Key Points and Summary on Ukraine War and Nuclear Weapons – The Trump administration’s push to end the Russia-Ukraine war could force Kyiv into a disastrous peace deal, mirroring the 1940 Winter War, where Finland lost territory to the Soviet Union without any security guarantees.
-A simple ceasefire along current lines, without a robust, Korea-style mutual defense treaty with the West, would leave Ukraine vulnerable to future Russian aggression and economic strangulation.
-Such a “betrayal” could foster extreme nationalism in Ukraine and, as a last resort for survival, compel Kyiv to pursue its own nuclear weapons, a far more dangerous outcome for global stability.
Negotiations Over Ukraine Mirror the Winter War Ending Without Korean Armistice Protection
Against the backdrop of the second Trump Administration’s swearing-in, ongoing negotiations are taking place to try to find a way to end the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, one major factor lies in the ending of the talks, sidestepping Ukraine out of most of the negotiations and potentially rewarding Russia, which has an overly aggressive militaristic regime that becomes emboldened by appeasement.
Wanting to quickly end the war by being far harder on Ukraine, the Trump Administration is making a grave mistake. Mirroring the Winter War woes Finland faced, the ongoing conflict is unlikely to end.
Still, it will instead likely exacerbate in the future, as unresolved issues and appeasement will only further escalate the powder keg.
Ongoing American-Russian Negotiations
Initially campaigning on a firm stance against Russia while simultaneously wanting to end the bloodshed in Ukraine, the Trump Administration instead took a hardline stance against the latter, putting more blame on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for the war starting, more so than Russian autocrat President Vladimir Putin.
Holding a ‘dress down’ on live television against the Ukrainian President while holding United Nations ‘no’ votes against Russian aggression, the current Administration is potentially tiptoeing into a state of appeasement not seen since the domino effects that led to WWII. While pressure remains in Ukraine, Russia has not stopped offensive operations or missile attacks, including the deadly Sumy City Massacre on Palm Sunday.
Washington is experiencing a rift in its NATO alliance, marked by several diplomatic incidents with fellow European nations. Growingly frustrated at the lack of progress, the Trump Administration is threatening to withdraw from all diplomatic talks completely. However, a renewed minerals deal signed on April 30th between the United States and Ukraine can create a pathway to future enhanced security guarantees.
The Winter War Woes
Ukraine could be left in a similar scenario to Finland’s in 1940, with major ramifications for the European continent. In the aftermath of the Winter War, Finland, despite inflicting heavy casualties on the Red Army, was forced to cede 11% of its sovereign territory. Hundreds of thousands of Finnish civilians became refugees, and those in the Karelia region went through Russification.
Finland would be left without any mutual defense or international guarantor to ensure that Soviet aggression would be stemmed, and with such, a nationalist movement grew that sought revenge and would ally with any country willing to help Helsinki. Only a year later, Nazi Germany became the one country that came to aid Finland, which led to the even more devastating Continuation War—enshrined in war crimes, and history could repeat with Ukraine.
Kyiv’s constitution does not allow territorial changes to the 1991 borders—a constitution signed and recognized by the Russian Federation and the last Soviet government. Any forceful changes without security guarantees could lead to a hardline government coming to power and far-right nationalist movements akin to those in countries such as Finland and Romania during World War II. Resentment and nationalistic militant groups can arise, as seen in various other wars and conflicts throughout history, when a country is stripped of some of its sovereign territories.
Proposing Frozen Lines Without the South Korean Model Will be a Catastrophe
The war in Ukraine will be difficult to end, as without substantial Western logistics and hundreds of thousands of additional manpower, it will be hard for Kyiv to liberate all occupied areas held by Moscow militarily. Nevertheless, the Kremlin is making its imperial vision clear: a complete regime change and landlocked Ukraine as the ‘Novorossiya’ project.
If Russian troops are deployed in occupied regions of Ukraine with frozen contact lines, provocations could very much ensue in eventual renewed war. Furthermore, pressure, intimidation, and fear of Russian military personnel in the occupied regions will negatively affect Ukraine’s economy, future investments, and demographic outlook.
Russian forces, positioned along the Black Sea and the Dnipro River, could conduct provocations against Kyiv’s maritime trade, potentially hindering exports. Furthermore, Moscow would control the rich grain regions, which are a lifeline of Ukraine’s agricultural economy. Businesses and international investments could slowly digress from establishing offices in Ukraine out of fear of Russian missile strikes.
Ukraine’s demographics, already drastically suffering, akin to Russia’s, will further be threatened if Russian troops stay in the occupied regions without security guarantees. Already suffering from a refugee crisis, Kyiv’s demographic outlook will further exacerbate downward under Russian threats of potential war several years later unless concrete mutual defense measures are taken.
If the Trump Administration pushes for a concessions model where Russia gets to keep occupied territories and Ukraine is exempt from NATO, a model equivalent to the Korean armistice will need to be established. Against the backdrop of the Korean Armistice, despite losing some territory along the 38th Parallel, South Korea has consistently been assured of mutual defense by the United States under the ROK-US alliance, still intact in its eight decades.
Ultimately, Ukraine Will Need Either Mutual Defense or Nuclear Proliferation
Lastly, Russia will certainly rearm and conduct new provocations to enact a casus belli. Due to this, Kyiv may be backed into a corner where the country may need a weapon of mass destruction as a deterrent against Russian aggression, such as nuclear proliferation.
In the 1990s, Ukraine was forced to give up its nuclear arsenal, which was the third largest in the world at the time. In return, the United States, Britain, and Russia signed the Budapest Memorandum, guaranteeing Kyiv’s territorial sovereignty on the 1991 borders.
However, with a drift in diplomatic efforts to end the war and with the current low possibility of Ukraine establishing the 1991 borders, Kyiv may be ‘betrayed,’ and drastic measures could take place. The international community should avoid a Ukraine that does not have a future in demographics, economy, and security as long as Russia continues imperialist claims, as Kyiv may have no choice but to enact drastic measures.
In conclusion, there is a likely chance that Ukraine will be forced into territorial concessions that the world sought to prevent after World War II. However, suppose the United States doesn’t grant Kyiv NATO membership or establish a mutual defense clause between Japan and South Korea. In that case, Ukraine may have no choice but nuclear proliferation if it’s forced into a Winter War-style ending.
About the Author: Julian McBride
Julian McBride is a forensic anthropologist and independent journalist born in New York. He is the founder and director of the Reflections of War Initiative (ROW), an anthropological NGO which aims to tell the stories of the victims of war through art therapy. As a former Marine, he uses this technique not only to help heal PTSD but also to share people’s stories through art, which conveys “the message of the brutality of war better than most news organizations.” Julian is also a new 19FortyFive Contributing Editor.
Hypersonic Weapons In Depth
Russia’s Hypersonic Missiles Summed Up in 4 Words
