«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 Mykhailo Podolyak propose shifting the narrative in negotiations to safeguard Ukraine’s sovereignty?
**Interview with Mykhailo Podolyak: A Ukrainian Perspective on Negotiations with Russia**
*Editor:* Good afternoon, Mykhailo. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the ongoing situation in Ukraine and the complex relationships at play, particularly with Donald Trump potentially re-entering the political scene.
*Mykhailo Podolyak:* Thank you for having me.
*Editor:* In recent statements, you mentioned that Trump’s aspirations might conflict with a genuine approach to negotiations with Russia. Can you elaborate on that?
*Podolyak:* Absolutely. Donald Trump is fundamentally a politician who seeks to be at the very top. If he were to confront Putin directly or support Ukraine’s sovereignty, he risks unsettling the balance of power he wishes to maintain. The projects being suggested right now, which seem to involve concessions to Russia, originate from Putin’s desires. This could never lead to a genuine peace, as it positions Trump as secondary in a conflict that fundamentally undermines Ukraine’s freedom.
*Editor:* You raised concerns about discussions of a potential ceasefire in exchange for territorial concessions. What are your thoughts on that?
*Podolyak:* It’s perplexing to see so much discourse implying that Ukraine must concede something to reach peace. Putin’s ambitions are rooted in the destruction of Ukraine and expanding his control over Europe. The idea that Ukraine should surrender any part of its territory is not only unrealistic but dangerous. Should Ukraine give in, there would be no guarantee that Russia would honor any deal.
*Editor:* You mentioned the role of Ukraine in the broader geopolitical landscape. Can you explain what you mean by ”bringing pragmatism to the negotiating table”?
*Podolyak:* Certainly. While we recognize the need for practical discussions, we believe that these talks should not place the burden to concede upon Ukraine. Instead, we need to shift the narrative and discuss what Russia should be made to relinquish. We’ve fought valiantly for three years, and we shouldn’t have to surrender our sovereignty. Furthermore, Ukraine has valuable military capabilities to offer and rare minerals that could be a part of a strategic partnership with the U.S. We need to change the terms of these negotiations — it should not just be about asking but about obliging Russia to accept meaningful conditions for peace.
*Editor:* Thank you, Mykhailo. It’s clear that the stakes are high, and the path forward remains complicated. Your insights are invaluable.
*Podolyak:* Thank you for having me. Let’s hope for a resolution that preserves Ukraine’s sovereignty and security.
