Written by Michael Crawford.
In an eyebrow-raising statement making waves online, Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested that the war in Ukraine might have been avoided if Donald Trump had won reelection in 2020. According to excerpts circulating Friday, Putin remarked, “If the victory wasn’t stolen from him in 2020, maybe the Ukrainian crisis that arose in 2022 would never [have] appeared.” These comments, attributed to a translation published by Russian media outlet RT.com, have added fuel to ongoing debates over U.S. foreign policy.
Putin’s assertion plays into a broader narrative that his actions as a leader are reactive, heavily influenced by the foreign policies of U.S. administrations. Notably, he launched significant military campaigns during the presidencies of Barack Obama and Joe Biden but refrained during Trump’s time in office. Critics may dismiss his statement as a calculated attempt to sow discord within American political circles, but it raises important questions about how international dynamics shift depending on who holds power in Washington.
Trump’s Peace Promises: Grand Vision or Political Theater?
Donald Trump’s campaign rhetoric around the Ukraine conflict has consistently revolved around promises of swift resolution. On the campaign trail last year, he vowed to end the war on his first day in office if reelected. While that promise struck a chord with many Americans weary of endless foreign entanglements, Trump and his advisors later acknowledged that any peace negotiations would be far from straightforward.
Trump’s approach combines tough talk with grand strategic goals. For example, he has called for stronger sanctions on Russia, a move that’s unlikely to sit well with peace activists who fear escalating tensions. Despite this, his promise of a decisive resolution continues to resonate with a significant segment of voters who view him as a dealmaker capable of brokering agreements others cannot.
His latest comments at the World Economic Forum in Davos underscored his commitment to peace. “It’s so important to get that done. That is an absolute killing field. Millions of soldiers are being killed. Nobody has seen anything like it since World War II,” he stated, reflecting on the human toll of the conflict. Whether his words translate into actionable strategies remains to be seen, but the urgency in his tone is undeniable.
Denuclearization: A Trumpian Dream or Feasible Plan?
In addition to tackling the Ukraine war, Trump has frequently emphasized the need for nuclear disarmament. Speaking about his past interactions with global leaders, Trump recalled, “We were talking about denuclearization of our two countries, and China would have come along. China right now has a much smaller nuclear armament than us, or field, than us, but they’re going to be catching [up] at some point.”
He expressed confidence in the potential for progress, noting Putin’s favorable reaction to scaling back nuclear arsenals. “I will tell you that President Putin really liked the idea of cutting back on nuclear, and I think the rest of the world, we would have gotten them to follow, and China would have come along too. China also liked it,” he claimed.
While these proposals sound promising on the surface, they are fraught with challenges. Achieving meaningful disarmament requires an unprecedented level of trust and cooperation among nations with long histories of suspicion and competition. Still, Trump’s framing of nuclear disarmament as a financial and moral imperative resonates with those seeking to curb unnecessary military expenditures and reduce global tensions.
Our Take
Putin’s comments about the 2020 U.S. election and its alleged impact on the Ukraine war underscore the high stakes of American leadership on the global stage. Regardless of whether his claims hold water, they highlight the perception abroad that U.S. policy decisions ripple far beyond its borders.
From a conservative perspective, the Biden administration’s handling of the Ukraine crisis has been a disaster. Prolonged conflict not only drains U.S. resources but also destabilizes the global economy and exacerbates humanitarian crises. Trump’s proposed approach—focusing on strong leadership and decisive action—offers a stark contrast to what many view as Biden’s reactive and indecisive policies.
However, Trump’s rhetoric must translate into results. Promises to end the war and pursue denuclearization are ambitious, but without concrete plans, they risk being dismissed as mere political posturing. Conservatives should demand accountability and detailed strategies to ensure these goals are achievable. The stakes are too high to rely on lofty promises alone.
