[]
Russia invaded Ukraine, but you wouldn’t know that from the peace negotiations. At every step, President Trump has pushed the victim to give ground, while the aggressor has given little of substance.
Yesterday brought the latest example. Vice President JD Vance laid out a peace proposal that sharply favors Russia, my colleagues David Sanger, Michael Shear and Mark Landler wrote. Ukraine would have to give up the territory that Russia took during the war as well as any chance to join NATO. Vance said the Trump administration would walk away if both sides didn’t accept its terms. The comments clearly targeted Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, who said this week that he would not preemptively cede Crimea, the region Russia invaded a decade ago.
Trump echoed Vance on social media. Zelensky “can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country,” Trump said.
This is now a familiar pattern in the American-led peace process: The administration frames its terms as demands for Russia and Ukraine, but only Ukraine has to give up something meaningful.
And if Ukraine refuses, the White House lashes out. After Trump took office, he demanded that Ukraine surrender its mineral wealth to the United States in exchange for continued support. After an Oval Office clash between Trump and Zelensky, the United States cut off Ukraine aid.
To make amends, Ukraine said it would accept a cease-fire if Russia did as well. Russia did not. Yet Trump didn’t punish Moscow; he rewarded it. He exempted Russia from his so-called reciprocal tariffs. Last week, the United States voted with Russia on a U.N. resolution about the war.
These are unusual circumstances. The United States is ostensibly Ukraine’s ally against Russia. Friends don’t typically demand more from friends than enemies in peace talks. Today’s newsletter will explain — with help from my colleagues who cover diplomacy, security, economics and international affairs — why the Trump administration takes this approach.
What Trump wants
Trump has two main goals when it comes to Ukraine.
First, he wants “to normalize the relationship with Russia,” David Sanger wrote. “If that means rewriting the history of Moscow’s illegal invasion, if it means dropping investigations of Russian war crimes or refusing to offer security guarantees that would keep Putin from finishing the job in Ukraine later, then Trump, in this assessment of his intentions, is willing to make that deal.”
Second, Trump wants to force European nations, not the United States, to handle problems in Europe. Trump criticizes NATO allies for spending little money on their militaries and, in his view, free-riding on U.S. security guarantees. By suggesting he won’t support Ukraine — or NATO — much longer, Trump is telling Europe that it should counter Russia on its own.
On both goals, Trump can claim some successes. The United States and Russia have discussed restoring embassy staffing. And Russia and Ukraine have signaled, for the first time, that they’re open to direct peace talks. Meanwhile, European leaders have promised to spend more on their militaries and weapons, including for Ukraine. “The new emphasis on arms production is evidence of a broader generational shift in Europe,” Lara Jakes and Bernhard Warner wrote.
Still, those wins are limited. The war in Ukraine persists. Fighting continued during Easter despite a truce. America’s relations with Russia remain strained; even U.S. companies that once benefited from Russian business are skeptical of going back, Anton Troianovski, Niraj Chokshi and Ivan Nechepurenko reported.
And a more independent Europe may not be good for America. The continent’s leaders could, for instance, use their independence to cozy up to China. Earlier this month, Spain’s prime minister met with China’s president to strengthen trade ties with Beijing, Liz Alderman wrote. All to say: Trump’s moves might not work as he hopes.
In the meantime, Ukraine suffers. So far this year, it has lost more territory than it has gained.
Related: At least nine people died in Russian airstrikes on Kyiv, Ukraine said.
Look closely at this image of Pope Francis being carried to lie in state. You can see continuity at the Vatican: The guards still wear the colors of the Medici family, 420 years after the last Medici pope. You can also see change: Francis specified a single, plain coffin, rather than the three nested caskets of past popes. See the image up close.
OPINIONS
Databases of suspected gang members are an effective tool that the left should support, Rafael Mangual writes.
Trump’s military actions in Yemen are leading the U.S. into a new forever war and diverting attention from China, W.J. Hennigan writes.
The White House wants more babies. This week, I wrote a story about how the Trump administration is assessing proposals that it hopes would get more people to procreate, including a $5,000 payment for new moms. Activists and policy experts have warned about the declining U.S. birthrate for years — and now they have allies in the White House.
My piece kicked off a lively discussion and was Monday’s most-commented story. One reader with a 2-year-old noted the prohibitive cost of day care.
“We want another kid but can’t afford it because full-time day care costs nearly $20,000 a year per child (if you’re lucky enough to find one with open spots),” the reader writes. “A $5K baby bonus or education about menstrual cycles won’t change this.”
Day care is an issue that divides many conservative pro-family voices from those on the left. Instead of funding child care programs — some of which have been slashed by DOGE — many conservatives are pushing policies that make it easier for one parent to stay home, saying that children do best when they spend more time with their family and less time with paid caregivers.
Another reader said he thought the “baby bonus” idea might present an opportunity for bipartisanship:
“Giving more money to mothers is an idea both the right and left could probably get behind,” the reader writes.
Democrats are eager to help families, including with an expanded child tax credit. But they might be squeamish about the “baby bonus” idea, which is associated with a conservative “pronatalist” movement to counter falling birthrates.
I’m covering these issues as part of a new beat at The Times. There’s a lot to talk about, and I love hearing from readers. You can reach me at caroline.kitchener@nytimes.com.
Trending online yesterday: Target and Best Buy’s websites crashed under the rush of people trying to pre-order a Nintendo Switch 2, The New York Post reports.
Social Q’s: “My fiancé wants a prenup after we decided we didn’t need one. Help!”
Lives Lived: After being named The Village Voice’s editor in chief in 1994, Karen Durbin waged a fervent campaign to attract young readers, partly by tilting toward often incendiary coverage of feminism, gay rights and avant-garde culture. She died at 80.
SPORTS
N.F.L.: The league’s annual draft begins tonight, with a focus on quarterbacks.
N.B.A.: The Warriors fell to the Rockets, 109-94, and lost their star Jimmy Butler to a pelvic injury in the process.
Soccer: The former U.S. men’s national team coach Bruce Arena criticized the current coach, Mauricio Pochettino, suggesting that hiring a non-American for the role was a mistake.
ARTS AND IDEAS
Mexico is in the midst of a battle over narcocorridos, a style of song that celebrates drug cartels. Artists within the genre have become international stars. But the law is turning against them. In the past month, several cities and states criminalized playing music that glorifies the drug trade, and the U.S. government revoked visas from members of a band that displayed a cartel leader’s face onstage. Read more about the crackdown.
More on culture
[]
Source link
