to Ukraine. Trump agrees.
• “Proxy War”. Putin has falsely argued that Russia is exposed to a Western proxy war (indirectly implying that Ukraine is not a party to the resolution of the war). Trump has changed the US’s former stand and agrees.
• Blocking Peace. Putin falsely claims Ukraine is blocking a peaceful resolution of the war. Trump agrees.
• Good faith negotiations. Putin says Ukraine is not interested in “good faith negotiations”. Trump agrees.
• Concessions. In conflict with international law, Putin demands that Ukraine must cede Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, the Kherson regions, and Crimea to Russia. Trump agrees.
• NATO membership. Putin demands that Ukraine abandon its goal to join NATO. Trump agrees.
• “Denazification”. Putin demands that Ukraine agree to “denazification” (“regime” change). Trump agrees.
• Sanctions. Putin demands the removal of all Western sanctions against Russia. Trump agrees.
• European security and stability. Putin has categorically excluded European involvement in the negotiations. Trump agrees in principle.
• Demilitarization. Putin demands that Ukraine demilitarize. Trump seems to agree. On 3 March, Trump suspended all US military aid delivery to Ukraine. He has also ordered a stop in intelligence sharing, allegedly to pressure Zelenskyy to make concessions, such as ceding territory to Russia. Trump also wants Zelenskyy to take steps toward elections in Ukraine and possibly step down as president. Seen in context with the US’s reset in the relationship with Russia, however, the halt in support serves a broader strategy.

In his “America First, Russia, and Ukraine” report, Kellogg proposed ending Russia’s diplomatic isolation. (Check) He proposed a ceasefire and that peace negotiations facilitated through a mix of incentives and pressure (Check). Russia would be offered to keep the occupied territories and lift sanctions (Check). In addition, Ukrainian NATO membership would be postponed (Check). Russian failure to negotiate would trigger increased US military support for Ukraine. The US would cut off military aid if Ukraine refused to participate in peace talks (Check).

Trump’s envoy, Keith Kellogg, has admitted that the peace plan discussed in Istanbul in March 2022 is “a starting point” for Trump’s vision for peace.

Putin demands – and Trump’s so-called “peace plan” – are tantamount to a Ukrainian capitulation. This would be disastrous for both Ukraine and its European allies.

What happens when Ukraine says no​

As Politico reported on 21 February, Trump has decided it was time to restore the relationship between the “US president and Putin, a leader subject to US and EU sanctions and an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for crimes against humanity and genocide.” Since his inauguration, President Trump has aligned with Putin 29 times, focusing on closer ties with the Kremlin.

To restart aid and intel to Ukraine, Trump demands Ukrainian concessions. He also wants Zelensky to make some movement toward elections and possibly stepping down as his country’s leader. According to Politico, Trump’s team is even holding secret talks with Zelenskyy’s political opponents, meddling in Ukraine’s democratic processes. Most importantly, Trump will demand that Ukraine accept a so-called “peace plan” based on Putin’s demands.

During the Saudi talks on 11 March, Ukraine will most likely be offered a choice of capitulation (dressed as a “peace plan”) or to continue fighting without US aid.

Zelenskyy will, however, have no other option than to deny Trump’s and Putin’s demands, blocking the former’s visions for “peace” and the latter’s calls for capitulation.
Ukraine will reject Trump’s so-called peace plan because it supports Russia’s aim to subjugate Ukraine. A Ukrainian refusal, however, will block Trump’s ambitions of a reset with Russia. His fury will have no limits. There is no reason to believe that the fallout from the meeting will be less dramatic than the disastrous meeting in Washington on 28 February.

The meeting between the US and Ukraine in Saudi Arabia might be pivotal for US-Ukraine-Europe relations.

The US stop in defense aid and intelligence sharing is unlikely to end anytime soon. I desperately hope I am mistaken.

https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/03...-ukraine-and-no-peace-talks-will-change-that/

 

[ChloeTzang]

Three Years Of Total War In Ukraine: A Saga Of American Betrayal

America's true Ukraine policy under both Biden and Trump is cruelly similar: betrayal, appeasement, and surrender.​

The all-out phase of the Ukraine War is now three years old, and it’s more than fair to say that few dreamed a conflict of this intensity could ever last this long. Had the USA proven to be a reliable guarantor of global security, Putin would never have dared invade Ukraine at all - in 2022, or 2014.

