«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 expertise 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 the implications of Ukraine refusing to make concessions in negotiations with Russia?
**Interview with Mykhailo Podolyak: Insights on Ukraine’s Stance in the Face of Ongoing Conflict**
**Editor:** Thank you for joining us today, Mykhailo Podolyak, advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Let’s dive right in. You’ve been vocal about the discussions around potential concessions to Russia. Could you elaborate on your position regarding these negotiations?
**Podolyak:** Thank you for having me. My stance is clear: Ukraine, as a country that is presently under attack, should not be expected to make concessions or stop resisting. We have been fighting for our sovereignty for three years, and the idea that we would relinquish our rights is simply unacceptable. It seems a bit one-sided to discuss what Ukraine should give up without also considering what Russia must concede.
**Editor:** You mentioned that suggestions for a ceasefire often involve significant concessions to Russia. What are your thoughts on that?
**Podolyak:** The conversation about a ceasefire typically surfaces because there’s an assumption that Ukraine should concede something in exchange. But let’s be honest—Putin’s ambitions are clear: he seeks the destruction of Ukraine and domination over Europe. So, why would he agree to a deal that relinquishes any of that control? It doesn’t make sense.
**Editor:** Some proposals suggest accepting NATO membership in exchange for concessions. How do you view this arrangement?
**Podolyak:** The notion that Ukraine must give up occupied territories in exchange for NATO membership is flawed. If Ukraine is to join NATO, it should do so on its own terms, without unnecessary compromises. We have shown our capability and resilience, and trying to negotiate from a position of weakness won’t serve our interests.
**Editor:** You suggested bringing pragmatism to the negotiating table. Can you expand on what that would look like?
**Podolyak:** Absolutely. We need to adopt a rational approach, one that pressures Russia to accept appropriate conditions. Ukraine has developed significant military expertise and could potentially assist the U.S. by partially replacing American contingents in Europe, for example. Moreover, we have valuable resources, like rare minerals, that we can secure for joint economic benefit. It’s time to turn the tables and obligate Russia to a serious discussion about its actions and consequences.
**Editor:** Thank you for sharing your insights, Mr. Podolyak. It certainly offers a clearer perspective on Ukraine’s position amid the ongoing conflict.
**Podolyak:** Thank you for your time. It’s essential to keep these discussions alive and clarify Ukraine’s stance and objectives.