Ukraine Again: An Evil Dictator (Putin), a Weak President (Trump) and No End to the War

On Sunday Ukrainian President Zelensky met with President Trump at Mar-a-Lago to discuss steps to end the four year old war by Putin’s Russia on its weaker neighbor. Both Trump and Zelensky claimed that “progress” had been made. Even while negotiations were going on, Putin was continuing the bombing of civilian areas in Ukraine. Trump then talked to Putin by phone and affirmed the strange claim that Putin wanted Ukraine to “succeed”. Later, Putin alleged that Ukraine sent drone strikes at one of his personal residences in Russia. Trump became very angry when he heard about these strikes, although he did admit that these strikes could be fictitious.

You probably see many holes in this narrative…and rightly you should. We have seen this script acted out (with a few variations) for four long years. We have been on a roller coaster ride of ups and downs where hopes of a peace are raised and then dashed to pieces…again and again. I am tired of hearing the same lies over and over. Let’s shine the light of truth on two specific individuals.

Putin is an evil aggressor who invaded Ukraine. He is guilty of war crimes. He is not a man of peace. And in no way does he want Ukraine to succeed. He claims he wants peace but he does not sit down with Zelensky to have genuine negotiations. His demands for concessions (land, no NATO membership or protection for Ukraine) are ridiculous that none of us would accept. An honest appraisal of Putin would conclude that he has “played” the White House and continues to do so.
Although Trump likes to bully his rivals and subordinates, in fact, he is a weak president. He has never stood up to Putin (nor to any other authoritarian leader like China’s Xi). He praises Putin at every turn. “Putin did not start this war,” “Putin wants to end this war,” and “Putin is a man of peace.” Nevertheless, we have seen the evidence. Putin will never end this war because of any supposed “goodness” in his heart. He will only agree to a peace deal when war becomes too costly. Economic sanctions need to be levied against Putin until he is forced to negotiate. Mr. Trump, don’t blame our European allies. Work with them to apply economic pressure upon Putin. Do not enable him any longer. In short, become a true leader.

Grading Trump on His Performance in the Summit: Using His Own Criteria, He did not Pass the Test

I give President Trump credit for organizing and attending the summit with “president” Putin. But giving Trump a grade on his performance at the summit, Trump failed the test.

Here are the criteria that Trump himself provided for evaluating the summit.

When the Putin-Trump meeting was first announced, it was hailed as a major breakthrough. Nevertheless, in the days leading up to their talk, the White House lowered expectations. A three-hour meeting in Alaska would not immediately end the war in Ukraine, but it would be considered a “success”, if Trump could arrange a “second meeting” in which he would moderate and Putin and Zelensky would settle their differences. No such “second meeting” has been announced nor appears on the horizon, but Zelensky is scheduled to come to the White House on Monday. Hope springs eternal?
This week Trump did affirm to Bret Baier of Fox News that, at the very least, a successful summit would result in a ceasefire. No ceasefire has been announced…yet.
Trump said there would be a joint press conference in which he and Putin would field questions from the international press. The press gathering lasted only 12 minutes, no questions were allowed, and the session was abruptly ended. Putin then turned the tables on Trump by giving him an invitation to meet the next time in Moscow.
Although Trump said they had a very productive meeting, no specifics were provided. Later, he conceded, “we haven’t gotten there”.
Even Trump’s supporters were disappointed in his performance. Fox News Senior White House Correspondent Jacqui Heinrich offered a brutal, eye-witness assessment of the awkward and confusing joint press conference fiasco. “We were told we would have an opportunity to put questions to both leaders after a joint press conference in the event the meeting went well enough that they could set the stage for a second meeting, And President Trump said if that didn’t happen, he was likely to call off the joint presser and just address the media solo and send people home. Neither of those things happened. And what was really stunning to me as someone who has been in a lot of these press conferences was a few things that were very unusual,” she said. “You had Putin come out and address the press first. We are on U.S. soil here. And that left the media scrambling to get their headsets in. Usually, it is the leader of the country — the host country of a summit that speaks first and addresses. Putin started off in Russian. And we all had to get our heads set on and listen to him rattle off the diatribe about the history of the U.S. and Russia. The way that it felt in the room was not good,” she reported. “It did not seem like things went well, and it seemed like Putin came in and steamrolled, got right into what he wanted to say. And got his photo next to the president and then left. Of course, that is only the piece of the picture that we have right now, and certainly President Trump, who is the host and who is, the president, would not want to, I think, enable something that would make him look weak.” Contrast her analysis with Trump’s grading himself as a perfect 10.
Putin did not make any concessions. Is he still “playing” Trump, by pretending to be open to peace negotiations, but not willing to follow through? James Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, called Putin’s handling of our president a “rope a dope” experience.

