The city of Kyiv no longer bears the scars of war as it did three years ago. Shops are open, and commuters brave traffic jams on their way to work. However, since February 12 this year, when US President Donald Trump conveyed a lengthy show of support to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, old fears of national peril from 2022 have resurfaced. Ukrainians used to be frustrated with President Joe Biden’s limitations on weapon systems and their usage in Ukraine. Regardless, they were confident of his allegiance.
In contrast, Donald Trump has been spreading a stream of exaggerations, half-truths, and blatant falsehoods about the conflict, echoing President Putin’s narrative. These include labeling Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky as a dictator unworthy of involvement in decisions about his country’s future. Trump’s biggest fabrication is the claim that Ukraine initiated the war.
Trump’s approach to negotiations involves offering concessions prematurely, rather than pressuring the country that breached international law by invading its neighbor. His public proclamations have granted Russia significant concessions, stating that Ukraine will not join NATO and acknowledging its forceful retention of seized territory. Putin interprets concessions as weakness, as he demands even more Ukrainian land than his forces currently occupy.
Following the first talks between Russia and the US since the 2022 invasion, Putin’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated the stipulation that no NATO troops would be permitted in Ukraine to provide security guarantees.
A seasoned European diplomat, familiar with dealings between Russia and the US, suggested that Lavrov, a seasoned official, would have outwitted Trump’s novice Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Despite Trump’s recent disparagement of Ukraine’s president, senior adviser Ihor Brusylo emphasized the immense pressure they face.
“These are exceedingly challenging times,” Brusylo stated. “The situation now is as difficult as it was in 2022. It feels like we are reliving it all over again.”
Brusylo emphasized that Ukrainians, alongside their president, remain resolute in their fight for independence.
“We are an independent nation. We are part of Europe, and we will continue to be.”
In the aftermath of Vladimir Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the sounds of battle on Kyiv’s outskirts reverberated through almost deserted streets. Checkpoints, barricades, sandbag walls, and tank traps swiftly lined Kyiv’s wide avenues. At the railway station, thousands of civilians, predominantly women and children, scrambled to board westward-bound trains away from the Russian forces.
The platforms were crowded, and with each arriving train, a fresh wave of panic swept through as people jostled to board. In the frigid days, amidst bitter winds and snow flurries, the atmosphere was filled with uncertainty.
It seemed as though the vibrant colors of the 21st century were fading away, giving the impression of an old monochrome newsreel that Europeans had long thought was relegated to the archives of history. President Zelensky, as described by Joe Biden, had dismissed American warnings about an impending invasion. While Putin’s saber-rattling had been ominous, a full-scale invasion with tens of thousands of troops and armored columns seemed like a relic of the past.
Putin was confident that Russia’s powerful and modernized army would swiftly defeat Ukraine and its resilient president. Even Ukraine’s western allies believed in a quick victory for Russia. The media discussed the idea of smuggling light weapons to support Ukrainian insurgency, while the West imposed sanctions and hoped for the best.
As Russian troops gathered near Ukraine’s borders, Germany provided 5,000 ballistic combat helmets instead of offensive weapons. Vitali Klitschko, the mayor of Kyiv and the former heavyweight boxing champion, criticized Germany in a newspaper, sarcastically questioning the usefulness of sending helmets over offensive weapons.
Despite the mounting pressure, Zelensky refused to leave Kyiv to establish a government in exile. He traded his presidential suit for military attire and reassured Ukrainians through videos and social media that he would stand with them in the fight.
In a surprising turn of events, Ukraine successfully repelled the Russian advance towards Kyiv, prompting a shift in the attitudes of the Americans and Europeans. Arms supplies to Ukraine increased as a result.
Reflecting on the situation, a senior Ukrainian official remarked anonymously, “Putin’s mistake was that he prepared for a parade, not a war. He underestimated Ukraine’s determination to fight, expecting a warm welcome instead of resistance.”
On March 29, 2022, Russian forces retreated from Kyiv. In the aftermath, we cautiously navigated the chaotic and ravaged outskirts of Kyiv, witnessing the devastating impact of the conflict. The roads that were meant for a triumphant Russian entry into Kyiv were now strewn with the bodies of civilians, left where they fell. Survivors recounted the horrors of Russian occupation, with stories of violence and looting.
As the war progressed, Kyiv saw a resurgence, but remained on high alert due to ongoing missile and drone threats. The front line, spanning over 1,000 kilometers from the northern border with Russia to the Black Sea, was marked by desolate villages and towns. In the east, Russian forces made slow advances in Donetsk and Luhansk, facing substantial losses in men and equipment.
Last year, Ukraine launched a successful incursion into Russia, seizing territory in Kursk. The conflict continues, with Ukrainian forces fighting to hold their ground and push back against the aggressors.
In the snow-covered forests along the border with Kursk in north-eastern Ukraine, the geopolitical storm stirred by Donald Trump remains a distant threat. If the US president proceeds with cutting military aid and intelligence-sharing, and potentially imposing a peace deal favoring Russia, tensions could escalate. Despite this, the rhythm of the war persists as soldiers navigate the treacherous terrain, fortified by concrete defenses and high-tech underground bunkers powered by generators and solar panels.