And now, Trump actively setting the pillars of American security on fire is actually a service to real democracies around the world. There is no going back now, at home or abroad. The Biden Administration’s repeated betrayals of Ukraine merely set the stage for Trump’s antics today, just as Trump’s idiotic deal with the Taliban enabled Biden to abandon Kabul. In a strange way, American domestic politics and Ukraine’s fight for survival are now tightly bound. The entire world stands at a fateful crossroads: either the unraveling accelerates, plunging everyone into chaos, or a coalition organized around simple universal principles emerges as a new power center. American willingness to bargain away Ukraine’s sovereignty and apparent desire to incorporate new territories into the federation suggest that Trump would sell parts of the USA to Moscow or Beijing if he felt it was in his personal interest. This neo-feudalism, and it’s got to be squashed for the good of everyone - even most of Trump’s own supporters.

Sadly, there’s no way to end the war in Ukraine without hard guarantees for Ukraine’s security. There’s just no getting around the hard reality that Putin’s regime is bound to expand its war however it can in order to evade the mounting consequences of its disastrous course. Putin and his fellow travelers are forced to portray any and all gains since 2014 as a grand victory against NATO, but to justify the immense costs and repeated humiliations of the past three years, only total triumph will now do. Simply put: if Moscow is not stopped, probably by 2026, the risk of a general war in Europe merging with an attempt by Beijing to take over Taiwan becomes extreme. Down that road lies tragedy for everyone on the planet.

Unfortunately, American leaders and too many of their partisan followers don’t live in the same world as the rest of us. Belief trumps evidence, because the partisan incentives don’t value anything other than keeping the show going. It’s a gigantic pyramid scheme in the classic American fashion, snake oil and magic tonics peddled to people whose teachers didn’t arm them properly to cope with the torrent of insanity the modern world produces. Barring Europe rapdly developing the will and resources to counterbalance the collapse of Postwar America, the coming years will be ugly in ways that most Americans are in no way prepared to handle. Europeans are a step ahead, because they’ve got a better grasp of their own history and found their world plunged into madness sooner.

As Trump shreds the last vestiges of the Postwar Order, it’s worth recounting the core reason why the Ukraine War was not over a long time ago. Simply put: American leaders have consistently betrayed their obligations to Ukraine. A reckoning will come, and it will be most deserved. Trump’s Ukraine policy, for all the thunder and fury of the past couple weeks, is only a more honest continuation of Biden’s. Right now, his fellow Democrats are ducking for cover and rubbing their hands in glee at the thought of being able to simply walk back into power without having to develop an effective new national brand after Trump totally discredits himself and his party in the eyes of a majority of Americans. They never cared about Ukraine or the American people. I don’t think this will turn out the way they expect. What has lately?

The failure to properly back Ukraine has shattered all American pretensions to global leadership forever. The Ukraine War simply would not have been possible had the United States ever applied the same standards used to justify organizing an international coalition to push Saddam Hussein’s Iraq out of Kuwait. Then, naked aggression was appropriately met with raw force in a bid to preserve the Postwar Order. Had Iraq and it’s dense stocks of Soviet gear not been smashed, the end of the Cold War would probably have played out very differently. But knowing that they couldn’t win a war against NATO in a bid to save their faltering empire, Soviet leaders didn’t even try. What’s more, the US went to war despite Saddam Hussein’s arsenal of chemical weapons and the missiles needed to rain warheads down on Allied forces. Expected casualties ran into the tens of thousands, but the USA went to war anyway. Though the Soviet Union still existed, it didn’t lift a finger to protect its client or prevent a US-led coalition from asserting total military dominance in the Middle East.

Ukraine was owed the same consideration when Putin invaded. Unlike Kuwait, a tiny oil-rich monarchy created by the British that wasn’t exactly known for respecting human rights, Ukraine voluntarily surrendered its nuclear arsenal in the early 1990s instead of troubling the world with the danger of a rogue actor selling nukes on the black market. This was done out of a sense that the USA would always intervene to prevent an armed invasion by the regime in Moscow. After all, what leader in D.C. would ever be stupid enough to let Moscow rebuild its empire unopposed? Competent hard power politics isn’t done that way. It’s like telling a neighbor that you’re totally fine with them taking over a workshop on your property without any compensation or even conditions. You don’t have to be a Kissinger or a Bismarck to comprehend this. Now Ukraine is in the position of being told to give up their living room, too, for the sake of peace, without any guarantee the kitchen is next - more likely, the whole house. What. The. Actual. Hell?

