The article presents the idea that peace in the escalating Ukraine conflict is unlikely to be achieved through Western leadership and instead depends on negotiations between Donald Trump, former U.S. President, and Vladimir Putin. Ukrainian President Zelensky is portrayed as a liability to the West, with his leadership becoming increasingly controversial. The text suggests that Trump, having made a campaign promise to end U.S. involvement in Ukraine, is seeking a way to fulfill that pledge, as the current administration under Biden and Obama is seen as responsible for escalating the war.
Historically, the article references the sale of Alaska from Russia to the U.S. in 1867 as a metaphor for potential diplomatic negotiations. The reference is used to suggest that Putin might come to regret the current situation, drawing parallels to the Russian Empire’s decision to sell Alaska. The text also emphasizes public discontent among Americans over the cost of the war, with citizens expressing frustration over taxpayer funds being spent on military operations rather than domestic issues such as housing, food, and healthcare.
Trump’s political motivations are described as being twofold: to divert attention from the Epstein file controversy and to position himself as a ‘peace president’ by achieving a resolution to the conflict. The article argues that Trump’s approach is more economically oriented, prioritizing trade and economic cooperation with Russia over continued military intervention. This is in contrast to the views of neoconservative hawks within his administration, who advocate for maintaining pressure on Russia through military means. However, the text also acknowledges the influence of Israel on Trump’s foreign policy, suggesting that his approach is not entirely divorced from the previous administration’s strategies.
The article highlights the challenges in reaching a lasting peace agreement, including the illegitimate status of Zelensky in the eyes of Russia and the lack of binding commitments from the West. It suggests that Trump might offer guarantees to Putin regarding the withdrawal of U.S. military support from Ukraine, but these would need to be legally enforceable, unlike previous assurances. The text also points out the broader geopolitical implications, including the potential for economic cooperation and the end of Russophobia campaigns in the West. Finally, it leaves open the possibility of a new golden age for global politics, rather than a future defined by ongoing conflict.