«Donald Trump is a politician who aims to be number one. The alleged projects circulating at the moment are all based on granting something to Russia, but they are suggestions from Vladimir Putin. If Trump went after him, he would become number two. And I don’t think he can accept it.” Speaking to Repubblica is Mykhailo Podolyak, advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who underlines – regarding the acceptance of a ceasefire in exchange for the concession of the occupied territories to Russia and immediate entry into NATO – that «a great deal is being made talk about this hypothesis because it is assumed that Ukraine must necessarily concede something. Putin’s goals are the destruction of Ukraine and domination in Europe, so why would he accept the deal?”
«I don’t think that the country under attack should make concessions and stop resisting – specifies Podolyak -. We have been fighting for three years and now we should give up our sovereignty? Unfortunately I don’t see the same discussion about what Russia should give or pay. It’s a bit strange, isn’t it? We bring pragmatism to the negotiating table. We have developed military skills and can offer Trump a partial replacement of American contingents in various regions, first of all in Europe. We also have deposits of rare minerals, such as lithium and titanium, that we can exploit together. The rational approach is to force Russia to accept appropriate conditions. Don’t ask or negotiate, but oblige.”
«The tools exist – continues the presidential advisor – and I am not talking about the military ones but rather the control of the price of oil. The US has the means to transform the market and make it unfavorable to Russia. They can also issue economic sanctions that actually hit Moscow. In my opinion this will be Trump’s line, he is someone who can take drastic measures. If we also inflict blows on a military level, as is happening on a smaller scale, we will influence the Russian internal front. As for Kursk, we are solving the problems positively, eliminating the positions that launched attacks on Chenihiv and Sumy. The point is another, when we began the operation in the region, we expected to be authorized to use (Western, ed.) missiles and to have more weapons of this kind.” The Ukraine situation will be a tough nut to crack for future President Trump.
#Trump #concessions #Russia #Tempo
How does Ukraine’s military advancement influence its position in potential negotiations for peace?
**Interview with Mykhailo Podolyak: Ukraine’s Stance on Ceasefire Negotiations**
**Editor:** Thank you for joining us, Mr. Podolyak. In a recent interview, you expressed strong views on the proposals suggesting Ukraine should concede territories in exchange for a ceasefire. Could you elaborate on why you believe this would not be a viable solution?
**Podolyak:** Thank you for having me. The notion that Ukraine should concede anything is fundamentally flawed. Vladimir Putin’s primary goal is the destruction of our nation and the establishment of domination over Europe. Any suggestion that Ukraine should give up its sovereignty in exchange for peace only undermines our legitimate right to exist as an independent country.
**Editor:** You mentioned that negotiating ‘concessions’ from Ukraine seems one-sided. What would you suggest should happen instead?
**Podolyak:** Exactly. I believe the conversation should shift to what Russia must concede and what costs they should face for their aggression. It’s quite strange to see that the narrative often focuses only on what Ukraine should give up. We have been resilient for three years; our fight is against invasion, not a negotiation to accept the status quo imposed by an aggressor.
**Editor:** Some have suggested that Trump’s involvement might change the dynamics. Given your insight, do you think a potential Trump administration would genuinely seek to mediate for Ukraine?
**Podolyak:** Trump’s political ambitions are clear; he aims to remain number one. However, negotiating from a position of weakness—by conceding to Russia—would only undermine him. If he were to accept any projects tied to Putin’s suggestions, it would mean elevating Russia’s status at the expense of Ukraine. He risks becoming number two to Putin’s agenda, and I doubt he would find that acceptable.
**Editor:** Interestingly, you also referred to Ukraine’s military advancements and resources. How could these play a role in negotiations?
**Podolyak:** Ukraine has significantly developed its military capabilities, which provides us leverage. We are proposing a pragmatic solution: we could assist by partially replacing American contingents in Europe while also offering collaboration on our rich mineral reserves, such as lithium and titanium. This approach would encourage a rational negotiation where we obligate Russia to meet our conditions, rather than asking for concessions.
**Editor:** Thank you for your insights, Mr. Podolyak. It’s clear that Ukraine is firm in its stance against any negotiations that compromise its sovereignty.
**Podolyak:** Thank you for the discussion. Our message remains clear: we will not give in to aggression, and any discussions must reflect that strength.
