Trumps Friedensabkommen ist schrecklich. Die Ukraine sollte es immer noch akzeptieren

The deal is a terrible one, at odds with both international law and basic decency. But it may yet prove impossible for Ukraine or its other western allies to improve the terms as long as Trump remains in the White House. For all their courage, Ukrainians cannot afford to fight for another three years and nine months without America’s backing.

There are of course grounds to worry that, if accepted, this deal will only embolden Vladimir Putin, just as the West’s acquiescence to Russian gains following his 2008 invasion of Georgia and his 2014 seizure of Crimea encouraged him to take the biggest gamble of his rule and mount a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

These are arguments against the current peace terms that it is for America and its European partners to consider. But Ukraine, locked in an existential struggle for survival, does not have the luxury of worrying about other’s countries’ fates.

The Trump administration has so far seemed determined to wash its hands of the whole situation if Kyiv rejects this latest version of the deal. A reported counter-proposal in which the US would provide firm security guarantees for Ukraine seems a non-starter.

Europeans and other allies could try and fill some of the gaps. However, they cannot make up the entire shortfall, especially in key areas such as long-range air defence. They could try and buy what they cannot produce, such as Patriot surface-to-air missiles, but in this case they would find themselves in a queue behind other customers who are higher on Washington’s priority list, such as Israel. Ukraine needs them now.

A British officer working with the Ukrainians was downbeat. “We’re not talking about a Ukrainian collapse,” he said. “But we are likely to see Russia able to make faster, cheaper gains.” In other words, if Ukraine fights on , there is every reason to believe that at some point in the future its leaders will eventually find themselves forced to swallow even harsher terms.

I disagree. The first rule for any sane person is that you don’t negotiate with unreliable, dishonest people unless you have the power to enforce the terms. Ukraine can’t enforce the terms against Russia or the USA.

So there is literally no benefit at all, not even the perceived benefit of the fighting stopping, because as soon as it benefits Russia, it’ll start again. They may as well keep going and hope Russia collapses first. It just might, too. We can’t see exactly what’s going on inside, but the eagerness in Russia for this peace deal is all the reason for Ukraine to not accept it.

Using economic coercion and calling it a „deal“.

It is pretty painful watching Mark Galeotti twist himself into knots trying to put lipstick on this pig.

He actually says „This deal does not include constraints on Ukraine’s capacity to defend itself“, *after* he has acknowledged that it would bar NATO membership for Ukraine and that Russia is demanding limitations on the Ukrainian armed forces.

He further says „There are no restrictions on other military alliances or even the presence of foreign troops on its soil“, and so makes convenient and self serving assumptions about a deal that has not even been negotiated yet.

He continues, apparently in all seriousness, with…

> Potential European Union membership offers Ukraine the prospect not just of greater prosperity but also security, as the Treaty of Europe commits all members to mutual defence

…apparently forgetting that the EU is not a military alliance, and aspirational language Eurocrats inserted into a treaty when they assumed there was never going to be another war in Europe is likely to be completely worthless if the moment ever comes where members are called upon to honour that commitment.

He acknowledges Ukraine won’t get any security guarantees in exchange for agreeing to a deal, while adding hopefully that „that does not preclude them from being provided separately“ – though he is ominously mum on the key question of who is going to provide them.

Finally, he suggests Vladimir Putin is actually going to be ok with the seizure of Russian assets as reparations, a neat bit of wishful thinking that is he is likely to be brutally disbursened of the moment real negotiations actually begin.

In short, if you look at a potential peace deal from just the right angle, and squint hard enough, and tell yourself enough lies, and indulge in enough self serving assumptions about what terms the deal will actually include, you could almost just about convince yourself this is something less than a complete sellout of the West’s principles and Ukraine’s interests.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, Professor.