During a tense bilateral meeting aimed at finalising a deal to resolve the Ukraine- Russia crisis, President Donald Trump accused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky of “gambling with World War III,” abruptly derailing the planned agreement. Trump’s warning carries weight. Since the conflict began, relentless military involvement by major global powers has heightened tensions.
Russia, motivated by realist concerns to protect its national security, has pursued aggressive actions against Ukraine and its allies. Meanwhile, the United States—spanning three consecutive administrations—alongside the European Union, has fueled the war with sustained military aid and strategic interventions, yet a decisive resolution remains elusive.
Barack Obama’s Ukraine policy (2009–2017) evolved in response to Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and the ensuing conflict in Eastern Ukraine. Initially, his administration sought a “reset” with Russia, focusing on arms control and counterterrorism cooperation.
However, Russia’s Crimea invasion shifted this approach, leading Obama to impose economic sanctions on Russian banks, energy companies, and officials. The U.S. supplied non-lethal aid—radars, body armor, and vehicles—but Obama resisted providing lethal weapons, wary of sparking a direct U.S.-Russia confrontation.
Diplomatically, he rallied NATO, the EU, and the G7 to isolate Russia, bolstered Ukraine’s government with IMF-led economic aid, and supported the Minsk Agreements (2015–2017) for a ceasefire and peace talks with Russia-backed separatists. Despite these efforts, fighting persisted, and critics argued that Obama’s restraint on lethal aid signaled weakness, emboldening Russian aggression.
Donald Trump’s first term (2017–2021) brought a shift in U.S. policy toward Ukraine, blending military support with political turbulence and skepticism about America’s global role. Breaking from Obama’s caution, Trump authorized lethal aid, including Javelin anti-tank missiles, with nearly $1.5 billion in security assistance to bolster Ukraine against Russian-backed forces in Donbas.
Yet his tenure was marred by controversy, notably when he froze $391 million in military aid in 2019, sparking domestic backlash. Trump often questioned Ukraine’s strategic value to the U.S., criticized NATO allies for inadequate defense contributions, and suggested easing sanctions on Russia—moves that raised doubts about his commitment to countering Moscow.
He also opposed the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, sanctioning involved companies to curb Russia’s energy leverage over Europe. While Trump’s military aid marked a policy shift, his erratic stance left Ukrainian leaders uncertain of U.S. reliability.
Joe Biden’s administration (2021–present) has positioned the U.S. as Ukraine’s staunchest ally against Russian aggression, delivering over $75 billion in aid—the largest such package in U.S. history. This includes advanced systems like Patriot missiles, HIMARS, Abrams tanks, drones, artillery, and F-16 training, alongside intelligence sharing and battlefield coordination.
Biden has intensified sanctions on Russia, targeting banks, oligarchs, and energy exports, while imposing a price cap on Russian oil to choke war funding. Beyond military support, he has reinforced NATO—backing Finland and Sweden’s membership—deployed more U.S. troops to Eastern Europe, and provided over $20 billion in economic and humanitarian aid to sustain Ukraine and support refugees.
Biden has also pushed war crimes probes against Russia, signed a 10-year security pact with Ukraine, and advocated for its eventual NATO membership. His policy—pro-Ukraine, anti-Russia, and pro-NATO—has made Ukraine a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy, cementing America’s leadership in the global response.
Despite massive Western support and sanctions, the Ukraine war remains deadlocked, with intense combat yielding no major territorial shifts. Uncertainty clouds the future of Western commitment; potential shifts under a Trump presidency and growing European fatigue could disrupt aid flows.
Russia, under Vladimir Putin, appears dug in for a protracted fight, aiming to exhaust Ukraine’s resources and erode Western resolve. The toll is staggering: immense loss of life, widespread destruction, and global economic upheaval from sanctions. Worse, the involvement of major powers—directly or indirectly—raises the specter of World War III if tensions boil over.
Given these stakes, diplomatic alternatives deserve serious consideration. Former President Trump has proposed leveraging his rapport with Putin to broker a peace deal, arguing he’s uniquely positioned to negotiate an end to the bloodshed. While skepticism surrounds his approach, any viable path to de-escalation should not be dismissed outright.
