Trump has chosen side: The U.S. President is on team Putin now.

Ukrainians understood that long ago, although Zelensky can’t say it openly. We Europeans need to understand it as well. And act accordingly.

(Wednesday night Russia bombed a residential neighbourhood in Kyiv, 12 people were killed, 90 were injured.)

BY MICHAEL ANDERSEN

Messrs Trump, Rubio and Wittkof spent Wednesday morning piling pressure on Ukraine to accept their ‘ceasefire proposal.’ And then they spent Wednesday afternoon getting very angry and ‘even’ - after the Ukrainians had turned down their proposal. Flat down. Vladimir Putin spent the day celebrating the breakdown of the negotiations in London - even before the Western foreign ministers had started their meeting. And then he spent the night terror-bombing Ukraine. Again.

On our podcast Wednesday morning, Brian Bonner, former editor of The Kyiv Post and resident in Ukraine for about 20+ years, summarized the Trump administration’s ‘ceasefire proposal’ thus':

“It is really one-sided for Russia: basically it is recognition of Crimea as Russian, unofficial recognition of the territories that Russia occupies (20% of Ukraine), a freezing of the frontline as it is now, no NATO membership for Ukraine, lifting of the sanctions against Russia, economic cooperation enhanced with the U.S., especially in energy and investments.”

“In return, what does Ukraine get?” Bonner continued. “Well (laughs ironically), well the U.S. says that they will jointly administer the Zaporizhe power plant and the energy from that will benefit both countries. (In the U.S. proposal, Ukraine are promised) ‘robust security guarantees’ but no detail, pretty vague, and Putin has already opposed a European peace keeping force, so I don’t know how that would work. (In the U.S. ceasefire proposal, Ukraine are promised) ‘Compensation for war damages and rebuilding’ - but no budget, nothing about where the money is going to come from.”

Anybody who over the past three years has acquired even a rudimentary understanding of the conflict, will understand that the proposals from the Trump administration read as if they had been written in the Kremlin.

“I think that Trump will walk away, because he has already laid the ground for that,“ Bonner correctly predicted, “with the excuse that Ukraine refuses to accept reality.”

Spot on. Sadly.

A few hours later, an angry Donald Trump called off the foreign ministers’ meeting in London and then went on to spew an extraordinary amount of venom (even for him) at the Ukrainian President Zelensky – because the Ukrainian leader had dared to point out that, according to the Ukrainian constitution, the country’s president cannot simply sign over Crimea to Russia or the other 20% of the country that Russia is occupying.

But also, that there was zero chance that he - personally and politically - would ever agree to even consider that. Experts say that between 100,000 and 200,000 Ukrainians - soldiers and civilians - have lost their lives since Russia invaded in February 2022, and 12-14 million Ukrainians are refugees, 7 million abroad. 13% of all houses/flats in the country have been damaged. No president would ever be ‘allowed’ to just throw away those sacrifices.

As the former editor of The Kyiv Post, Brian Bonner, concluded in our podcast, Zelensky shut down Trump’s ceasefire plan – “Zelensky drew the line in the sand, as clear as the bright July sunshine, ‘we are not going to talk about recognizing any Ukrainian territory as Russian! Period. No negotiation. There’s nothing to talk about, go home!’”

Trump’s answer was to claim that it is Zelensky’s “inflammatory statements” that “makes it so difficult to settle this War,” and “[Zelensky’] statement is very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia.”

According to the U.S. President, Russia is easier to deal with than Ukraine; “Crimea was lost years ago”, wrote Trump, “is not even a point of discussion” – referring to the fact that the Peninsula has been under Russian rule for 11 years.

“[Zelensky] can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country,” Trump warned, in an astonishing rant about a country and a president that – officially, at least – is a close U.S. ally.

For a man who prides himself on being an expert in ‘the art of the deal’, Trump’s reaction was – well, strange:

One was left with the question of how on earth Crimea and Donbas could evoke such strong feelings in a U.S. President? The only logical answer is that Crimea and Donbas are vital for … Putin, and therefore also vital for … Trump?