Although Trump did not pass this mid-term exam, he has not totally failed the course. If he studies harder and works on his negotiating skills (such as using economic pressure to force Putin to make concessions), he can still get a passing grade. In fact, if he brokers a deal between Putin and Zelensky that Ukraine finds acceptable, I might even consider supporting his desire of winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

Trump will Meet with Putin: Strong Prayer for a Weak President

Donald Trump is scheduled to have a summit meeting tomorrow with Russian “president” Vladimir Putin to discuss ways to end the war in Ukraine. Although I applaud Trump for meeting with the Russian leader, I do not hold out much hope for this summit. Ending a needless war that has killed thousands of people (both soldiers and innocent civilians) is a noble, valiant goal. But to be totally truthful, Trump is in a weak position before a formidable foe. Trump himself has lowered the expectations for their meeting. He now calls it a “listening” event which might lead to a second more important meeting. In spite of being the president of the most powerful country in the world, and in spite of all his bravado and bullying, Trump is quite weak. Here’s the evidence:

Trump’s irrational praise of Putin – over the last decade, Trump has praised authoritarian rulers all over the world, both present and past (China’s Xi, Hitler, etc.) Trump has been quite lavish in his admiration for Putin. In his book “Time to Get Tough,” Trump wrote, “Putin has big plans for Russia. He wants to edge out its neighbors so that Russia can dominate oil supplies to all of Europe. Putin has also announced his grand vision: the creation of a ‘Eurasian Union’ made up of former Soviet nations that can dominate the region. I respect Putin.” Yet in his more thoughtful moments, Trump has recognized that Putin has “played” him.
Trump’s weakness with the Truth – I do not intend any cheap criticism of the president, but he has had a troubled relationship with the truth. Just two weeks ago, he didn’t like the job report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Instead of admitting responsibility for his failed economic policies, Trump fired the BLS director. He claimed he won the 2024 election in a landslide. In fact, he received less than 50% of the vote. These are just two examples of how the president invents a false reality instead of dealing with the real world. I believe, as Jesus said, “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free”. If Jesus was right, then Trump’s preference for untruths means he is neither very free nor powerful.
Trump’s exaggerated estimation of his own abilities – The president campaigned on ending the war in Ukraine on “Day 1” of his presidency. That did not happen. He also claimed he would bring inflation down below zero percent. He was wrong. The July inflation report that was issued this past Tuesday shows the annual core inflation rate moved up to 3.1%. Realism and maturity demand that we all have a sober estimate of our own abilities. Trump is weaker than he thinks.
Trump’s approval rate is underwater. Most major polls place his approval ratings between 37% and 44% with his disapproval ratings much higher. He is down even on his stronger issues, like immigration and the economy. His weakest areas refer to his handling of the Epstein files, his policies regarding tariffs, and the “Big, Beautiful Bill” tax legislation.
Trump’s concessions to Putin do not bode well for the summit. Trump has already conceded everything but the kitchen sink which greatly harms Ukraine. Most democracies in the world consider Putin to be the guilty invader of its neighbor Ukraine. Putin is a pariah and is prohibited from even visiting their countries. Nevertheless, Trump is elevating Putin on the international stage, by granting him a summit on U.S. soil. They will be talking about Ukraine’s future, yet Ukraine’s president Zelensky was not even invited to participate. Trump has announced a “swapping” of territory (readers beware: Ukraine would give up land to Russia, not vice-versa). Ukraine would not be able to join NATO…and on and on and on. Later, if Zelensky does not accept these concessions, he is the “problem”, not Putin.

