Vladimir Putin’s “whole economy, his whole society, his whole politics, his whole preservation of self revolves around having this war go on”, Fiona Hill, who was Donald Trump’s adviser on Russia in his first presidential term, has told The Independent in an exclusive interview.
She says that Putin knows exactly how to manipulate the US president and has no intention of stopping the war in Ukraine. The Russian president’s reason for taking part in peace talks is that he hopes Mr Trump will bully the Ukrainians into surrender – or, if not explicit surrender, then a ceasefire agreement that so weakens them that Russian forces will be able to finish the job later.
A lifetime of studying Russia and the experience of working with President Trump has convinced Ms Hill that “Putin’s got his number”. She said: “Putin realises he is a man with a very fragile ego, and that he is somebody that can be manipulated in that way.”
She tells the story of Putin “trolling” Mr Trump by saying that he was such a great supporter of Israel that “maybe they should just name the country after you” – to which the US president, oblivious to the sarcasm, said, “Oh no, that would be a bit too much.”
That is why The Independent has argued that the priority for Ukraine’s allies is to persuade the US president that appeasing the Russian dictator would be an act of weakness on his part; that a Ukrainian surrender deal will not buy him the Nobel peace prize; and that it would, on the contrary, bring dishonour upon him.
For a moment, when the 28-point Russian plan as dictated to Steve Witkoff, Mr Trump’s envoy, was leaked, it seemed that Putin might succeed in pulling the wool over the US president’s eyes. But a deft response from Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian leader, backed up by the coalition of the willing, including the United Kingdom, exposed the Kremlin’s game. Simply by seeking clarification on certain points, Mr Zelensky has forced the Russian president to reveal his hand. Putin said in his latest pronouncement that either Ukraine retreats to get a deal or “we will achieve our goals by military means”.
In other words, Ms Hill is right.
The immediate danger of President Trump pulling the plug on support for the Ukrainian war effort may have receded somewhat, therefore. He has threatened it before and he may threaten it again, but he has not followed through because he must realise on some level that it would make him look bad.
As Professor Sir Lawrence Freedman, of King’s College London, has written, “the core points of principle on which the earlier efforts got stuck remain. In particular, Russia continues to demand that Ukraine hand over territory that it has failed to take through war.”
That does not mean, of course, that Ukraine’s European friends can afford to relax. We must not merely be prepared to stand up for the Ukrainian people in case the US stands down – we must increase our support for them now. That is another reason that Rachel Reeves’s Budget on Wednesday was disappointing: the chancellor confirmed plans to increase UK defence spending this year and next, but did not set out a path to higher spending in the longer term.
Unfortunately, our commitment to the Ukrainian cause is likely to be a long-term one. As Ms Hill says, Putin does not want peace, and therefore those who want to defend Ukraine and the rest of Europe from his aggression have to pay the price.
The Ukrainian people are willing to lay down their lives to defend their right of self-determination. The least we can do is to help to meet the financial cost of standing up for freedom, democracy and the rule of law.
