Why is Trump siding with Russia?

Donald Trump has called President Zelenskyy a dictator, stopped sending aid to Ukraine and is publicly making favourable overtures to Russia as part of a proposed peace deal. All the while, he has not said one bad word about the man who began the war: Vladimir Putin. How did we end up in a situation where the leader of the free world is lambasting his allies and cosying up to the enemy?

Friend or foe in the White House?

A quick recap

Russia has a long history of being an enemy of the West. 

Those who grew up during the Cold War were lectured on the nuclear apocalypse the Soviets wanted to rain down on the democratic world. Previous generations saw tensions stoked following Russia’s transition to communism in 1917. 

Even the brief allyship during World War II can be seen as a pause in hostilities to fight a common enemy, rather than a peace between two ideological poles.

Successive US presidents have stood firm against Russia and President Vladimir Putin, a man who is set on continuing the tradition of destabilising the West. Most recently, the ‘leader of the free world’ has played a vital role in the global response to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, with Joe Biden arming his ally and sanctioning the aggressor. 

You can read more about why the war started here. 

But then Donald Trump stepped into the Oval Office. 

Trump pledged to end the Ukraine War on day one of taking on the top job - but his proposals for a peace deal seem overwhelmingly favourable to Putin. He has suggested Ukraine might have to surrender territory to Russia in order for a ceasefire to be agreed - and last week paused all aid and military intelligence sharing in the hope it pressures Zelenskyy into signing this agreement.

He has also supported Putin’s demands that Ukraine does not join NATO, playing this card before negotiations have even begun. Making such big concessions prior to any settlement being brokered leaves Zelenskyy with very little wiggle room to make demands of his own. Why would Russia compromise when Trump has already suggested he would accept their demands? 

You can read more about why Trump’s idea of a peace deal is problematic for Ukraine here. 

After over a century of strife between Russia and the US, Trump seems to have shredded American foreign policy and is now putting Putin’s interests above those of his allies. 

Money, money, money

Before the 2024 election, Pew Research Center released a poll detailing the most important issues informing voters’ choices at the ballot box. The results showed 93% of Trump supporters, and 81% of all voters, listed the economy as ‘very important’ to how they would vote. Trump also received a ten point lead over Kamala Harris when voters were asked who they believed would make better decisions about economic policy.

The attraction here was Trump’s commitment to put more money back into the pockets of everyday, hard-working Americans. For those who had seen inflation eat into their savings, this was a welcome position for a potential president to take. 

Actions were dubbed a pushback against “being woke and being broke”. Climate change protections have been ripped up in favour of new oil and gas endeavours to increase national reserves. Tariffs have been introduced to protect American industry from foreign competition and because Trump believes the US is on the bad end of international trade deals. You can read more about the looming trade war and why it might not be the ‘good deal’ Trump has promised for the US here. 

And, with the help of Elon Musk, the President has set up the new Department for Government Efficiency, which seeks to cut government waste. Money earmarked for improving diversity in the workplace and supporting international development has been on the chopping block.

Part of this initiative is to keep more American taxpayer money within US borders, the argument being that there are domestic problems which should be prioritised over foreign issues. Voters were incredibly responsive to this stance, and so Trump is making good on his promises. That means limiting the aid budget, the biggest recipient of which is currently Ukraine. 

Trump claims $350 billion has been sent to Zelenskyy to defend his country, and has accused him of “grifting” from the American people. This is at best an overestimate: Ukraine has received roughly $120 billion in direct aid from the US, according to the Kiel Institute. 

But that figure includes military aid, such as weapons, which has actually been invested in American companies to manufacture and provide this equipment. While this money is definitely benefitting Ukraine, it is also supporting domestic jobs and industry, making it more complex than simply being considered foreign aid. Slashing these investments will be harmful to the US, too.

Last week, Trump announced a pause to any more aid going to Ukraine - seemingly in an attempt to pressure Zelenskyy into agreeing to a ceasefire with Russia and encourage the rest of Europe into defending itself rather than relying on US resources. All of this fits his presentation of America getting a shoddy deal while the rest of the world free rides on its goodwill. 

A more permanent peace will, in Trump’s eyes, prevent the need for any further American money flowing into Europe, something he has long been critical of. More than that, the ceasefire he wants will seek to claw back the money already sent into Ukraine. Zelenskyy has signalled willingness to sign a mineral deal, which will allow the US access to its rare earth minerals as repayment for its help, hoping it will encourage continued American support of their defence. 

An end to the fighting is therefore in Trump’s best interests: he can position himself as the man who stopped sending taxpayer money abroad, and actually recuperated most of it. But stopping the war isn’t really Ukraine’s decision. If you want to stop a bully punching someone, you have to negotiate with the bully - the victim doesn’t have much leeway. 

