Russia-Ukraine War: Can Donald Trump End It Within 24 Hours?

Critics argue that Trump’s track record does not indicate an ability to achieve quick peace in complex conflicts.

As the world gets ready to deal with sudden twists and turns Donald Trumps presidency, political analysts are turning their attention to one of the former US president’s boldest campaign claims: He could end Russia-Ukraine war within “24 hours” of access.
Driving the news

Trump’s promise to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, repeated in stump speech throughout the campaign, is provoking both skepticism and a flicker of hope from different corners of the world.
The seriousness of Trump’s declaration cannot be understated given that the war in Ukraine – Europe’s largest armed conflict since World War II – has cost countless lives and reshaped geopolitical alliances.
“I think we will talk,” Trump said in an NBC interview, hinting at potential direct talks with Russia’s president Vladimir Putinwho himself congratulated Trump, noting with reserved optimism that the president-elect’s campaign statements “deserve attention.”
Putin, in his first public statements since Trump’s win, said the former US president acted like a real man during an assassination attempt on him when he spoke at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania in July.
“He behaved, in my opinion, in a very correct way, bravely, like a real man,” Putin said.
To be sure, the 24-hour pledge comes as no surprise from Trump, who has boasted what he sees as an unparalleled ability to negotiate deals. But as previous examples illustrate, big promises have often yielded mixed results. In 2019, for example, Trump’s attempt to secure a denuclearization deal with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un in Hanoi ended inconclusively, underscoring the unpredictable outcomes that arise from high-tempo diplomacy.
Critics argue that Trump’s track record does not indicate an ability to achieve quick peace in complex conflicts. As a former president, his involvement often favored unconventional tactics that sometimes resulted in high-profile diplomatic meetings but failed to produce lasting resolutions.

Why it matters
The war in Ukraine, which began in February 2022, has resulted in significant geopolitical and humanitarian consequences. The United States and European allies have collectively provided billions of dollars in military and humanitarian aid to support Ukraine to resist Russian advances. Trump’s statements about a potential quick end to the conflict have intensified concerns among NATO members and US allies, who worry about a potential shift in US foreign policy.
For European leaders, Trump’s election signals possible changes in transatlantic relations and a recalibration of US military and financial support for Ukraine. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and other officials have previously expressed concern about Trump’s past statements about NATO’s relevance and his criticism of member nations that do not meet defense spending benchmarks. These factors heighten fears of reduced support for Ukraine, should Trump actually seek to implement significant changes.
Leverage at Trump’s disposal

But what if Trump is serious about fulfilling his campaign promise? What tools are at his disposal to force Russia and Ukraine to reach a settlement? Should Trump aim to pursue peace talks, he can use economic and military influence as leverage.
Sanctions and aid controls: Trump has indicated he would reevaluate military and economic aid to Ukraine, which could cut aid. While this could pressure Ukraine into talks, it could also embolden Russia and damage US credibility as a steadfast ally.
Putting diplomatic pressure on European nations to increase their contributions or take a more active role could change the dynamic but would carry risks. European leaders are already grappling with political and financial challenges related to sustained military support.

Challenges to Trump’s 24-hour promise
Lack of details: Trump has not explained how he would operationalize a 24-hour resolution. Experts note that complex negotiations would require concessions, groundwork and sustained talks that cannot possibly be condensed into such a short period.
Presidential transition period: Trump will have no formal power to influence foreign policy until his January 20 inauguration. During this period, President Biden will remain at the helm and maintain current US policies, including continued support for Ukraine.
Before the inauguration of Trump’s presidency, the Biden administration may decide to increase US aid to Ukraine, which could increase its chances of fighting Russia. Thus, the outgoing administrator could complicate Trump’s promise of a quick end to the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
The big picture

Achieving peace in Ukraine is multifaceted and involves a web of geopolitical interests, military realities and national pride.
Russia’s strategic interests include maintaining control over Crimea and territories in eastern Ukraine. Putin has set conditions such as Ukraine renouncing NATO ambitions and recognizing Russian control over occupied regions.
Analysts in Moscow have mixed views on Trump’s presidency; while some see opportunity in his skepticism of NATO and US interventionism, others recall that Trump’s first term involved new sanctions and actions that ran counter to expectations of a softer stance.
Putin has indicated he is open to talks but insists any negotiations must reflect the new territorial and military realities after the invasion.
President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyys stance is clear: A “quick end would be a loss” for Ukraine. The Ukrainian president has warned that any premature resolution could result in defeat and would embolden Moscow and potentially destabilize Europe.
Zelenskyy has advocated US and allied support to force Russia to negotiate on Ukrainian terms, with the aim of avoiding a temporary ceasefire that could allow Russia to regroup.
Any plan that suggests Ukraine makes significant concessions risks alienating not only Kiev but also US allies committed to seeing Russia’s aggression countered. Germany, Britain and Eastern European states have expressed strong support for ensuring that Ukraine retains its sovereignty.

What they say

“What was said about the desire to restore relations with Russia, to bring about the end of the Ukrainian crisis, in my opinion, this deserves at least attention,” Putin said. But Putin’s tone was cautious.
“It is pointless to put pressure on us. But we are always ready to negotiate with full consideration of mutual legitimate interests,” Putin added.
“It’s clear to me that he wants to end it,” Zelenskyy said of Trump’s pledge, while stressing that a hasty settlement could be disastrous for Ukraine, equating a quick termination with potential defeat.
“Trump’s statements about ending the war in a day are more consistent with campaign hyperbole than practical policy,” Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, told Bloomberg.
“Many people close to power in Moscow who understand US politics are afraid of Trump’s victory,” Stanovaya added. “You can drink a bottle of wine, dance with happiness and then have a terrible hangover.

What’s next

Ending the war in Ukraine would likely involve more than a declaration; it would require significant diplomatic leverage and military strategy. While Trump has touted his ability to change outcomes through sheer bargaining power, the reality on the ground is much more complicated.
The war has entrenched positions on both sides, with Russia consolidating control over significant territory and Ukraine adamantly rejecting any settlement that compromises its sovereignty or leads to a de facto frozen conflict that Russia could exploit to rearm and attack again later.
So if Trump is serious about seeking an end to the conflict, the process will involve balancing perceptions to avoid the appearance of a Russian victory or a Ukrainian defeat. This diplomatic juggling act would require accommodating Western interests and securing buy-in from Ukraine. Trump’s post-election comments indicate potential willingness to explore dialogue, but history suggests that promises of quick, sweeping change often run up against the complex reality of geopolitical gridlock.
For now, the world waits to see whether Trump’s bold statements will turn into actionable strategies or, as critics suggest, they will join the archives of unfulfilled promises. The stakes couldn’t be higher. An immediate ceasefire may be a chimera, but Trump’s willingness to engage with authoritarians like Putin could spark a dialogue that changes the dynamics of the war. However, whether this is enough to stop the bloodshed remains an open question.

(With input from agencies)

Shopmaisonbouey

Russia-Ukraine War: Can Donald Trump End It Within 24 Hours?

Kaneb

Kaneb

Related Posts