Ukraine, Trump and the Middle East

Donald Trump’s jarring Oval Office confrontation with Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky symbolizes what is wrong with Trump’s dysfunctional approach to foreign policy.  In what seemed like a television comedy show, Trump accused Zelensky of everything from risking World War III to having no cards to play in defending his homeland from Russia’s unprovoked aggression.  Trump then kicked Zelensky out of the West Wing without even providing lunch.

Most American children are raised to be more polite to their guests.  The real meaning of the Oval Office debacle, however, does not turn on who committed the worst breaches of etiquette.  Instead, Trump’s evident hostility toward Zelensky reflected the reversal of America’s position in the Russo-Ukrainian war, from supporting Ukraine to effectively supporting Russia.  Recent US history provides nothing remotely comparable to Trump’s about-face.

Trump, of course, contends he is merely seeking peace to stop what he called in his State of the Union address the “senseless” war in Europe’s center.  Of course, neither Russia nor Ukraine consider the war “senseless,” albeit for very different reasons. The Kremlin is fighting to recreate the Russian empire, a goal Putin announced as far back as 2005, whereas Ukraine is defending its freedom and independence.  Americans once fought for freedom and independence, and certainly didn’t consider it “senseless.”

What explains Trump’s emphasis on rapidly ending the conflict, and his sympathy for Moscow?  He has frequently said that if he has good personal relations with a foreign head of state, then America has good relations with that leader’s country.  Conversely, if his personal relations with a foreign leader are bad, then US relations with his country are bad.  Personal relations have a place in international affairs, as in all things, but they are not decisive factors in national-security decision-making, especially for the world’s hard men like Putin, China’s Xi Jinping, or North Korea’s Kim Jung Un.  These authoritarians are cold-blooded and clear-eyed in knowing what their national interest are, and they pursue those interests unhesitatingly.

Trump, by contrast, pursues his personal interest.  He thinks Putin, Xi, and Kim are his friends, even saying(https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/we-fell-in-love-trump-and-kim-shower-praise-stroke-egos-on-path-to-nuclear-negotiations/2019/02/24/46875188-3777-11e9-854a-7a14d7fec96a_story.html) he and Kim “fell in love.”  In the case of Ukraine, that explains Trump’s tilt toward Putin and against Zelensky:  Trump wants the war, which he considers Biden’s responsibility, behind him so that Moscow-Washington relations will improve.  During the 2024 campaign,  Trump said repeatedly that the war would never have begun had he been President.

Based on my own observations, Putin, reflecting his KGB training and skills, does not think he and Trump are friends.  Rather, Trump is an easy mark, to be manipulated to achieve Moscow’s objectives.  In short, the Kremlin sees Trump as what Vladimir Lenin once called a “useful idiot,” meaning he can be made to serve Russian purposes without realizing what he is doing.  As part of his ongoing manipulation, Putin recently agreed the war in Ukraine would not have occurred under a Trump presidency(https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/24/world/putin-trump-ukraine-crisis-talks-intl/index.html).   

Putin continued the manipulation by releasing Marc Foley, an American hostage held in Moscow, followed by Belarus releasing another US hostage, and much more.  The game continues, as reflected by Putin’s conditional acceptance of the Saudi-brokered cease-fire between Washington and Kyiv.  Putin doesn’t want to endanger the concessions Trump has already made to him, so he carefully accepted the cease-fire in principle, only to obscure it with conditions and modifications.  Despite this carefully muddled answer, Trump was enthusiastic, saying it was “very good and productive(https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/russia-calls-for-trump-putin-talks-on-ukraine-war-4dd35ede).”  The Kremlin must have celebrated its success.

What does Trump himself want?  He wants the Nobel Peace Prize.  After all, Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel for no particular reason, just months after assuming office.  Under Nobel’s prize rules, nominations for a given year must be submitted by January 31 of that year(https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/nobel-peace-prize/nomination/), meaning Obama’s nominations had to be received eleven days after his Inauguration, making the award laughable.  Trump may not realize it is already too late for him to win this year, but he still craves the faded glory of a Nobel prize.

The likely next step on Ukraine is direct Trump-Putin talks, which Trump clearly wants as soon as possible.  Putin also wants direct negotiations because it provides an opportunity to manipulate Trump directly, rather than through intermediaries.  Moreover, by definition, their conversation would exclude Ukraine and the Europeans from the real dealmaking, which won’t bother Trump as all.  While there is no certainty to the outcome of this coming conversation, all signs point to a result heavily skewed in Moscow’s favor.  

The lesson for the Middle East goes straight to the question, how to deal with Trump?  He is not pursuing some American grand strategy or playing sophisticated three-dimensional chess.  He is pursuing a Trump-centric strategy in two dimensions, one move at a time.  Keep that in mind, pile on some personal flattery of Trump, add pomp and circumstance, and who knows what Trump will be prepared to give away?

This article was first published in Independent Arabia on March 17, 2025. Click here to read the original article.