Given these varied weaknesses, many Americans believe it would take a miracle for the summit to be successful. True peacemaking needs divine intervention and this includes “strong” prayer. The emphasis is on the word “strong”, not the questionable religiosity of the phrase “God bless America” that many politicians use to close their political speeches. No, strong prayer does not ask God to bless our fallen plans and actions. Strong prayer can happen because the All-Powerful, All-Wise God invites fallen people to humble themselves and become active participants in making human history through their prayers and their actions. The Apostle Paul encouraged fellow believers to pray for all persons, especially for kings and those in authority so that people could live in peace. (I Timothy 2:1-3).

There is a certain amount of mystery regarding prayer. Does it depend on God? Yes, of course it does. Does it depend on those who pray? Yes, to some extent. Does it depend on those who are prayed for? Yes. Somehow their human wills need to become aligned with God’s will being done on earth as it is done in heaven. Humility is essential. People need to humble themselves in a variety of ways.

People who don’t agree with Trump need to humble themselves and to pray for a leader they perceive as wrong.
People who do agree with Trump also need to humble themselves and to pray that their president repent of his arrogance and especially his political sins that harm the world.
Trump needs to humble himself and to ask God to show him ways to become a better peacemaker and wisdom and courage to promote a just peace.
Putin needs to humble himself and to repent of his invasion of Ukraine and the thousands of human deaths he has caused.

Readers:

If you consider yourself a person of faith, pray and live out your faith with love, justice and grace.
If you do not see yourself as a person of faith, may you live your life according to your highest ideals.
If any of the information I mentioned is inaccurate, let me know.

Trump’s Plan to End the War in Ukraine: Concessions and Non-negotiables

On the campaign trail, Trump promised that he would end the war in Ukraine BEFORE he took office on January 20. Of course, no sane person believed that promise and of course, Trump did not fulfill his pledge. Nevertheless, Trump does deserve some credit for attempting to end the war. Last night, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff met with Russian “president” Putin in a preliminary meeting to suggest a temporary ceasefire. It is in everyone’s interest (Ukraine, Russia, United States, Europe) for this war to end and a “just peace” to emerge in which both Ukraine and Russia are in agreement with the terms.

This will not be easy. A poll came out overnight in which 59% of Americans believe that a just peace is unlikely or very doubtful. Both countries have non-negotiables and both sides will have to make significant concessions. Here are the most important issues.

Territory integrity – I believe Ukraine is right in demanding territory integrity, that is, the boundaries be the same as prior to the war: Russian occupied lands in eastern Ukraine should be returned. Although Ukraine would also like Crimea to be returned, this wish list item might need to be sacrificed. One option is for the United Nations to study and vote on the status of Crimea some time in the intermediate future.

Membership in NATO – Ukraine wants to join NATO for its future security. Of course, Russia does not want an additional large, NATO member as its next-door neighbor for its own security reasons. Although desiring to join NATO is a legitimate goal, I would be willing to see this deferred for 5-10 years in order for a peace agreement to take place.

Putin’s Responsibility – It is obviously clear to sane people that Putin started this war. He was the aggressor. His reckless invasion has caused the deaths of many thousands of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers and civilians. Justice requires that Putin make some financial remuneration for the deaths that he caused and for the rebuilding of Ukraine. It is doubtful that Putin would admit any guilt. Tyrants seldom acknowledge any mistakes. (Trump knows this all too well.) My suggestion is that Europe and the United States magnanimously and jointly offer to pay for much of the rebuilding of Ukraine. This would be a more economical option than continuing to finance an unnecessary war.

Trump has chosen a difficult challenge: Bringing about a just peace. I hope he can achieve the “art of the deal”.

