As discussions surrounding a potential ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine continue, United States President Donald Trump has remained steadfast in his alignment with Russian President Vladimir Putin. This stance has raised alarms within his own Republican Party and among European allies. Sir Bill Browder, a prominent financier, author, and outspoken critic of Putin, has pointed out the contradictions in Trump’s behaviour, questioning why he consistently supports the Kremlin despite overwhelming American opposition to Russia’s actions.
Recent diplomatic efforts have seen US envoy Steve Witkoff travel to Moscow for talks with Putin, later returning to Washington to brief Trump. However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has expressed doubts about the Kremlin’s sincerity, accusing Putin of deliberately setting conditions that Ukraine cannot accept in order to derail the peace process. According to Browder, this is a well-known Russian tactic: introducing unreasonable demands to shift blame onto Ukraine while appearing to engage in diplomacy. He suggests that Putin’s ultimate goal is to manipulate Trump into furthering his agenda by portraying Ukraine as the obstacle to peace.
Trump’s approach is particularly striking given that between 84 and 94 percent of Americans view Putin negatively, a sentiment echoed across party lines. Many Republican lawmakers in Congress are reportedly frustrated with Trump’s refusal to condemn Putin and are working behind the scenes to counter his stance. This growing internal resistance suggests that even within his own party, there is recognition that siding with Russia contradicts US national interests and public opinion.
Browder, who has been instrumental in advancing legislation that allows nations to impose sanctions on Russia, believes Trump’s unwavering support for Putin is highly suspicious. He recalls how, following the Mueller investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 US election, Trump dismissed allegations of collusion as a hoax. Yet, his current actions appear to align with Russian interests, raising further concerns about his motivations.
While Trump insists that his focus is on ending the war and reducing financial costs for the US, his statements reveal a willingness to negotiate on terms favourable to Russia. He has openly discussed territorial concessions, including control over power plants and key infrastructure, suggesting that Ukraine may need to cede land in order to secure peace. Such proposals align with Russia’s long-standing objectives and undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Browder warns that Europe must prepare for a scenario in which Trump abandons Ukraine. He argues that the continent has the economic and military capacity to counter Russian aggression independently of the US, provided that European nations commit the necessary resources. Some leaders, such as UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, have already announced increased defence spending. However, Browder notes that political will and unity will be crucial in ensuring that Europe can stand firm against Russian threats.
For Putin, a divided and weakened West is the ideal outcome. Trump’s stance, whether intentional or not, serves this objective by fostering uncertainty among US allies. If European nations rise to the challenge and bolster their own defence capabilities, they could neutralise one of Russia’s key strategic advantages — the perception that Western unity is fragile.