The reason his ceasefire favours Russia may simply be because he thinks if he can get Putin onside, the deal is more likely to stick, and he will see a return on investment a lot sooner. In his own words: “I’m finding it more difficult, frankly, to deal with Ukraine. And they don’t have the cards. In terms of getting a final settlement, it may be easier dealing with Russia.”

But it also seems a more personal motive is at play. 

It’s personal

The relationship between Washington and Kyiv has been strained recently, to say the least. The furious meeting between Trump, Vance and Zelenskyy in the Oval Office on 28 February shows the President holds a degree of contempt for his opposite number in Ukraine.

This is the latest in a series of inflammatory remarks Trump has directed towards Zelenskyy. Throughout February, he labelled him a dictator, attacked his approval ratings and accused him of starting the war. 

All the while, he has not said one negative word about an actual dictator - and the villain in this whole story - Vladimir Putin. Instead, he has heaped praise on the Russian leader, wagering that he is more “generous” than he needs to be and saying his intensifying bombardments on Ukrainian civilians is “what anybody would do”. 

So why is Trump admiring an enemy of democracy while chastising the man defending it?

In his first term, Donald Trump was impeached twice. One of those times was due to allegations he sought foreign interference to boost his chances of re-election during the 2020 race. The country involved? Ukraine.

During a phone call with Zelenskyy, Trump asked if the Ukrainian president would dig up evidence on Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, who worked for a Ukrainian energy firm. Trump’s suggestion was that an investigation into this energy firm was dropped and a top lawyer was fired because Vice President Biden (as he was at the time) had bribed Ukraine’s lawmakers into backing down to protect his son. This allegation had already been debunked as a conspiracy theory peddled by Russia, no less. 

A whistleblower revealed Trump’s request for evidence came with the threat that an aid package would be withheld unless Zelenskyy complied. Zelenskyy never publicly committed to an investigation, and Trump ended up impeached for his efforts to conspire with a foreign power to potentially influence the outcome of an election. 

More than this, he ended up losing the 2020 election - something which may not have happened if questions about Biden being corrupt had emerged during the campaign. Zelenskyy choosing not to open an investigation is not something Trump will easily forget. 

The allegation that Zelenskyy campaigned for Kamala Harris also came up during the heated White House exchange. In September 2024, Zelenskyy visited a munitions factory in Pennsylvania, a key battleground state, with Democrat Governor Josh Shapiro. Republicans criticised the timing and location of the visit, but Zelenskyy used the moment to thank all US support rather than endorse any candidate. 

Trump has been known to nurse a grievance, and it is entirely possible these personal vendettas he holds for Zelenskyy are the main basis of his foreign policy shift. To him, such “disrespect” should not go unpunished. 

Meanwhile, he has been vocal in his admiration for Putin, praising him as a “strong leader” and a “genius”. Is it fear, weakness or diplomacy that keeps him friendly with the old foe? It’s possible he simply sees a bit of the man he wants to be when he looks to the Kremlin - someone who always gets his own way, revered by supporters and feared by dissidents.

A greater game?

Trump labels his own IQ as “one of the highest” - and maybe it would be unfair to not consider this possibility. Perhaps the transition is part of a grander strategy. As with the war against the Nazis, Trump may be making allies of traditional enemies to fight what he sees as a common evil: China.

Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State, encouraged President Richard Nixon to establish relations with China in 1972 to ensure they did not become allied with the Soviet Union. Two huge superpowers working together against the US and the West seemed to be the ultimate threat.

Commentators are calling Trump’s pivot a “reverse Kissinger”: he is doing the exact same thing, but partnering himself with Russia instead. This would help weaken China, the number one American rival due to its sprawling global influence and ideological differences. The US worries a China-Russia pact would pitch the world against it and restart the Cold War. 

Or there is potential Trump is merely acting as an unreliable partner to force Europe into getting its house in order. With the EU seeking to invest €800 billion in defence, it’s a strategy that may be working. Winding down international reliance on US taxes will be a big win back home. 

But there should be caution when considering if Trump’s intentions have geopolitical tactics at their core. This is a man who once quipped: “Show me a man without an ego, and I’ll show you a loser.”

And maybe that’s really what it is all about. Delivering for America by ending their bankrolling of a foreign war and scoring peace - maybe even winning the Nobel Peace Prize - would be an ego boost like no other. Cosying up to Russia seems the best method of achieving a ceasefire, even if it is neither just nor lasting. 

Mix that with the fractured personal relationship Trump has with the Ukrainian president - again, a product of his ego being hampered by an impeachment and an election loss he partly blames Zelenskyy for - and we end up with the perfect cocktail for the shredding of the foreign policy rulebook.

The emerging new world order might be built around one man’s precious ego. Those who pander to it, be they Western ally or warmongering dictator, will forge this path by his side. 

To everyone else, Ukraine in particular, they are caught up in a god complex with potentially catastrophic results.