Trump's plan to talk directly with Putin to end the Ukraine war was slammed as risky for Ukraine's independence and Europe's safety, while a few supporters saw it as a fast fix. Last week, Donald Trump announced plans to negotiate directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine. Now, President Zelensky of Ukraine has been invited to join peace talks with Russian negotiators in Saudi Arabia, according to a US congressman. Senior officials from Trump’s administration will travel there this week to begin discussions.
Some see Trump’s efforts as a quick way to end the conflict, but many Independent readers were not convinced when we asked for their views. Readers shared concerns that Trump’s plan is too simplistic and more about his own interests. Many warned that leaving Kyiv out of the talks and pushing NATO aside could weaken Ukraine and encourage Putin to take more land. They argued that Trump’s approach focuses on quick deals instead of long-term peace and could hurt international support for Ukraine.
Some also criticised Trump for putting his own goals above global security. They stressed that any peace deal should protect Ukraine’s independence and Europe’s safety. Overall, readers expressed frustration and urged for more transparency and a stronger stand for democratic values. Here’s what you had to say:. Trump's interventions are only exacerbating the problem. He is an opportunist and he offers nothing but short-term, simplistic answers to complex problems. Forget "America First" — everything he does is "Trump First" — and what he sees here is an opportunity with Putin to dominate the globe. He has no loyalty to allies and he will do whatever, with whomever, to further his and his coterie's ambitions.
I think the UK government needs to distance itself from the Trump administration and stand shoulder to shoulder with other sensible nations to oppose him on this. If not, history may not forgive us. Trump is only emboldening Putin and we should be under no illusion that if Ukraine is forced to concede territory to Russia, nowhere in Europe is safe. Whatsthestorydontvotetory. What else can he do? At least he is ending the war, which Biden was totally incapable of doing. How will Ukraine get back the lost territory? Are the brave British soldiers going to march onto the frontlines of the battlefields in Ukraine and take the territory away from the Russians? Please do so and show us how it should be done — I encourage you to go. If not, you have nothing to say about Trump. Why should America defend Ukraine? It seems that Europe can't even defend its own backyard. You can just talk a lot. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
As far as demolishing democracy goes, Putin and Trump are on the same page. Together, they might stop the war, but the cost of that peace will effectively be that Putin has won. And Trump, with his talk of exploiting Ukrainian minerals as the price for help, is engaging in predatory imperialism. Nobody is saying Trump is a force for good except the deluded, the usual apologists, and people in league with his disgraceful agenda.
Sacredmonger2. So many previously thought it was fiction — that one man ruling the world. Ukraine is being sold off, appeased, and painted out of the maps. This war can be stopped in a heartbeat if Ukraine just gives up — and that is what Trump is proposing. Give up all the occupied land and a bit more, for peace. Give up all hope of becoming part of the West or NATO and succumb to being a Russian satellite. I don't think this is what Ukraine wants; that's not what they are fighting for.
If this plan is used, next step: Gaza on Sea, Greenland taken over as a base and mine, Canada incorporated as an American state, and the UK as a vassal. Full mining rights in Ukraine and control of cereal production is Trump's reward there. Martyn. The US has been a central piece of this conflict since the start in 2014, and before. It is right for the US, Ukraine, and Russia to negotiate peace. If the UK was involved in the conflict back in 2014, then maybe they should also be at the table. Up to now, Trump is the only person talking about negotiation to stop the carnage.
When Trump started talking about annexing Greenland (and later Gaza), it became obvious (at least to me) that he and Putin have the same kinds of ambitions. In a sense, he has a vested interest in allowing Putin to have his annexed territory insofar as helping to convince the world that annexations can be OK. Therefore, I can't see that his intervention can be anything other than biased and detrimental to the peace process.
Hungubwe. Trump has completely bypassed an initial allied diplomatic response. There is no detail about his 90-minute call with Putin. He has kicked away any initial leverage that Ukraine had, and his administration has announced that they won't get involved in Ukraine and that the protection of Europe is now of secondary value. This is not only a unilaterally and ego-driven strategic and diplomatic disaster, but it gives Putin a heads up and will embolden him for planning further probing and land grabs in the region — Moldova and the Baltic states. The special relationship with the US has now expired. Starmer needs to realise this and firmly align the UK with our true allies in the EU, economically and militarily.
.png?auto=webp&width=800)
