Daniel Kochis is a senior fellow at the Center on Europe and Eurasia at Hudson Institute.
During his election campaign, U.S. President Donald Trump claimed he’d have the Russia-Ukraine War “settled within 24 hours.” But while he’s since fulfilled many of his campaign promises — from clamping down on illegal border crossings to slashing the federal workforce — a swift settlement to the war has proved elusive.
Now, with Trump’s revised goal of peace within 100 days in the past as well, the U.S. administration has been forced to come to terms with the conflict’s intractability.
Hinting at their frustration, Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that “if it is not possible to end the war in Ukraine, we need to move on.” But it’s not this campaign promise the Trump administration should be abandoning — it’s their “deal-or-bust” stance.
Ending the war on acceptable terms and establishing Trump’s legacy as a peacemaker is still possible. But in order to do so, he must channel his desire for peace into the only strategy that has any hope of bearing fruit: weakening Russian President Vladimir Putin and negotiating from a position of strength.
The Kremlin won’t stop fighting a war it believes itself to be winning — it has to be forced.
Trump seems to recognize this: “It makes me think that maybe [Putin] doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently, through ‘Banking’ or ‘Secondary Sanctions?’” he posted on Truth Social last month.
And despite his occasional disagreements with Kyiv — most famously, the acrimonious exchange between Trump, U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House in March — it’s become clear that Moscow is the obstacle to peace. Russia’s consistent disregard for agreed ceasefires and slow-walking of U.S. peace proposals leave little doubt as to who’s to blame, even for Trump.
Therefore, achieving peace will require the U.S. leader to bring the Kremlin to heel.
There are many ways in which Washington can do this. For one, tightening sanctions against Russia would hamper Putin’s ability to continue fighting effectively.
The Russian military is highly reliant on large sign-on bonuses and death payouts to recruit soldiers and backfill its ranks. So, constricting Moscow’s ability to fund its army — like by clamping down on the shadow fleet of illegal tankers it uses to move crude oil — would force it to make decisions it doesn’t want to. In such a case, Moscow would either have to walk back its plan to expand its active-duty military to 1.5 million troops or begin recruiting more heavily from the wealthier classes of Russian society, which are much closer to the Kremlin power base and pose a greater risk to the regime’s stability.
The U.S. could also take a page out of Europe’s book and help bolster Ukraine’s domestic capacity to produce the arms and capabilities crucial to fending off Russia’s relentless assaults. This would ease Pentagon concerns over depleting U.S. stockpiles. It would also help ensure U.S. industry isn’t left behind as European firms race to build out manufacturing in Ukraine, and learn from their knowledge in areas like drone design and production. This wouldn’t necessitate massive investment either, just enough political signaling to give U.S. industry the confidence to engage fully.
Trump’s 100-day deal may be dead, but the repercussions of how the U.S. responds to its demise will stay with the transatlantic community for decades to come.
The Istanbul negotiations clearly show Putin has zero interest in a lasting settlement in Ukraine. Instead, all signs point to a Kremlin that’s doing everything in its power to sustain its war machine on the killing fields of Ukraine, as well as prep for potential future war against NATO. The more Russia comes away with in Ukraine, the more likely this possibility becomes.
Trump may view this war as that of his predecessor. But the outcome will, for better or for worse, be appended to his time in office. And if he’s willing to accept hard realities about Russia’s leadership and force the Kremlin into concessions, history could still remember Trump as a peacemaker.
The post Trump could still be remembered as a lasting peacemaker appeared first on Politico.
