Editor’s note: The opinions expressed here are those of the authors. View more opinion on ScoonTV
By Todd Davis
Alaska and Washington. Two meetings between President Trump and the opposing sides of the Russia-Ukraine War over four days confirmed what most already knew: peace will not come easily. Trump has tried to position himself as a mediator while America remains an active participant in the war. The danger is not just that peace may be elusive, but that peace itself may be more dangerous than war. If America agrees to underwrite Ukraine’s future security, it risks guaranteeing a collision course with Russia for a country most Americans do not care about.
To understand why peace is so difficult, we have to examine the motivations of the primary actors. Trump, Ukraine, Russia, and Europe. Each wants something different. Every party in the conflict has its reasons for pursuing either peace or continued war. These motivations shape the negotiations and reveal why any settlement could draw America deeper into commitments it cannot escape.
Trump’s Calculus
Trump’s motivation is clear: he wants to end the war and claim the Nobel Peace Prize as proof of his statesmanship. It also allows him to free himself from the conflict he blames on Joe Biden and to appease a base that has no appetite for Ukraine. Most Americans, especially his MAGA supporters, want nothing to do with the war. They don’t want to fight in it, fund it, or even hear about it.
But here lies the paradox. In pursuing peace, Trump may be forced into the very commitments his supporters reject. Ukraine will not accept a settlement without security guarantees, and Trump could find himself pledging future American protection as the price of peace. That would be NATO without the name, an arrangement that ties America to Ukraine’s survival and risks a renewed confrontation with Russia under a future president eager to enforce those promises. For Trump, the short-term political win could become America’s long-term entanglement.
Russian Degrees of Victory
Militarily, Russia is expected to emerge victorious in the war. The original goals of the Special Military Operation have been fulfilled. How peace is made will determine the extent of the Russian victory. An obtuse Europe flatly refuses to accept any form of Russian win. Ukraine has yet to move off its peace demands that exist in a different reality. This leaves Russia in a position where it either must continue the war and conquer more of Ukraine or find some accord with Trump in a negotiated settlement.
Vladimir Putin has offered Istanbul Plus as his peace plan for over a year now. This is an expansion of Novorossiya encompassing Donetsk and Luhansk, the original breakaway Republics from Ukraine, plus Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, which were later partially taken through conquest. Russia has annexed all four regions following a referendum by voters.
A key component of Russian demands requires Ukraine to hand over major cities like Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, which Russia does not hold. That won’t happen until Kiev acknowledges defeat. And based on what we’ve seen in the peace process, this is something neither Ukraine nor Europe will accept without force.
Novorossiya represents the minimum terms Russia will accept to justify the war, something of a pyrrhic victory considering Russian losses sustained. And while losses haven’t been anywhere near the one million Ukraine is fond of claiming, even a more realistic 120,000 isn’t insignificant.
A Russian major victory would mean leaving Ukraine landlocked through the annexation of Odessa, considered by many within the Federation to be a “Russian city,” and/or taking Kharkov, which would add a much-needed buffer zone between Russia and whatever is left of Ukraine. Achieving this would likely take years. However, this would be on the table if peace can’t be reached.
Without reaching the Dnieper and forcing a regime change in Kiev, Russia is looking at a turbulent geopolitical situation following a peace agreement. Especially if the key Russian demand, no NATO membership, isn’t enforced. A militarily viable Ukraine post-war would set up a Franco-Prussian situation that existed between France and soon-to-be Germany in the 1870s and stretched out into the Second World War. Those two nations would fight three wars with each other. If we compare Russia’s first invasion and the seizure of Crimea to the Franco-Prussian War, and the current war to the First World War, then an inability to reach a lasting peace will likely lead to something resembling the Second World War when Ukraine and Russia go at it again. That would spiral out of the region and end up being World War III.
Europe’s New Hot/Cold War
Europe wants the war to continue. Having severed its economies from Russian energy at great cost, and recently entering into a trade deal with President Trump that is highly advantageous to the United States, Europe is locked into a single-minded vision; Russian victory cannot be accepted nor validated.