Ukraine has been betrayed over and over by America over the course of a generation. It’s such pathetic joke that Muscovites pretend they’re up against the full might of NATO in Ukraine - please! The only reason that the orcs still have ships afloat anywhere in the world is that American leaders are rank cowards willing to accept Putin’s tiresome bluffs about going nuclear. Putin was a convenient foil for decades. They thought he was contained, would always play the game according to their script. They were wrong. The first grave American betrayal of Ukraine came courtesy of Barack Obama in 2014, when Putin seized Crimea. Then, as the USA was recovering from the failed occupation of Iraq and the 2008 financial crisis, the choice was made to tolerate Putin’s open aggression against Ukraine.

Soon after, orchestrated uprisings by a small number of sympathizers reinforced by Moscow’s agents overthrew elected city governments in Ukraine’s south and east, plunging that part of the country into a proxy war by 2015. Most of these uprisings failed, knocked out by local citizens rising up in protest. But in the border areas of Donetsk and Luhansk a group managed to consolidate a small separatist region with Moscow’s semi-covert support. As Ukraine’s almost non-existent army mobilized however it could to restore government control, it managed to push the separatists back towards the international border. That was when Putin began to dispatch “volunteers” with heavy military equipment to join them, shooting down an airliner full of civilians with a surface to air missile system. Ukrainian forces were unprepared for an onslaught of this size and slowly driven back. Heroic stands were made, and daring raids by armored forces deep behind enemy lines - Syrskyi was involved in one - allowed most of the encircled Ukrainians to evacuate, though at a high cost. Moscow’s troops liked to reach local agreements to allow a Ukrainian troop withdrawal then promptly open fire when it began. Slowly the pre-2022 line of contact firmed up, a series of broader ceasefire agreements reached and soon broken, Ukrainian troops fighting bloody skirmishes with Moscow-backed separatists, sometimes professional russian regulars officially on vacation.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Part II

The failure to properly intervene during the intensified invasion or help enforce a ceasefire by deploying forces to Ukraine represents a second great betrayal by the Obama Administration. At least this much can be said for Trump’s first term: he attempted to blackmail Zelensky for political gain, just as he’s doing with the mineral access agreement Kyiv and D.C. are negotiating, but Trump also ultimately gave Ukraine the first modern small arms the U.S. deigned to provide. Yet the most serious and consequential betrayal by far was the next.

When Putin began building up a massive force on Ukraine’s borders in early 2021, Biden’s response was… to reward Putin with a one-on-one summit. That fall, when it became obvious that Putin planned to attack Ukraine on some scale, instead of even threatening to send troops the Biden Administration unilaterally ruled out any support that carried even a theoretical risk of escalation. Terrified of having NATO Article 5 triggered on his watch, instead of organizing a coalition to deter Putin’s assault Biden instead had the CIA and allied media insist for weeks that Ukraine was doomed - the implication being why bother. Even sanctions would only be applied after the fighting began - another signal of American intent.

For the United States of America to decide that any effort to physically defend Ukraine on any level was to step away from any rightful claim to global leadership forever. A country with less than a tenth of America’s annual military budget was allowed to bluff the entire US-led NATO alliance into allowing Putin’s airborne troops to land at Hostomel, a move even a modicum of air and land power could have rendered totally impossible. Would Putin have tried to take all of Ukraine had a single brigade from 82nd Airborne or regiment of Marines been on the ground in Kyiv in February of 2022? No. Even then it was clear that he couldn’t possibly take that risk. Ukraine was, simply put, supposed to fall, its brave warriors reduced to fighting a guerilla struggle backed by the CIA. Afghanistan on a grand scale.

