Trump plans to end Russia's war in Ukraine by freezing it if he wins presidential election

Donald Trump's campaign is reportedly considering a plan to end the Russia-Ukraine war by “freezing” it if he wins the 2024 U.S. presidential election. This approach, reported by the Financial Times, would likely involve negotiating a ceasefire and establishing autonomous zones in occupied regions without Ukraine conceding formal territory. However, NATO membership for Ukraine could be deferred, aligning with remarks by Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst, who suggests this strategy might force Russia to the negotiating table without requiring Ukraine to officially relinquish any claims.

Key Republican figures like J.D. Vance and Fred Fleitz have proposed that Ukraine’s aspirations for NATO be put on hold and that the U.S. take a hands-off approach to enforcement. Instead, European forces—not NATO or UN troops—would keep the peace. In line with Trump's "America First" approach, his allies assert that the U.S. should not finance or supply troops to this peacekeeping mechanism. Some advisors have also discussed economic measures to pressure Russia, including potential oil and gas price reductions—a strategy that could face resistance from Trump’s previous allies like Saudi Arabia.

Trump's plan recalls the failed Minsk Agreements (2014–2015), which sought but struggled to implement autonomy for Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine. Trump’s allies argue that a similar framework could be revived with better enforcement mechanisms and consequences for violations.

Republican figures, like Rep. Mike Waltz, have suggested complementary economic strategies, such as lowering oil and gas prices, to pressure Russia further. Trump’s former ambassador Ric Grenell has also noted Trump’s past diplomatic achievements, citing the Abraham Accords as evidence that he could similarly broker peace between Ukraine and Russia.

This plan, however, may not receive unanimous support even within the Republican Party, as many view any concession of Ukrainian territory or NATO deferral as a potential security risk for both Europe and the U.S.

Russian strike on Kharkiv injured 21 people

A nighttime Russian assault targeted multiple districts in Kharkiv, including Shevchenkivskyi, Saltivskyi, and Kholodnohirskyi, using guided aerial bombs. Additionally, Chuhuiv in Kharkiv Oblast was struck with Tornado-S multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS). The attack left 21 people injured, among them five children, according to local officials.

The assault caused widespread damage, affecting residential and public areas, and emergency response teams were deployed to manage the situation and aid the injured.

Lack of money and human resources will force Putin to change the way he wages war

Economic strains and dwindling human resources are increasingly pressuring Russian President Vladimir Putin to confront the sustainability of Russia’s war effort. According to an analysis by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), Russia’s intensified military spending—despite fueling short-term economic growth—is forcing companies to significantly raise wages to compete with military salaries, thus contributing to inflation and economic “overheating.” This economic stress, compounded by limited labor availability, signals potential long-term instability.

Russia’s Central Bank Head, Elvira Nabiullina, warned in July 2024 that Russia's labor and production capacities are nearing exhaustion. The Russian government is now offering unprecedented bonuses to attract soldiers, with regional authorities offering one-off payments to sustain the current recruitment rate at around 30,000 troops per month. Putin’s reluctance to enact general mobilization reflects concerns over the potential political backlash, pushing him toward what experts describe as “crypto-mobilization,” a strategy that discreetly pressures Russian companies and regional governments to boost military recruitment without official mobilization.

The reported deployment of North Korean troops in Russia’s Kursk Oblast illustrates the lengths to which Putin is going to maintain his military presence. These conditions underscore a dilemma for Putin: either implement drastic changes in resourcing the war effort or adjust the approach to avoid jeopardizing his political stability.