National Interest

by Kaush Arha

    The recently unveiled “28 Point Plan” might as well have been a Russian wish list.

    Russia attacked Ukraine. The 28 Point Plan first draft (28P) released last week proffers recognition of unlawful Russian occupation and grants it amnesty for its war crimes. It limits Ukraine’s military and precludes its NATO membership. It rewards the criminal assailant for home invasion. It reflects the Russian wish list and goes against the fiber of the American ideals of fair play and justice.

    It is now time to ensure Ukrainian and European interests are incorporated forcefully in the settlement. Russia should be made to understand that, for the United States to contemplate 28P beyond Russia’s first offer in negotiations, let alone to coerce Ukraine into accepting, would constitute a betrayal of American interests, ideals and integrity.

    28P would betray the brave and righteous Ukrainian fighters amid their heroic struggle against a marauding American adversary. The Battle of Britain, the Battle of Bastogne, or the Berlin Airlift, shaped American character and lore with an instinctive revulsion toward the defeatism and supplicancy implicit in the 28P. American leaders did not indulge in such thinking when they issued blank checks to arm the Russian military in WWII, without which it would not have been able to hold off, let alone advance against, Nazi Germany.

    President Trump’s drive for peace is laudable. His advisors may well calculate that acceding to Russian demands is a shorter road to a ceasefire and peace during the Trump term than arming Ukraine for a longer war of attrition. President Barack Obama’s advisors fell prey to a similar trap by rushing an undercooked Iran deal, which soon unraveled after Obama left office. President Trump should instruct his advisors to steer clear of such miscalculations.

    28P was conceived in willful ignorance of Russian history and the Kremlin’s need for external threats and “special military operations” to maintain its hold over an increasingly abnormal and artificial empire. A strong sovereign democratic Ukraine or NATO does not threaten Russia, only the Kremlin’s authoritarian rule. No amount of NATO concessions will suffice for Moscow’s need to conjure an external threat to control its people.

    Rehabilitating the Russian economy would greatly disadvantage American energy exports to Europe and Indo-Pacific regions and undermine the United States’ growing economic interests in the Black Sea, Caucasus and Central Asia. Due to the lower transport costs to Europe and Asia, Russia is a more competitive energy producer than the United States. If implemented, 28P would incur unnecessary economic costs, including the loss of energy profits, global energy primacy and new markets. Rehabilitating the Russian economy is bad for American economic interests and it will blemish not burnish President Trump’s deal-making reputation. Simply put, it would be bonkers.

    28P offers naught to Ukraine for its years-long struggle of blood, tears and sweat. It calls the brave nation to accept territorial losses and restrictions on its military size, capabilities and alliances. In return, it is offered vague security guarantees not materially different from those of the Minsk Agreements.

    “We want to be free and owe this freedom to nobody”—a harsh lesson the Poles of Warsaw learned during the waning days of WWII, when the Soviet army refused to lend a hand to their insurrection, is applicable to Ukraine. The only security guarantee for Ukraine is the Ukrainian military. An inviolable Ukraine requirement in a ceasefire or peace agreement must be a free hand—with unreserved support from allies—for an expeditious military build-up to prevent future attacks. Any territorial concessions from Ukraine will only invite more territorial aggression. Rewarding the criminal assailant for home invasion invites more breaking and entering.

    Europe’s present and future security and standing will be materially affected by the character of the eventual Ukraine ceasefire or peace plan. A strong, resilient Ukraine will act as a force multiplier for European defense against Russian imperialism. A weakened Ukraine would invite greater Russian aggression toward NATO and across the Black Sea. Europe’s standing as a strategic actor on the global stage will be directly influenced by how Ukraine’s future unfolds.

    Europe needs to convey greater rectitude and resolve in preventing the periodic reiterations of the Russian wish list. It needs to convey the deserving priority and urgency of resolving the Ukraine war with strength. It needs to adopt, amplify and act upon President Trump’s observation that Ukraine, with requisite military assistance, can repossess all its territories unlawfully occupied by Russia. Ukrainian victory on the battlefield is the only way to ensure a just peace with Vladimir Putin’s Russia. The time for European talk is over—it must act to ensure Ukraine’s victory on the battlefield.

    The United States’ handling of 28P will send a clear message to American allies, particularly Taiwan. It will either deter or encourage China to emulate Russia’s “special military operations” in its neighborhood. It will either reaffirm or cast doubt on American security assurances across Europe, the Indo-Pacific and the globe. America’s handling of the Ukraine peace process will either strengthen or weaken American alliances and standing, with wide-ranging ramifications for American security and prosperity.

    President Trump professes to be a strong leader and the greatest dealmaker ever to occupy the White House. His leadership and style have been instrumental in bringing about peace agreements between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the Caucasus and Israel and Hamas in Gaza. He is likely to bring about a cessation of hostilities in Sudan. A bad peace in Ukraine would overshadow his admirable accomplishments in other corners.

    History has been unforgiving to leaders who wasted their legacies on bad peace deals. British prime minister Neville Chamberlain sought “peace for our time” through granting the Czech Sudetenland to Adolf Hitler in 1938. President Obama’s premature withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 and subsequent Middle East equivocation led to the rise of ISIS, Russian inroads in Syria and regional upheaval from the Levant to Europe. President Biden’s ill-conceived and tragic withdrawal from Afghanistan cost American lives and honor while directly contributing to the dissolution of the Afghan state. President Trump, to safeguard his legacy, would do well to ignore entreaties—domestic or foreign—to mindlessly pursue “peace for our time” in Ukraine based on the provisions of 28P.

    28P retreads old ground of Russian appeasement under the false shroud of realism. It professes to repeat the experiences of 2008 (Georgia) and 2014 (Crimea-Donbas) and expects a different result. It offers the marauding Russian bear territories, respect and rehabilitation, in the hope that it will turn vegetarian. This fundamentally misreads the nature of the bear. You do not feed the bear to keep it in check. You arm the hunter to ensure the bear leaves the woods. Realism calls for the United States and Europe to ensure Ukraine victory on the battlefield before engaging Russia in negotiations for a just and lasting peace.

    Engaging Russia in peace negotiations while it has an upper hand in the war, because Ukraine is starved of arms from its allies, does nothing to advance American and European interests. A just and lasting peace should first and foremost remedy the situation by immediately supplying the Ukrainian military with the necessary weapons, including deep strike missiles, to level the playing field ahead of peace negotiations. Moreover, any final arrangement that does not guarantee ironclad Ukrainian sovereignty and impose the costs of war on Russia is morally and pragmatically untenable.

    President Trump will be recognized in history for his achievements in bringing peace to the Caucasus, the Middle East, Africa and other regions. A rushed, ignoble peace rewarding the aggressor in Ukraine would fatally impugn his deserved peace-making credentials. An ill-conceived peace on the lines of 28P would be remembered not for bringing peace but for prolonging the war at a high cost to American interests, security and standing. “America First” calls for standing with David, not Goliath.

    Ukraine, Europe and the Free World, while holding out hope for American resolve and rectitude, should urgently undertake all necessary actions to ensure that nothing short of a just peace sees the light of day. “NUTS,” replied General McAuliffe, commanding cornered US troops in Bastogne, to the German offer of surrender. The 28 Point Plan is beyond “Nuts.” America can do much better and Ukraine deserves far better.