American leaders can’t conceive of a world where everyone doesn’t jump when they shout. From the moment Zelensky demanded ammo instead of a ride, he has been an obstacle to whoever is running D.C. His raw courage utterly shames America’s leaders, and they know it. Their envy of him has always been palpable. Small wonder Zelensky is constantly chided for not showing enough gratitude for the mere fraction of the annual Pentagon budget that Ukraine has received so far from the USA. These people don’t like it when material reality steps on their postmodern illusions. Biden’s slow drip feed of vital military aid after 2022 counts as yet another gross betrayal, America hoarding kit that Ukrainian troops badly needed to maximize their survival odds. Nearly fifty thousand Ukrainian soldiers have perished, and Zelensky recently revealed that nearly as many more are missing, most either captured or their bodies not recovered, with some having deserted. This nebulous missing category will be the source of the high end casualty estimates constantly made by the American press. Taking these at face value, the numbers suggest that 10% of Ukraine’s defenders have been lost, as many maimed. That’s almost certainly a pessimistic estimate, but the pain is palpable regardless. Despite that, and the self-destructive stupidity of Team Trump, Ukraine isn’t anywhere near giving up, not even if American aid were suddenly cut off. Despite the constant American talk about how much territory Ukraine is losing, what Ukraine recaptured in 2022 alone still dwarfs all of Moscow’s gains since.

Yet another great American betrayal of Ukraine was the six-month total interruption of aid in 2023 and 2024 - and both parties bear responsibility for that mess, as the Democrats tried to lump Ukraine Aid in with stuff they knew plenty of Republicans would balk at voting for in an election year. Classic ploy. Hoping to score political points right up until his humiliating exit from the race in 2024, it served Biden’s interest to keep Ukraine on a leash, its future dependent on the largess of the Democratic Party. As with everything else Biden attempted, this failed to achieve anything more than an own goal.

Now here we are in 2025, and Trump has apparently decided to carry on the Democratic Party’s tradition of betrayal, parroting Putin’s propaganda in a way that makes a lasting peace all but impossible. Trump has now claimed that Ukraine started the war, lost millions of soldiers, and is ruled by a despised dictator. All completely untrue, not that this matters to his feelings-based mentality. Better not penetrate Trump’s incredibly thin skin, or else he’ll say mean things and threaten worse. I wonder if he knows that anyone who wants to assassinate him with a wire-controlled drone probably can?

Full stop: Ukraine will suffer greatly without US aid, likely unable to mount a decisive counteroffensive this year. But the fighting will continue even if Trump and Putin ink some new Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the USA playing the role of the USSR this time around. That went swimmingly for Stalin, as any student of history will recall (sarcasm alert). Thousands of drones will continue to strike deep into each side’s territory while ground troops test the front. No ceasefire in Ukraine will hold, never mind a peace deal, that doesn’t involve enough firepower on the frontier to defeat the orcs. Barring that, Ukraine may as well continue fighting despite the horrific cost to prevent Moscow from catching its breath and rebuilding its battered forces. Better to hang on and wait for Europe to mobilize.

Trump faces the same stark choice no matter how long he keeps putting off the moment of decision: surrender to Putin, and as a consequence watch America’s global power evaporate, or back Ukraine fully, accepting the uncertain consequences of Moscow’s inevitable collapse.

What's coming out of Trump’s mouth right now is part of the way he negotiates. He thinks that if you hit every point of leverage at once the other side will be bulldozed into accepting his terms. But what usually happens instead is that Trump hypes a deal to the point that, to save face when it is about to fall apart, he backs off from the most ridiculous demands then declares total victory. You beat him not by playing his game, but holding absolutely firm to your position - which is what Putin is doing. Trump is loudest when he’s weakest.

Trump may yet radically alter course on Ukraine, and that could even be the plan. Boosts the entertainment factor to have lots of dramatic turns hinging on some random pretext. He’s attacking Zelensky a lot right now, but in May he could well be declaring that Putin is a nasty liar who has to be put in his place. Not that the USA would lift a finger to accomplish this, but at least Europe should still be allowed to buy stuff for Ukraine from US stocks no matter what happens. And once the EU has juiced its economy with a big spending program, the rubber will hit the road in a big way. Probably by next year.

Knowing that, Ukraine might still be able to mount a major counteroffensive this summer. When you’re in a fight for your life, reliability matters more than promises. That aside, there is no option for the world’s democracies but to develop institutions that can cope with the collapse of the USA. And that has to happen fast. The sooner the better, because the fighting remains tough on the front line - and anywhere Ukrainian air defenses fail to stop an inbound missile or drone. Fortunately for those of us who would prefer not to live in a world torn apart by egomaniacs squabbling over resources, Ukraine continues to fight like it has a plan. A lot is surely happening behind the scenes that the majority of the media remains oblivious to.