Amidst the conflict, corporal Evhen, a seasoned soldier, remains focused on his duties and his family back home. He reflects on the challenges of the front line, including facing North Korean forces aligned with Putin’s regime. As the war continues, the soldiers rely on their own resources and resilience, acknowledging the fleeting nature of external support.
While some volunteers have succumbed to the brutal realities of war, others like Mykola, who leads an airborne assault company, remain determined to defend their land with the help of American-supplied armoured vehicles. They see their mission in Kursk as a defiance against a nuclear power, determined to protect Ukraine from Putin’s expansionist ambitions.
Ultimately, the soldiers on the front lines carry the weight of their nation’s fate, unwavering in their resolve to defend their homeland against external threats.
Vladimir Putin.
“He lied so many times, I can’t even count on my fingers. To everyone – to the Russian people, to us, to our Western partners. He deceived everyone.”
In the early days after the invasion, at a volunteer center in Kyiv, I encountered two young students, Maxsym Lutsyk, 19, and Dmytro Kisilenko, 18, who were enlisting to join the fight. Standing among older men who could have been their fathers and other young recruits, they carried camping gear, appearing like friends heading to a festival, except for the presence of their rifles. Reflecting on the scene, I noted, “Throughout history, young lads of 18 and 19 have gone off to battle. I had hoped that in Europe, we had moved beyond that.” A few weeks later, Maxsym and Dmytro were stationed at a checkpoint just behind the front line in Kyiv, still students sharing jokes about their families.
Both participated in the battle of Kyiv. While Dmytro opted to depart the military as a student volunteer when the conflict shifted to the east, choosing instead to train as an officer at the National Military University, he stands ready to return to the fight if needed. Maxsym, on the other hand, remained in uniform, serving on the front line in the east for over two years. Presently, he holds a position as an officer in military intelligence.
I have maintained contact with them as war, unexpectedly, shapes their adulthood, as it does for countless other young individuals in this setting. The recent political shifts towards Moscow under Trump’s administration have left them feeling as if they must start anew.
“We have mobilized,” Dmytro remarked. “Our resources, our people – I believe it is time for us to do so once more.”
Unlike the men in the forest on the Kursk border, Maxsym and Dmytro keep abreast of current events. Trump’s diplomatic and strategic maneuvers, commencing at the Munich security conference merely ten days prior, evoke comparisons to the infamous agreement made by Britain’s Neville Chamberlain in Munich in 1938, where Czechoslovakia was compelled to yield to Adolf Hitler’s demands.
“It’s akin to that,” Maxsym stated. “The West is giving an opening to an aggressor to seize territories. The West is striking a deal with the aggressor, with the United States playing the role of Great Britain.”
“This is an extremely perilous moment for the entire world, not solely for Ukraine,” Maxsym continued. “We observe Europe beginning to stir… but if readiness for war was their goal, they ought to have begun preparations years ago.”
Dmytro concurred on the looming dangers.
“I believe Donald Trump aspires to emulate a new Neville Chamberlain… Mr. Trump should focus on emulating Winston Churchill.”
For a real estate developer like Donald Trump, who transitioned from the property business to reality TV
As President Trump seeks to redefine America’s role in global affairs, tensions simmer over the country’s perceived exploitation by its allies. A familiar refrain echoes through the corridors of power, as Trump’s defense secretary warns NATO partners against treating “Uncle Sam” as a “sucker.” The specter of President Eisenhower’s warnings resurfaces, underscoring a decades-long struggle to assert America’s interests on the world stage.
In a pivotal moment in 1959, Eisenhower expressed frustration at the perceived lack of reciprocity from European allies, cautioning against the erosion of American credibility. Fast forward to the present day, and Trump’s demands for mineral rights from Ukraine signal a bold stance rooted in a desire for retribution. However, Zelensky’s steadfast refusal to acquiesce underscores the complexity of international relations and the delicate balance of power.
Amidst the geopolitical chess game, European leaders grapple with the fallout of their support for Ukraine, straddling a fine line between deterrence and escalation. The looming specter of a protracted conflict with Russia underscores the fragility of the current alliances and the urgent need for a coherent strategy to navigate the turbulent waters of international diplomacy.
At the heart of Trump’s approach lies a belief in the power of personal diplomacy, exemplified by his outreach to Putin. The pursuit of a détente with Russia raises eyebrows and concerns among traditional allies, who fear the erosion of established norms and values in pursuit of realpolitik.
As the specter of conflict looms large, the fate of Ukraine hangs in the balance, with echoes of past struggles and present uncertainties shaping the future of the region. The resilience of the Ukrainian people and their struggle for self-determination underscore the enduring human cost of geopolitical machinations.
In the midst of uncertainty, one thing remains clear – the need for a nuanced and comprehensive approach to international relations that balances strategic interests with ethical considerations. The evolving dynamics of global power demand a reevaluation of traditional paradigms and a willingness to engage in dialogue and cooperation to address shared challenges.
As the world watches and waits, the future of Ukraine and the broader European security landscape hang in the balance. The echoes of history reverberate through the corridors of power, reminding us of the enduring lessons of the past and the imperative of forging a path towards a more stable and peaceful world order.
In the midst of uncertainty and turmoil, one thing remains certain – the need for a new approach to global affairs that prioritizes diplomacy, dialogue, and cooperation over confrontation and conflict. The fate of nations and the lives of millions hang in the balance, underscoring the urgency of finding common ground and building a more secure and prosperous future for all.
