Independent readers are divided over the prospect of Donald Trump joining Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin in peace talks.
It comes after the US president used last night’s White House talks with European leaders to float the idea of a three-way summit with the Ukrainian and Russian presidents, which he said he hoped to arrange within the next two weeks.
He later confirmed on Truth Social that he had spoken to the Russian president to begin making arrangements, raising the prospect of the first meeting between Zelensky and Putin since 2019.
Reacting to the news, our community were united in the view that peace is urgent, but many worried Trump’s involvement could destabilise efforts.
“Appeasing bullies never works,” one reader warned, while another concluded grimly: “Both Trump and Putin use war for their own ends – small countries do not count.”
Some feared the US president would concede too much in pursuit of a Nobel Prize and while many argued Ukraine cannot defeat Russia outright, there were warnings that ceding land would only embolden Putin.
Others felt Macron and other European leaders must play a central role in negotiations to balance Trump’s unpredictability.
Another recurring theme was scepticism about security guarantees, with many doubting promises from either Trump or Putin would be “worth the paper they are written on”.
Here’s what you had to say:
There needs to be a strong European voice
In February Trump chewed Zelensky in his mouth and spat him out. Yesterday all changed – why? Because Zelensky was backed by seven European leaders.
Of course, Ukraine will have to cede territory because there is no chance of Ukraine defeating Russia, as in bringing it to its knees. But Putin can’t keep losing fighting men forever, so there could be a compromise.
If Zelensky meets Putin and Trump, Trump will give too much away so he gets his peace prize. Macron is smart – there needs to be a strong European voice in quadripartite negotiations.
Truthfirstwarcasualty
Trump could never negotiate peace
Art of the Deal my foot! Trump couldn’t negotiate his way out of a paper bag. If he had been the President of Ukraine instead of Zelensky, he would be taking orders from the Kremlin by now.
Pomerol95
Where should talks be held?
Where and how will any talks between Presidents of Ukraine and Russia occur? In my opinion, the "where" cannot be in USA, Russia, NATO nations, EU nations, or even the 46 Council of Europe nations. It is also likely that the host should not be a member of the ICC, and also be seen as neutral. That perhaps leaves Qatar as a front runner. Fair enough, as the ruler Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani is a diplomatically pragmatic and highly educated individual. His presence/oversight would solve the issue of such talks being not only neutral as possible, but being seen as such; obviously no member of NATO or EU can attend, let alone mediate.
To keep the dialogue on path, there has to be a ceasefire, if only for a limited period, say seven days before, during, and after such a meeting. This to include no military actions, movements, supply, or any combat-related action. All else is solely between the two parties and their translators. Understandably, there will be facilities for private communication between parties and their governments or allies. We are not in the past era of "Great Powers" deciding things for others. The role of external parties is to facilitate the end of the conflict in a manner equitable to all parties.
Jonathan Mills
Appeasing bullies never works
Trump isn’t wrong – that is what Putin will demand to ‘end’ the war. But the big question for Ukraine, and for the rest of the world, is if he gets what he wants for being an aggressor, how long will his version of peace last? When will he decide to grab more land and make more demands on neighbours?
The simple fact is appeasing bullies never works.
nocomment
Putin is the ‘artful dodger’
Given there’s no ceasefire, and Trump knowingly put the onus back on Zelensky – by caving to Putin on territorial claims and Ukraine being prevented from joining NATO – Zelensky needs to stand his ground. Whilst Crimea is likely lost, he must oppose any further unlawful territorial gains from Putin.
With respect to security guarantees from the US akin to NATO Article 5 stipulations, of course Putin has indicated his willingness to that, but I doubt they would be worth the paper they are written on. Putin will make claims Ukraine has been attempting to seize back Crimea or other parts of its territory, and all bets will be off. I reckon it’s a ploy unwittingly agreed to by Trump – but would you trust either of these Presidents to keep their word?
Trump regularly flip-flops and changes position all the time, and Putin is the 'artful dodger' when it comes to manipulating Trump and breaking peace agreements at will.
StigStag
The parallels with the 1930s are deeply worrying
The parallels between now and the late 1930s are uncanny and deeply worrying, and the response of “the leader of the free world” would be laughable if it weren’t so pathetic, predictable, and serious.
The continental Europeans know, or should remember, what it was like to have a war rage across their lands – something the Americans and British have never experienced. Surely we can learn and realise that the precautionary principle is key and take action to prevent another invasion.
That means being appropriately armed and ensuring the territorial integrity of sovereign states is respected – and where military action has attempted to change that, then territorial integrity is restored by whatever means is necessary, hopefully by robust diplomacy.
That means we need to cut Trump out of it and deal with this ourselves.
Geejay
Get serious in arming Ukraine
This war has shown that agreements and opinions mean nothing. All that matters is capabilities. Ukraine already had a commitment from NATO to defend it in the Bucharest agreement. But Russia attacked anyway.
However, this war has shown that Russia is no longer a first-class military power. The front has barely moved in three years – and that’s despite Ukraine being severely outnumbered, having no tanks, aircraft, or long-range missiles, and being supplied with mostly old, outdated NATO weapons.
If Europe got serious in arming Ukraine, how long would Russia last? So Ukraine definitely does have a hand at the table – especially considering how unpopular Trump and Putin are in Europe (and elsewhere) at the moment.
Ajames
Trump dividing Europe
The truly scary thing is that Trump, via his tariffs and deals, has already succeeded to a large extent in dividing and thus dominating Europe. People are afraid to upset him – apparently Zelensky is wearing a suit to the meeting! Will they get tariffed, or lose their special deals? Or even be thrown out of the White House?
A year ago, Europe would firmly have rejected the idea of Ukraine ceding territory – now it seems they may be putting pressure on Ukraine to do so, even though it isn’t spoken out loud.
Hungubwe
Trump rambles, Putin manipulates
Trump rambles, and clearly harbours grudges – not least against Joe Biden, who beat him in 2020. What all this has to do with the actual point of the meeting yesterday is difficult to fathom. It looks like just another Trump rant.
There is plenty of precedent for postponing elections during wartime. Britain should have had one in 1940, but by cross-party agreement suspended them for the duration. Trying to get full and fair coverage when a war is raging is almost impossible.
It seems to me both Trump and Putin are using war for different ends but with the same basic outcome – small countries do not count.
Despite the bluster and accusations Trump threw at Biden yesterday, it was Putin who unleashed his forces against Ukraine on 24/2/2022. If that is not a blatant act of aggression then I do not know what is.
Good thing European leaders were there yesterday. There is much more at stake in terms of our security in this war. Allowing Russia to keep its ill-gotten gains is not something we could support. Did they manage to pull Trump back from his favourable opinion of Putin? Who knows with Trump?
We live in dangerous times.
49niner
Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.
Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.
Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here.