To pull this off, Europe needs Ukraine to keep fighting Russia and the United States to keep funding it. Despite its bold talk, no country in European NATO wants to fight Russia on the battlefield. European arms production is, well, pathetic, so the only way to keep weapons going into Ukraine is to keep America engaged.
An even greater fear among the European leaders is that the United States will pivot away from Europe and focus on PanAsia, a long-term strategic shift in American geopolitics that has bipartisan support among Neocons and Neoliberals. Europe is desperate to stave off this future.
In order to accomplish this, Europe has begun creating variations of getting Ukraine into NATO. Realizing that voting them in right now isn’t going to happen, Europe has repackaged the idea into “security guarantees” for Ukraine that would be enforced with European troops in the country, supported by American intelligence, logistical (read monetary) support, and likely American air cover. Russia has said it won’t accept anything resembling this, and indeed, this is one of the primary reasons for the war; Russia, understandably, doesn’t want a steroid-sized NATO force on its border.
Europe’s primary goal is to keep Ukraine fighting and the US involved. All its actions will revolve around those two objectives. It’s hard to see how peace can be made while this state of mind exists.
Ukraine Won’t Quit
Not all Russians are Ukrainians, but all Ukrainians are Russians. Like Russians before them in other wars, the Ukrainians won’t quit. That isn’t to say the human cost isn’t taking a toll in every aspect of Ukrainian society. The war goes on and on, drowning the country in a sea of blood. Losses have likely surpassed one million by now. The AFU is largely a conscript army at this point, with many of the men impressed into service and forced to stay on the front lines by Azov blocking brigades that will try to shoot anyone who retreats. Even so, desertion within the AFU has become widespread.
After years of telling his people they are winning, Zelensky can’t accept Russia’s offer of Novorossiya. Ukraine’s goal has always been to get the United States involved. Zelensky has likely realized that President Trump won’t send in American soldiers, and getting any new aid from America is going to require months, maybe years of prodding and pushing. Under Trump. But with a new president? That will almost certainly change.
Ukraine, then, is trying to survive the Trump years. Trying to hold out three more years, grudgingly giving ground. Trying to prevent the Russians from reaching the Dnieper in an ever more porous front until a new US president is elected who will be more ideologically suited to supporting Ukraine, no matter what it takes.
When Peace Becomes War
Here lies the deadly problem for America. Trump does not have an offer that will satisfy both the Russians and the Euro-Ukrainians. Russia will accept peace only if Ukraine is permanently neutralized, a guarantee Europe refuses to give. Europe, meanwhile, insists on “security guarantees” for Ukraine, a backdoor to NATO that ensures American involvement in the next round of fighting. Ukraine itself cannot quit without such guarantees; to accept Russian terms without them would be political suicide for its leaders.
In each case, the cost falls on Washington. If Trump offers Ukraine future protection, he risks binding America to a European war it cannot escape. If he refuses, the war continues indefinitely, draining U.S. resources and influence. There is no visible outcome in which America is spared entanglement if Trump doesn’t walk away. Political pressure from GOP senators prevents him from doing that. Different peace plans will be floated and tried over the next several weeks, months, maybe years. Each will only rearrange different timelines and different triggers for confrontation.
That is the real danger. Peace is not a release for America, but a trap. A security guarantee to Ukraine is NATO without the treaty, a standing invitation to war with Russia the next time fighting erupts. And given Russia’s view of Ukraine as an existential question, the next time is almost inevitable.
Americans may not care about Ukraine, but under the wrong peace, America will be committed to defending it financially, militarily, and ultimately with blood.
For Trump, for Congress, and future presidents, the risk is clear: in seeking peace today, we may be writing the script for a catastrophic war tomorrow. In the end, we may find that the only thing peace in Ukraine guarantees is America’s next war. And for a nation that once swore never to fight another European war, we seem determined to write ourselves into one.
Curtis Scoon is the founder of ScoonTv.com Download the ScoonTv App to join our weekly livestream every Tuesday @ 8pm EST! Support true independent media. Become a VIP member www.scoontv.com/vip-signup/ and
download the ScoonTv App from your App Store.
