The official U.S. line on how the peace plan to end the Ukraine war emerged has Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, and Jared Kushner developing it, Marco Rubio endorsing it, and then Russia assenting to it. But that story does not hold up.
First, Rubio told two senators that the plan was made in Moscow and was one-sided. Later, having been told this was Trump’s plan, he changed his story to say he was all aboard.
Then Bloomberg reported on a telephone conversation between Witkoff and Yuri Ushakov, a foreign policy aide to Vladimir Putin. In it, Witkoff tells Yuri, “Here’s what I would do.” Yuri is all ears. Witkoff advises that the Russians compliment Trump on his peace initiative and say Russia supports it. Then “maybe we set out like a 20-point peace proposal, just like we did in Gaza.”
Don Bacon, a Republican congressman, said of Witkoff: “Would a Russian paid agent do less than he? He should be fired.”
He won’t be, of course. Asked about the conversation, Trump said: “I haven’t heard it, but it’s a standard thing. That’s what a dealmaker does.”
In other words, he knew all about it and supported Witkoff. Why not? These are real estate guys, and that’s the way they always operate. In fact, Trump said he had “thought this [deal] would be one of the easier ones because of my relationship with President Putin. But this is probably one of the more difficult ones because there’s a lot of hatred.”
Well, not just hatred, but kickback from all the parties, including the Russians, who continue to believe that they can bomb their way to victory, notwithstanding the enormous benefits for them of the 28-point peace proposal. Putin said the plan “forms the basis for future agreements,” but “if they [the Ukrainians] don’t withdraw” from all the territory in eastern Ukraine, “we will achieve this through military means.” As usual, the Russians haven’t abandoned their maximalist goals at all.
Little wonder that the Ukrainians and other Europeans reacted so negatively to the peace plan and devised their own. The Trump-Russia plan was as partial to Moscow as the Gaza plan is to Israel’s far right. The European and Ukrainian opposition has forced Trump to move from a take-it-or-leave-it demand to not-my-final-offer. Trump must feel deflated; his usual optimism about a quick agreement has proven unwarranted. He and his advisers refused to consult with all the parties to the conflict—a recipe for failure.
The other notable thing about the administration’s conduct is its chaotic, self-interested diplomacy. The secretary of state/national security adviser isn’t in charge. Instead, it’s Witkoff and Kushner (wasn’t he supposed to be out of this business?), wheeling and dealing.
Their eyes, and probably Trump’s as well, are on the potential financial rewards from an agreement with Moscow, as Anne Applebaum suggests: the investment opportunities in energy, rare earth minerals in the Arctic, Russian infrastructure, and resources, according to the plan document.
That approach, which ignores Ukraine’s and Europe’s security, must leave heads spinning, particularly among Russia and Europe experts in the State Department and the intelligence community. But then, that’s Trumpworld, where the personal interest is the national interest.
Mel Gurtov, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Portland State University.
Share
