Ukraine has a Trump strategy

Under President Biden, the U.S. pledged support for Ukraine for “as long as it takes," and it seemed that military aid and assistance from North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies would guarantee Ukraine’s resilience. But Donald Trump’s 2024 victory left Ukrainian officials guessing about his next steps. They had to come to terms with the danger that the aid they received from the Biden administration might not be continued under the new president.

Initially, Ukrainian diplomats were slow to adapt to Mr. Trump. His foreign-policy platform seemed at odds with Ukraine’s ambitions. It took months for Kyiv to understand that the president wasn’t particularly concerned with the intricacies of Russian aggression—he was wholly focused on achieving a peace agreement.

This realization was difficult for many in Ukraine, but as time passed, their strategy evolved. With advice from British and French diplomats, Ukrainian officials came to a critical understanding: They needed to engage with Mr. Trump’s diplomacy, demonstrate their willingness to cooperate, and wait for Russia to be the first to reject any potential cease-fire or peace talks. This approach allows Ukraine to avoid blame when talks inevitably fall apart.

The strategy, however, is dependent on Mr. Trump. In his efforts to position himself as a peacemaker, the president faces two paths forward—neither of which are simple. The first is to push for a quick settlement within strict parameters, face opposition from one of the warring parties, and blame that party for the plan’s failure.

The second, more prolonged route involves pushing both sides for concessions. This presents challenges. The U.S. holds some leverage over Russia, but it needs Moscow’s cooperation for crucial nuclear talks about the impending expiration of the New Start Treaty, as well as for the effort to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Applying pressure on Ukraine is easier but likely to backfire, especially ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. A March 9 poll from the research nonprofit More in Common found that 67% of Americans, including 65% of Republicans, believe the U.S. should continue sending aid to Ukraine until the end of the war.

The sense among Ukraine’s leadership is that the U.S. will push for a rapid resolution to the war with little room for deviation. One side will be labeled as a hurdle to peace the moment it refuses to make concessions. This would place Ukraine in the untenable position of desperately needing support from the U.S. while facing pressure to deliver results in negotiations that are moving far more quickly than Kyiv can accommodate.

Adding to Ukraine’s anxiety is the understanding that while European backing remains steadfast, it can’t replace the American military and intelligence support that has kept Ukraine in the fight. European leaders privately advise Ukraine to avoid provoking the U.S. or becoming an obstacle in Mr. Trump’s peace efforts, especially when the Trump administration’s demands are still forming. The goal for Kyiv is clear: Don’t become the problem.

Ukraine is caught between a rock and a hard place. The pace of diplomacy with Mr. Trump is fast, and the risk of falling behind is high. The Europeans are asking Kyiv to move quickly, but Mr. Trump’s strategy leaves little room for error. The more hesitant Ukraine is, the more it risks being seen as an impediment.

Mr. Trump, for his part, is playing his cards cautiously. On recent calls with both Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin, he seemed to be trying to act as an unprejudiced mediator. This means Ukraine has to adjust to Washington’s ever-shifting priorities. The struggle is less about military might and more about diplomatic agility. The key for Kyiv is not to fall into the trap of becoming the obstacle to peace.

Mr. Skrypchenko is president of the Transatlantic Dialogue Center.