Sign up for the free White House Watch newsletter
Your guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the world
Next to the Middle East, the future of Ukraine is one of the most important geopolitical questions in the coming year. US President-elect Donald Trump has spoken of ending Russia's unprovoked war on its neighbor within 24 hours of his return to office. Kyiv has shown readiness for a deal, on its own terms. Without stress The Russian economyhowever, Vladimir Putin – whose army has made slow but steady progress over the past year – shows little inclination to come to the table. The biggest risk is that Ukraine is pushed into a bad deal for the country, for European security, and eventually for the US and other allies.
The fear in Europe is that Trump can quickly prioritize agreement as the first trophy of his presidency. He has forced Kyiv to talk by threatening to cut off US aid. Despite the pressure on Moscow, however, this would be tantamount to complying with Russia's demands, including the neutrality and dissolution of Ukraine.
I the dangers of such an agreement they are clear. A very weak rump Ukraine could either fall back into Moscow's orbit, or be defeated in a later Russian attack. Kyiv's leaders may not accept a deal that amounts to submission but choose to fight, even without US support; European countries may feel morally and strategically obligated to help. In any case, although Trump may see the withdrawal of the US from Ukraine as freeing it to focus instead on China, any impression that Washington had left the ally would not only dare Beijing but the likes of North Korea and Iran.
One thing at least is conceivable, very difficult to achieve but much better for Ukraine and its allies. It would want to ensure that, while Russia can maintain de facto control of some part of Ukraine – although it abhors that prospect – others will be able to rebuild, join the EU and succeed.
There are two main challenges in realizing such a vision. One is forcing an anti-Putin to the table with a willingness to compromise; his goal, after all, has always been less about seizing territory than undermining Ukraine's status. But it is possible to push the Russian leader to the agreement with caution – like Trump he suggested – that the US would give Ukraine “more than they got”.
This will require not only pledging but quickly deploying more military aid to Kyiv to demonstrate seriousness. Risks of The rise of Russia will increase. Although some people close to the US president-elect agree, the “bad” agreement on Ukraine can reach “Trump's Afghanistan”, referring to the orderly withdrawal of 2021 under Joe Biden, who is said to be insulted by Trump. European partners should press this conflict with the new president.
The second challenge is that any agreement that allows all of Ukraine to rebuild will have to be supported by it security guarantees strong enough to deter Moscow from future attacks. Since an agreement to invite Kyiv to join NATO may not happen, and Trump intends to scale back and not expand US military commitments in Europe, it may fall to European countries to provide such arrangements. French President Emmanuel Macron has led consultations on security guarantees, including the possibility deployment of troops. But progress is limited. Proper preparations will require the mobilization of now depleted European forces and resources on a scale not seen in decades.
There is nothing “bad” about ending the war or a prolonged continuation of a destructive war with diminishing prospects of restoring Ukraine's integrity is an attractive option. An acceptable agreement will be difficult to reach and expensive to support. Addressing those costs now, however, can prevent much greater costs down the line.