National Interest

by Ahmed Charai

    The end of the Ukraine War will not come through blind trust in Russian promises, but through the adage, “trust, but verify.”

On Sunday, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria asked a serious and necessary question: Does the Trump administration dangerously misunderstand Russian President Vladimir Putin

    President Putin is, of course, a Russian nationalist shaped by a career in the Soviet intelligence services, where concealment, manipulation and exploitation of weakness are instruments of power. He seeks to diminish American influence and weaken the international order.

    The evidence appears across continents. According to The Financial Times, Russia has secretly assisted Iran in developing advanced supersonic cruise-missile technology. Moscow has supported Venezuela and projected power across Africa, while using energy, disinformation and military force against Western interests. Anyone negotiating with Putin must understand that he respects strength, studies internal divisions and may use diplomacy itself as a weapon.

    But the most powerful moment in Zakaria’s segment was the testimony of Iryna Chechotkina, co-founder of Rozetka, one of Ukraine’s largest e-commerce companies. She helped build a $70 million logistics center outside Kyiv that employed around 1,000 people and supported tens of thousands of Ukrainian vendors. The warehouse represented years of work and sacrifice. For Iryna, a mother of four, it also represented time taken from her children to create something for her country’s future.

    Then three Russian missiles struck and the facility was consumed by fire. Years of human effort disappeared into smoke and twisted metal. When invited to address Putin, Iryna instead appealed to the international community: “…to help us protect our skies so that Ukrainians can live in peace, children can go to school and businesses can operate; so that we no longer have to live in bomb shelters or constantly check for air raid alerts; and so that our men stop dying.”

Her testimony forces us to ask: What is to be done

Should the West continue a war against a nuclear power without a clearly attainable political destination  Should it escalate and risk confrontation between Russia and NATO  Should it watch more of Ukraine be destroyed  Or should it negotiate

    This is not a choice between understanding Putin and seeking peace. We cannot know every assessment being made inside President Donald Trump’s White House. But no serious American policy can be based on the assumption that Putin is a benign or trustworthy partner. The relevant question is whether diplomacy, backed by leverage, can stop Ukraine’s destruction.

    Negotiation need not require absolute trust. President Ronald Reagan negotiated the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, eliminating an entire class of missiles under unprecedented verification measures. Reagan’s principle was clear: “trust, but verify.” The same realism must guide negotiations today.

    As I argued recently in The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune, this war must end—but not through naïveté. A credible settlement should rest on five principles.

    First, attacks against civilians and critical infrastructure must stop, followed by a wider ceasefire verified through intelligence, satellites and international observers.

    Second, a ceasefire must not compel Ukraine or its allies to recognize Russian sovereignty over occupied territories. Military control and legal sovereignty are different. Final territorial status can be deferred without being abandoned.

    Third, Ukraine must remain sovereign, economically viable and capable of defending itself. Guarantees must include air defenses, intelligence cooperation and predetermined assistance if Russia attacks again.

    Fourth, Russia should receive no immediate normalization. Sanctions must be relaxed only after verified compliance and restored automatically after major violations. The West must never exchange irreversible concessions for reversible Russian promises.

    Fifth, reconstruction must begin as soon as security permits. Ukraine cannot remain sovereign if its ports, energy systems and economy are left in ruins. Over time, protected commercial corridors, Black Sea navigation and supervised investment could give both societies a material interest in stability. This should not take the form of renewed Ukrainian dependence on Russia, but a higher cost for returning to war.

    US Special Envoy for Peace Missions Jared Kushner’s task is not to manufacture trust overnight. As he conducts negotiations with Russia, he must determine whether shared practical interests can help Russians and Ukrainians sustain an agreement despite their profound hostility. This possibility deserves to be tested. Security must restrain renewed aggression, while economic and human interests give both societies a reason not to return to war.

    The doctrine for dealing with Putin should therefore be simple: test, verify and enforce. Maintain pressure, grant benefits only after compliance and establish the consequences of violations in advance.

    Iryna’s appeal reminds us what is ultimately at stake: whether an entire people will recover ownership of their future. Diplomacy cannot change Putin’s nature, but disciplined statecraft can limit his choices, raise the price of renewed aggression and create the conditions for Ukrainians to live beyond this war.