Clear Thinking in the Fog of War: Reflections on the Campus Protests

The protests on university campuses across the country have brought back powerful memories. In the spring of my freshman year at Ohio University (1970), protests against the US involvement in and expansion of the war in Vietnam spread across our country. On most campuses, the protests were peaceful and helpful and produced reasonable discussions regarding the morality/immorality of the war. On other campuses, the national guard was called in to preserve the peace. Confrontations took place and, sadly, four students at Kent State University in Ohio were killed by the national guard. All “hell broke loose” at many universities, including my own. Violence begat more violence. The president at Ohio University cancelled classes for the rest of the quarter and sent us home. Nevertheless, one basic truth emerged. The US war in Vietnam failed to meet the basic criteria of Just War Theory. The protests marked a turning point in the war. Plans were made (and slowly implemented) for the withdrawal of our troops from a costly, unwinnable war.

Earlier this month, Christian theologian Daniel Bannoura from Bethlehem, Palestine spoke on “Faith in the Fog of War: Theology and Politics of Palestine/Israel” at Wheaton College (his presentation is available on YouTube). He explained the factors that led up to the Israeli/Palestinian war in Gaza. He argued that genocide is taking place right before our eyes. Over 30,000 innocent civilians in Gaza have been killed. Many thousands more are facing imminent starvation. He made several excellent suggestions for resolving the conflict. He used the phrase “the fog of war” to illustrate how war can lead to a lot of erroneous thinking. Both sides are tempted to exaggerate the “goodness of our cause” and the evil of the enemy. In the midst of this fog, we need to strive for clarity of vision, courage, and clear thinking.

The protests on our campuses reveal a national fog, but also provide us an opportunity to lift that fog. Here are some of my reflections regarding the protests.

I celebrate that many students are actively trying to improve our world and are not consumed with greed and self-interest.
I acknowledge that outside agitators might be infiltrating the protests.
Violence against other students is never justified.
School administrators should provide venues for a respectful debate of the issues instead of provoking angry confrontation.

Last fall, I posted a brief reflection “Genocide against Israel is Evil…and so is Genocide against the Gazans” on this blog site which might guide our national dialogue. In that piece, I argued that the attack on Israel by Hamas on October 7 was morally evil. I also claimed that Israel’s response, although understandable, was excessive. Their indiscriminate bombing of civilian Palestinians was also evil. The same standards of justice must be applied to all. Regrettably, the war has continued. Sin (both personal and social) permeates all societies and people (including me). May we strive to honestly acknowledge the moral failures on all sides, turn from our evil ways, and be realistically courageous in seeking reconciliation and a lasting peace.

Violence Begets More Violence

A week ago, Hamas viciously attacked Israel with missiles and ruthless kidnappings. This attack took the Israeli government by surprise, but Israel then responded by bombing Gaza. These mutual attacks have been bloody. Thousands of people have already been killed and more than a hundred people are being held hostage by Hamas. It is understandable that Israel wants to get revenge and they are poised to launch a massive ground assault in Gaza. Although this is understandable, it is also immoral and shortsighted. Their announced goal is to permanently rid Gaza of Hamas leadership. It is a flawed plan for the following reasons:

Hamas leaders are probably hidden away in underground tunnels throughout Gaza, making it difficult to capture or kill them. In this pursuit of Hamas leadership, a ground assault will become prolonged and will lead to the death of many Gazan civilians.
In addition, the Israeli government is cutting off food, water, and electricity to the 2.5 million civilians who live in Gaza. This is already producing a humanitarian crisis of gigantic proportions and the death of numerous innocent people.
Although Israel currently has the empathy and support of much of the world community, that will soon evaporate if large numbers of civilians lose their lives.
A ground assault will lead to the death of the hostages, not their liberation.
Neither the Israelis nor the United States have proposed a viable exit strategy. When will enough of the Hamas leadership be destroyed for Israel to claim victory? How many civilians will have died?

Positive actions do exist and should be pursued:

A ceasefire should be implemented immediately which would permit humanitarian aid to enter Gaza.
The U.S. should lean on Egypt to open their border crossing into Gaza to permit refugees to escape.
Neutral countries should step up to mediate and promote a long-lasting peace that would lead to the removal of Hamas leadership and would promote a two state solution and self-government for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

Continued “justified” violence is not the answer. It would only lead to more senseless violence.