Don’s Plan: Recipe For Next War

medium118507211The information space remains in turmoil following Trump’s latest remarks on Ukraine. Trump’s pre-election pledge to end the war in 24 hours has now stretched well beyond 24 days. Still, the speed of developments has come as a shock to Ukraine and its European partners.Trump and his team, having already engaged in separate negotiations with Russia in Saudi Arabia, appear intent on breaking Ukraine’s resistance. Trump has effectively blamed Zelenskyy for the war, arguing that his decision to resist Russian aggression — rather than negotiating — was the true catalyst for the conflict. This framing suggests that Ukraine should have capitulated to Russian demands to avoid trouble for Moscow, US and Europe. Simultaneously, Trump has cited wildly exaggerated figures regarding the aid provided to Ukraine since 2022 and is now pushing for what can only be described as a colonial-style agreement, demanding 50% control over Ukraine’s mineral resources in exchange for continued support.These developments have left many Ukrainians deeply unsettled. After all, it was not Ukraine that attacked Russia — Moscow has been occupying Crimea and parts of Donbas since 2014, launching a full-scale invasion in 2022 with the clear intent of eradicating Ukraine as a sovereign nation. Ukraine’s vision for a just end to this war remains unchanged: the liberation of all occupied territories, full reparations from Russia (potentially reaching $1tn), accountability for war crimes, and robust security guarantees to prevent future aggression.Yet, the current course of events is far from just. Ukraine is now facing immense pressure to abandon its Nato aspirations, relinquish its sovereign territories, and bear responsibility for the devastation wrought by Putin — hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian lives lost, thousands of children abducted, and entire cities and cultural heritage sites reduced to rubble. However, Trump had been open about his stance even before taking office, making it clear that he views freezing the conflict — on Russia’s terms — as the most pragmatic outcome.One thing remains certain: Ukraine will continue to resist. Neither Zelenskyy nor the Ukrainian people will accept conditions being forced upon them by Trump and Putin. Ukraine will not negotiate its sovereign territory with the aggressor. The same applies to its desire for Nato membership.True, a ceasefire along the current frontlines could be a potential negotiation point — but only minus additional conditions or concessions to Moscow, such as troop reductions or forced cultural Russification. Crucially, there is one issue that Russia cannot ignore: the status of the Russian Kursk region where Ukrainian forces have gained ground. Despite Kremlin denials, any discussion on ceasefire lines must account for this reality. Moscow will either have to negotiate a territorial trade-off or risk losing leverage in the process. A pragmatic exchange — such as handing over the Kursk region in return for Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant — could address a range of issues, including international nuclear security concerns.One crucial aspect missing from current discussions is the necessity of demilitarising occupied Crimea and Black Sea. A frozen conflict could allow Russia’s Black Sea fleet to regroup at its bases in Crimea, potentially restoring its military dominance in the region. Ukraine, meanwhile, could be barred from deploying its naval drones and other deterrence systems due to ceasefire restrictions. This would create an environment ripe for Russia to resume hybrid warfare, block maritime trade routes, and exploit Black Sea resources unchecked.Furthermore, a frozen conflict could prompt Türkiye to reopen Bosphorus and Dardanelles to military vessels, overriding the Montreux Convention’s restrictions and enabling Russia to reinforce its Black Sea fleet with ships from other naval commands. Given the relative weakness of the Ukrainian, Romanian and Bulgarian navies, Moscow would likely reassert its maritime superiority. Such a development would also pose a strategic challenge to Türkiye itself, making demilitarisation here a critical factor in any long-term security arrangement.For Ukraine, one stark reality must be acknowledged: a US-imposed freeze on the war is merely a prelude to the next phase of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. A final confrontation between Ukraine and Russia is inevitable, as the two cannot coexist in their current forms. This next war is highly likely to erupt once Trump is out of the picture — but as long as Putin remains in power.Accepting this as an inevitability is crucial for strategic planning. Ukraine’s focus should be on long-term military readiness.In parallel, Ukraine must also push Europe to wake up to the new security reality. US is unlikely to continue shielding Europe from Russia, a reality that could serve as the catalyst for building an independent European defence framework.Instead of treating Ukraine as a buffer zone or bargaining chip with Russia, Europe must fully integrate Ukraine into its security architecture. The immediate priority should be establishing a joint European Defence Force, complete with strategic deterrence capabilities. The choice is clear: either Ukraine and Europe prepare for the next phase of this existential struggle or risk being overtaken by forces determined to reshape the world order in their favour.The writer is a columnist based in Kyiv, and director of New Geopolitics Research Network