Trump’s Ukraine Plan a Necessary Reminder of Realpolitik
Diplomacy is the art of the possible. Trump's potential plan in Ukraine will piss off both sides, but it's far better than continued slaughter.
Former German chancellor Otto von Bismarck once remarked “Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best.” Bismarck’s words would be taken to heart by another German, controversial diplomat Henry Kissinger who coined the term “realpolitik” to describe foreign relations as working within pragmatic reality as opposed to how we wished it could be.
It’s former president Trump and his advisors who seem to understand this the best vis-a-vis the war in Ukraine. Per new reporting from Reuters, “Two key advisers to Donald Trump have presented him with a plan to end Russia's war in Ukraine - if he wins the Nov. 5 presidential election - that involves telling Ukraine it will only get more U.S. weapons if it enters peace talks.”
But “the United States would at the same time warn Moscow that any refusal to negotiate would result in increased U.S. support for Ukraine.”
Some scoff, saying this is handing Ukraine to the Russian wolves…er, bears. But to many, it’s a tacit understanding that the war needs to end, and that pragmatically Ukraine is probably screwed barring endless U.S. intervention.
As the war rages for its second year (some might argue its 10th), the consequences have been blatant and terrible for the whole world to witness. Ukrainian blood floods the fields, the country faces a demographic crisis that will haunt it for decades to come, and the war seems no closer to a conclusion.
While many in the West insist that with just a few billion dollars more, Ukraine can finally push out Putin’s thugs and reclaim occupied Ukrainian territory, the reality on the ground is far more grim.
Both sides are suffering from manpower issues, but Ukraine is faring far worse. As a result of a massive shortfall of troops, Ukrainian president Volodomyr Zelenskyy recently had to sign a controversial new law lowering the age of conscription from 27 to 25. That law is set against the bleak reality that the average age of a Ukrainian troop on the front lines is 43-years-old with many even older than that. In terms of war goals, Russia still occupies vast swathes of Ukrainian territory and there appear to be cracks in the hitherto unified Ukrainian support for continued fighting.
If the worst consequences of a prolonged conflict are to be avoided, the art of the possible, attainable, and next best will need to prevail.
In a perfect world, Ukraine would reclaim all its lost territories including the Donbas and see Vladimir Putin put on trial for his crimes. Russia would pay war indemnities and there would be some form of insurance to prevent Russian aggression in the future, maybe Japanese style pacifism.
But this is very much not a perfect world and it’s more likely the embalmed corpse of Lenin rises from his Moscow mausoleum to restore the Soviet Union than a total Ukrainian victory.
So then, what is possible?
First, any form of nuclear war must be avoided. It is estimated Russia sits on a nuclear arsenal of around 4,400 active missiles. As President Biden mulls sending American defense contractors to Ukraine, as well as permit American weapons to strike targets in Russia, the risk of accidentally sparking WWIII grows.
Therefore, any plan to end the war cannot be dictated by Bush-era neoconservatism to “save the world” and eliminate the “bad guys.” It must be designed to reflect realities on the ground and ensure that both parties don’t feel screwed over.
To that end, Ukraine must accept that the eastern provinces are lost to Russia. For now at least.
Through a weak foreign policy, Obama and Biden ensured that the Crimean Peninsula is now firmly in Putin’s hands as are large swathes of the Donbas. While Zelenskyy has declared that reclaiming all lost territory for Ukraine is essential, American plans for 2024 have “de-emphasized winning back territory and focus instead on helping Ukraine fend off new Russian advances while moving toward a long-term goal of strengthening its fighting force and economy.”
This is not to say that these territories will forever be Russian. One need only to look back to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 to show that territory once absorbed by a hostile power can soon make their way home through shrewd diplomacy.
Next, to ensure that Russia doesn’t view its invasion as a total success and act to take more territory, it must face consequences. Sanctions levied by the U.S. against Russia have utterly failed leading not to a crushed ruble, but a profoundly strong Russian economy.
Instead, Russia most countered through more covert means that belay the risk of nuclear fallout, yet still directly send a message to Moscow that consequences are coming. Luckily, one of the most effective weapons America can utilize helps boost the economy, helps reign in the Europeans, and hits Russia’s biggest export.
That target is, of course, natural gas. By unleashing American energy, Russia’s economy will take a massive hit as the world will flock to the U.S. for their energy needs. Additionally, America can extract concessions from Russia like releasing Washington Post journalist Evan Gershkovich and soldier Pail Whelan.
Are these plans perfect? No. But the alternative is that Russians and Ukrainians continue to slaughter each other, while Ukraine continues to sink further into an economic and demographic pit from which it never emerges.
Ending the war now would allow Ukraine to rebuild and reorient. It would halt the carnage. It would save lives. As Trump put it in that infamous CNN Townhall, “I want everyone to stop dying. Russians and Ukrainians.”
That’s the end goal here. It might not be pretty, it might not be pleasant. And it might make Americans feel like we “lost.” But reality doesn’t care about sentimentality. It’s time to pursue the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best