Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
Ukrainians React to Trump’s Potential Influence on War Outcomes
In Kyiv, residents shared a blend of optimism and doubt regarding Donald Trump’s ability to facilitate an end to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has lauded Trump as a “decisive” figure capable of achieving a “just peace,” yet doubts linger on the feasibility of such prospects.
During his recent inauguration speech, Trump positioned himself as a “peacekeeper,” vowing to steer the United States away from detrimental foreign engagements. However, his remarks notably omitted any mention of Ukraine or a strategy for persuading Vladimir Putin to consider negotiations after nearly three years of war.
After his speech, Trump made claims about the conflict, asserting that approximately one million Russian soldiers have died and emphasizing the necessity for both sides to pursue peace. “He [Putin] is destroying Russia. He should make a deal. Zelenskyy wants to make a deal,” Trump stated, highlighting his perspective on the deteriorating situation.
Outside the Lukianivska metro station in Kyiv, a site recently hit by a Russian missile that claimed three lives, local citizens expressed their apprehension regarding the war and its future. Amidst the backdrop of a damaged McDonald’s and the remnants of an office building, opinions diverged. Valeriia, a 23-year-old shop worker, voiced skepticism: “I think a deal is unrealistic. Trump is blah blah blah. He promised to end the conflict in 24 hours. That won’t happen.” She noted a split among her peers regarding Trump’s potential impact—some are hopeful, while others remain unconvinced.
Conversely, Mykola, a retired physicist, shared a more optimistic view, recalling his experiences in New York where he encountered Trump. “I think he can really do something. He’s made a ceasefire in Israel and Gaza,” he claimed. Mykola proposed a potential approach of freezing the current front lines to initiate diplomatic discussions, although uncertainties loom about Zelenskyy’s acceptance of such terms, particularly regarding NATO membership and territorial concessions.
Zelenskyy has welcomed Trump’s return to the White House and officially congratulated him, expressing hope for a stronger collaboration and a path toward peace. “The peace through strength policy he announced provides an opportunity to strengthen American leadership and achieve a long-term and just peace,” Zelenskyy remarked, indicating a desire for constructive relations, especially following recent tensions with the Biden administration, which some Ukrainian officials criticized for its delayed military aid.
However, skepticism persists regarding whether Trump’s overtures toward Ukraine will manifest into tangible diplomatic efforts. Anna Fedorivna, an English-speaking graduate, reflected on Trump’s inauguration, noting that Zelenskyy was not invited and questioning Trump’s genuine interest in Ukrainian affairs: “Maybe Trump can find a way forward. He talks to Putin at least, which Biden didn’t. I hope something positive can emerge.”
The perspective of Kristina Berdynskykh, a Ukrainian journalist, further illustrated the uncertainty surrounding Trump’s views on Ukraine. She observed Trump’s speech in a local bar and noted the lack of any mention about Ukraine, focusing instead on more distant international issues. “I think Trump doesn’t think about Ukraine a lot. Our main challenge in the future will be to keep his attention,” she stated, emphasizing the need for Ukraine to maintain relevance in U.S. foreign policy.
Furthermore, Berdynskykh highlighted a potential benefit of Trump’s proposed increase in U.S. oil and gas production. This move could decrease global oil prices, presumably impacting Russia’s war funding. “I don’t think Trump will give Putin Ukraine as a present. That would make America look weak,” she asserted, signifying a broader concern about national perception amid international diplomacy.
In discourse around the conflict, Anton Herashchenko, a commentator and former government adviser, noted that Trump may prioritize rapid resolution, potentially viewing the situation in Ukraine as more of a European dilemma rather than an American one. “As of today, the situation of strategic uncertainty continues,” he remarked, reinforcing a sense of unpredictability surrounding future developments.
Despite the potential for negotiation frameworks, considerable obstacles persist as Trump’s envoy, Keith Kellogg, envisaged a swift agreement of 100 days during media appearances. Nevertheless, many Ukrainians are doubtful of such a timeline materializing, suspecting that Trump may seek to limit U.S. military aid to Ukraine to escape Biden-era policies.
On the Russian side, Putin continues to demonstrate inflexibility, insisting on the annexation of several Ukrainian regions and advocating for the establishment of a pro-Russian governance in Kyiv. Amid these tensions, Russian military operations have intensified, further complicating the prospect of peace talks.
As sentiment among Ukrainians remains mixed, Petro Hryhorovych, a pensioner, encapsulated the prevailing anxiety regarding the conflict. Reflecting on recent explosions that shook his home, he commented, “I don’t think Putin will stop until he has destroyed Ukraine. He’s a fool. Even so, there is a little bit of hope. I want the war to finish. So many peaceful people have died.”
Source
www.theguardian.com