Will Trump Pressure Ukraine to Cut a Deal?

The clearest change that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump is likely to make on foreign policy is in Ukraine. Republican support for spending more on sending weapons to Kyiv has been declining, and Trump will probably follow through on his promise to seek a peace deal. 

The problem is that peace will likely come at terms that do not favor Kyiv. Now, Ukraine’s military losses have begun to mount, and the practical barriers to continued support to Ukraine—declining Western stockpiles, Ukraine’s significant manpower and corruption problems—have increased. Trump has a popular mandate to seek a settlement, even though Europeans might object. 

What, then, would a settlement in Ukraine look like? The territorial question will be settled by facts on the ground: Russia’s recent gains suggest that this will be worse for Ukraine than it would have been a year ago. The Kursk incursion could give the Ukrainians some leverage, but only if they can succeed in holding it.

Then there are the bigger strategic questions. Kyiv insists that any peace deal must include a security guarantee, ideally via NATO; Russia isn’t likely to tolerate this. Despite what Ukrainian leaders say publicly, a minimum acceptable deal for Kyiv might look more like Ukrainian sovereignty, the ability to arm itself with Western help, and economic integration into Europe. 

Trump is well placed to put pressure on Kyiv, but he and his advisors should be under no illusions that they can force Kyiv to the negotiating table. 

It’s possible that whatever deal is negotiated—particularly if it is negotiated over the heads of Ukrainians—would be politically unacceptable to the Zelensky government. Kyiv might opt to keep fighting and seek European support instead.

For the Trump administration, the choice would be whether to continue to support Ukraine or to step back and drop the problem on Washington’s European allies.