Donald Trump and his team have spent a fair amount of time recently trying to convince the public that the president’s policy toward Russia’s war in Ukraine is having a positive impact. In mid-March, for example, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt boasted, “I can say we are on the 10th yard line of peace, and we’ve never been closer to a peace deal than we are in this moment.”
Two months later, Trump participated in a two-hour phone meeting with Vladimir Putin, and the Republican touted the discussion as a possible breakthrough. “The tone and spirit of the conversation were excellent,” the American president declared, adding that his chat would “immediately” lead to new diplomatic negotiations.
Soon after, Kyiv came under a large-scale Russian drone and missile attack, described by Ukrainian officials as the largest aerial assault on the country since the war began. It was soon followed by Ukraine’s surprise drone attack that proved disastrous for Russia, and that jolted global perceptions. This in turn led Russia to launch one of the largest barrages of missiles and drones of the war at targets across Ukraine.
This does not look like “the 10th yard line of peace.”
It was against this backdrop that Trump has apparently come up with a new metaphor. The New York Times reported:
As Germany’s chancellor, Friedrich Merz, sat beside him watching in silence, President Trump compared Russia and Ukraine to two fighting children who needed to work out their differences for a while before anyone could intervene.
“Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “They hate each other, and they’re fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart. They don’t want to be pulled. Sometimes you’re better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart.”
“And I gave that analogy to Putin yesterday,” the Republican added. “I said, ‘President, maybe you have to keep fighting and suffering a lot, because both sides are suffering, before you pull them apart, before they’re able to be pulled apart.’”
So, a few things.
First, comparing this conflict to a dispute among children on a playground is unhelpful, and Trump complaining about anyone engaging in juvenile behavior is unwise, given everything we know about his temperament and frequent tantrums.
Second, the idea that the White House is prepared to let Russia and Ukraine “fight for a while” overlooks the inconvenient fact that they’ve already been fighting for a while. Indeed, Russia invaded Ukraine back in February 2022 — more than three years ago — which Trump described at the time as “genius” and part of a “wonderful” strategy. But let’s also not lose sight of the evolution of the American president’s thinking. Trump’s Plan A for the war in Ukraine was ending the conflict within 24 hours by way of a secret strategy he assured voters was real. When it became obvious that this strategy didn’t actually exist, Trump moved on to Plan B: He told Russia that if it failed to end the conflict quickly, the White House “would have no other choice” but to impose new economic sanctions. When Putin ignored those threats and Trump failed to follow through, the American president floated Plan C (international economic penalties designed to force a ceasefire), Plan D (Trump-backed bilateral talks between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy) and Plan E (bilateral talks between Trump and Putin). Plan F — White House passivity — is now increasingly coming into focus. Trump’s latest plan to end the conflict is apparently to stop trying to end the conflict. This post updates our related earlier coverage.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post
Recommended
