The Limits of Trump’s Diplomacy

When President Trump took office, he promised to end the wars in Gaza and Ukraine, positioning himself as the only leader capable of achieving peace. However, his diplomatic efforts have so far fallen short. Trump has blamed Biden for the escalation of both conflicts, claiming that only he could bring about a resolution. Unlike the Biden administration, which supported Israel and Ukraine’s strategies without applying significant diplomatic pressure, Trump demonstrated America’s influence over Netanyahu and Zelensky. This led to a temporary ceasefire in Gaza and a brief halt in attacks on energy infrastructure between Ukraine and Russia. Yet, Israel’s recent massacre, violating the ceasefire, and the ongoing clashes between Ukraine and Russia have exposed the limitations of Trump’s transactional, America-first diplomacy.

Washington’s Priorities

After Trump’s controversial meeting with Zelensky in the White House, expectations were high that the dynamics of the Ukraine war would shift dramatically. The suspension of U.S. aid to Ukraine forced European leaders to act urgently. Realizing they had to operate without American support, Europe began reshaping its security architecture and ensuring continued assistance to Ukraine. This crisis in the transatlantic alliance signaled that, rather than pursuing a comprehensive, unified strategy for peace, the two sides of the ocean would act independently. Trump’s pressure on Zelensky regarding Ukraine’s rare underground resources and his direct negotiations with Russia, bypassing Europe, underscored Washington’s new strategy of prioritizing narrow American interests.

While the Biden administration hesitated to impose U.S. strategy on Israel and Ukraine, Trump’s approach sought to extract American gains from the midst of war. The American delegation’s meeting with Russian officials in Saudi Arabia indicated Trump’s desire to take the driver’s seat in negotiations. On one hand, the administration floated ideas like displacing Palestinians to neighboring countries and having the U.S. take over Gaza. On the other, it argued that American control over Ukraine’s underground resources would serve as the strongest security guarantee for Ukraine. Trump’s belief that America should reap rewards for its support to Israel and Ukraine revealed a lack of a comprehensive strategy to end these wars.

The Trump-Putin Call

In a dramatic reversal of America’s previous policy of isolating Russia and labeling Putin a war criminal, Trump held a phone call with Putin to push for a ceasefire. However, the outcome was only a temporary pause in hostilities. While Zelensky attempted to mend relations with Trump by offering concessions, Putin showed no urgency for peace. Although Putin agreed to halt Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian energy infrastructure, he made no concrete promises regarding a ceasefire or peace talks. The resumption of mutual attacks shortly after the call highlighted the lack of trust and progress toward a lasting resolution.

The Return of War in Gaza

The ceasefire brokered through Trump’s pre-inauguration pressure on Netanyahu appears to have collapsed. While the first phase of the ceasefire included a prisoner exchange, Israel’s sporadic attacks signaled its fragility. As the time came to move to the second phase, Netanyahu, influenced by domestic politics, reverted to targeting civilians, demonstrating the temporary nature of Trump’s ceasefire efforts. Trump’s proposal to displace Palestinians and rebuild Gaza under American ownership revealed his disinterest in a lasting peace. Instead of advancing to the second phase of the ceasefire or pursuing a comprehensive resolution, Trump continued Biden’s policy of unconditional support for Israel. His failure to take meaningful steps toward a lasting peace underscored the emptiness of his promises. As Trump himself admitted in early February, there was no guarantee that peace would last—and Netanyahu ensured that a return to war was inevitable.

The Limits of Trump’s Diplomacy

Trump’s approach to both the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts has shown a clear lack of a strategy for achieving lasting peace. His efforts to pressure Ukraine, alienate European allies, and normalize relations with Russia have yielded little success. In Gaza, his disregard for Palestinian rights, pressure on Arab countries to accept displaced Palestinians, and failure to hold Netanyahu accountable have made meaningful peace impossible. Trump’s approach of achieving peace through unlimited support for Israel is not possible. His rhetoric about ending wars quickly has proven hollow, and his America-first diplomacy has served as a reminder to Europe and Middle Eastern nations that they must find solutions without relying on the U.S. While Trump’s transactional approach may secure short-term gains for American interests, it has done little to address the root causes of these conflicts or deliver the lasting peace he once promised.