«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
What are Mykhailo Podolyak’s thoughts on the potential impact of U.S. election candidates on the Russia-Ukraine conflict?
**Interview with Mykhailo Podolyak, Advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky**
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Mr. Podolyak, for joining us today. With the upcoming elections in the U.S., there’s significant interest in how candidates like Donald Trump and Kamala Harris might handle the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. How do you assess Trump’s potential approach based on his past statements?
**Podolyak:** Thank you for having me. In my view, Donald Trump’s positioning is quite complex. He seems drawn to proposals that could appease Russia, potentially leading to the idea of concessions from Ukraine. However, this focus on negotiating with a power like Putin is problematic, given that any concessions are not just about territorial compromise but about sovereignty and survival for Ukraine.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned negotiations. How do you see the conversation shifting, especially with Harris continuing her predecessor’s policies?
**Podolyak:** Kamala Harris has been clear about supporting Ukraine militarily and politically, aligning closely with previous administration policies. This consistency is crucial. We cannot afford to normalize a dialogue where Ukraine is merely expected to concede. Instead, we should be pressing Russia to face consequences for its actions.
**Interviewer:** In light of the ongoing war, do you feel that there’s an underestimation of what Ukraine brings to the negotiating table?
**Podolyak:** Absolutely. There seems to be an odd expectation that Ukraine should be the one making sacrifices. We’ve developed significant military capabilities and have valuable resources like lithium and titanium. We’re not just victims; we are partners ready to contribute. The rational approach here should be to make clear that there are costs for Russia’s aggression, and we won’t be the ones dictated to.
**Interviewer:** As the conflict progresses and discussions of ceasefire arise, what do you think about the ideas being floated regarding potential NATO membership in exchange for peace?
**Podolyak:** It’s a dangerous proposition. If we entertain ceasing resistance while yielding territory, it would undermine our sovereignty and embolden aggressors like Putin. This is not just about negotiating peace; it’s about preserving our national identity and future. The notion of trading land for peace must be scrutinized closely, as it overlooks Russia’s ongoing ambitions in Europe.
**Interviewer:** Thank you for your insights, Mr. Podolyak. Your perspectives shed light on the complexities involved in these political discussions as the conflict continues.
**Podolyak:** Thank you for the opportunity to share. It’s vital that the international community understands the situation from Ukraine’s standpoint as discussions evolve.
