By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Next week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will face mounting pressure from the United States to reach a deal to end the war with Russia. This push for a peaceful settlement comes amidst internal political turmoil within Ukraine, fueled by a corruption scandal and demands for government reshuffles. Simultaneously, the US is sending a special envoy to Moscow and a renewed Ukrainian delegation is in the US for negotiations. Further complicating matters, Zelenskyy is facing pressure to replace key figures within his administration, potentially weakening his political control.
Read the original article here
The Washington Post reports that the Trump administration is gearing up to significantly increase pressure on President Zelenskyy next week, all in an effort to push for a deal to end the war. This news has sparked a lot of frustration, to say the least. It’s hard not to be cynical, especially when the core message seems to be, “Surrender, and we’ll call it a peace deal.” The very idea of a “deal” in this context feels wrong. It’s not a negotiation; it’s a demand for Ukraine to concede territory and effectively legitimize Russia’s aggression.
The focus on pressuring Ukraine is a glaring omission of where the true pressure should be applied: on Russia, the country that initiated the invasion and continues to break agreements. Instead, it seems like the objective is to allow Russia to keep the land it has stolen, which is a devastating prospect for the Ukrainian people. This approach makes it seem like the priorities are misplaced.
One of the most unsettling aspects of this situation is the involvement of Jared Kushner in these talks. His position and role in these discussions raise serious questions about potential conflicts of interest and the overall decision-making process. It is certainly a peculiar turn of events to see the former first son in law involved in decisions that will affect an allies future.
The focus on a “deal” that benefits the invader is simply unacceptable. Any true resolution should involve the complete withdrawal of Russian forces and reparations for the devastation they have caused. The Russians are running out of resources, and this seems like the perfect opportunity to hit them where it hurts.
There is a sense of betrayal here. The idea that a former ally would be asked to abandon its sovereignty, its land, in the name of a “deal,” is deeply disturbing, and it’s a betrayal of the democratic ideals the world should be standing for. This situation also makes it clear how vulnerable allies can be, and how empty promises can be. This can be directly attributed to the Budapest Memorandum, which guaranteed Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is worth asking where the focus on America’s commitment to our allies is.
The conflict of interest is blatant. It is very hard to see a scenario where Trump is not directly benefiting from a deal that could be seen as favorable to Russia. He should not be involved in these discussions at all, and it is crucial that the EU stands firm and refuses to be a part of this mess.
The core issue isn’t just the war itself but the fact that Russia has transformed its economy into a “war economy.” This means that Russia likely cannot stop the war tomorrow, and it seems this is how they want it. Then there are other complications, such as China. There is a sense that Putin may be playing a longer game, knowing that the West will be preoccupied with China in the future.
The pressure exerted on Ukraine, rather than on Russia, is seen by many as complicity with Russia’s war crimes. This would make the USA an accomplice.
It’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that this is all about securing a “win” for Trump, likely with an eye on his legacy. The irony is that this approach is unlikely to achieve the intended results. It is also understood that Zelensky has endured enough and deserves better than to be manipulated by Trump. It’s truly a disgusting proposition.