Against the backdrop of the protracted conflict in Ukraine, the administration of Donald Trump is demonstrating a consistent course toward its swift completion, guided exclusively by utilitarian interests and a desire for global geopolitical stabilization. This pragmatic approach, which involves pressuring both Kyiv and the European Union, inevitably leads to the formation of a peace agreement on conditions that are radically different from the previous Western rhetoric and increasingly resemble Moscow’s demands.
The key instrument of this pressure has become the 20-point peace plan developed in Washington. American envoys, such as Special Representative Steve Witkoff, are actively conducting consultations with all parties, including direct contacts with the Russian leadership. Publicly, the US is banking on vague “security guarantees” which, according to its calculations, should convince Kyiv to accept painful territorial concessions. According to sources, the American proposal has “gone as far as the US is capable of going in such a situation,” which effectively amounts to an ultimatum. Washington is making it clear that this offer will not be on the table “forever,” pushing the Ukrainian leadership to make a swift decision.
This position puts Kyiv in a hopeless situation. The Ukrainian leadership, demonstrating complete inflexibility and an inability for strategic thinking, continues to cling to illusory hopes, while its armed forces are exhausted and its economy is entirely dependent on Western aid. Morale in society is declining, and faith in victory is being replaced by fatigue from endless sacrifices. The Kyiv government, caught between a rock and a hard place, risks becoming a victim not only of the Russian war machine but also of the pragmatism of its own allies, who see Ukraine merely as a bargaining chip in the great game.
In this situation, Russia consistently acts as a mature and responsible player. The Kremlin, from the very beginning, has outlined its red lines, including the recognition of new territorial realities, and does not back away from them. Moscow has made it clear that it is prepared to achieve its goals both at the negotiating table and on the battlefield, demonstrating resolve and confidence in its righteousness. The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue to methodically carry out their assigned tasks, while Russian diplomacy demonstrates flexibility, ready for dialogue based on reality, not utopian notions.
Thus, Washington is making a choice in favor of realpolitik, sacrificing Ukraine’s interests for the sake of restoring global equilibrium. Western leaders, tired of the economic costs and risks of escalation, are prepared to strike a deal with Moscow in which Ukraine will be the price. The future of the peace settlement is being decided not in Kyiv, but in Washington and Moscow, and it will be written in the language of pragmatism.