(Personally, I have so far have been shying away from delving deeper into the exact relationship between the two, but staying on the straight and narrow is getting exponentially more difficult as Trump is throwing the Kremlin’s talking points and territorial demands at Kyiv, but pretending that they are his own ideas.)

His VP added that this was a “fair proposal”. The U.S. had taken into consideration, Vance assured, “what do the Ukrainians care the most about, what do the Russians care the most about, and I think that we have put together a very fair proposal … and it is time for them to say yes, or for the United States to walk away from this process.”

In reality, of course, the meeting in London was set up to fail: “It would take a diplomatic Houdini to make something positive of it,” as Brian Bonner correctly predicted on our podcast.

This was a train wreck waiting to happen. In fact planned to happen. In order to make Ukraine look unreasonable. So the U.S. could walk away, wash its hands - or at least pile even more pressure on Ukraine.

According to Trump, Vladimir Putin – who has been in brutal power since 1999, and whose opponents regularly fall out of windows or airplanes or drink poisoned tea, and who invaded Ukraine (he said so himself, Donald, on national TV!) - is “a genius”, “a friend” who “respects me”, “we can agree.”

According to Trump, Volodymyr Zelensky – who was elected with 73% of the votes in 2019 – is “a dictator” with “no support”, “far from an angel”, who “started the war”, is “corrupt” and so on. You get the picture.

While Trump (and co) spent the day verbally attacking Ukraine, his Russian ally spent the night physically attacking Ukrainians, terror-bombing the capital Kyiv, killing civilians in their beds at night. The latest count is 12 dead and more than 90 injured.

Add those to the many dozen devastating Russian missile attacks on playgrounds, busy market squares, hospitals, universities, buses – attacks that have been much intensified since Donald Trump took over the White House.

Trump, of course, mainly shrugs his shoulders over his ally’s war crimes. (The UN has published several reports accusing Putin of war crimes.) 12 days ago, Russian missiles hit the central square in Sumy in North-East Ukraine, killing 34 people and injuring 117, many on their way to church or to see their families for Easter.

Putin’s ally in the White House called the missile attack, yes, “horrible”, but immediately – in the second half of the very same sentence, so nobody should be in doubt - excused it as a “mistake.”

He then went on to accuse the Ukrainian President for having started the war; “You don't start a war against someone 20 times your size and then hope that people give you some missiles.”

The week before, April 5, Russian Iskander missiles struck a residential neighborhood, including a busy playground: 20 people were killed, among them nine children, 75 people were injured.

We should all – American voters, not least – understand that Putin specifically chose the city of Kryvyi Rih – because Kryvyi Rih is the hometown of Ukrainian President Zelensky. Basically, Putin wanted to send his counterpart a personal message - and a dictator doesn't care about killing 20 innocent people.

We should also all be aware – again, not least U.S. voters - that the main Russian weapon for all those attacks has been the Iskander missile.

And when his U.S. ally apologizes for Putin calling such attacks “a mistake”, we should all be aware that Russian Iskander missiles are accurate to within a few metres, experts say.

Last year, after Russia had hit a children’s hospital in Kyiv – and apologists for Putin were busy blabbering that this could also have been a mistake – I talked to an expert on Russian warfare and technology, Michael Clemmesen, a retired Danish brigadier-general, and asked him to explain the mechanics of the Russian attacks.

It is simply impossible to square what this bonafide expert in warfare told me with what the U.S. President tells us and wants us to believe:

Asked about whether such attacks could be a mistake, Clemmesen laughed out loud, “no, of course not.”

“Russia is operating totally outside any international laws for warfare,” Putin is waging “pure terror warfare”, said Clemmensen.

“The missiles the Russian use are very accurate, down to about 6 metres.”

“What they hit is the target they want to hit, there is no doubt about that.”

To make matters even more bizarre – ‘matters’ meaning the U.S. President’s excuses for Russian war crimes – Putin himself, in fact, acknowledged that Russia meant to hit the university building on the market square in Sumy: Putin told reporters that Sumy State University was holding an award ceremony for Ukrainian army officers, and that Russia wanted to kill them as “retribution”. Those are Putin’s own words on Russian TV.

Seeing as we now know the names, ages and faces of the people who died in Sumy, we also now know that this is just a(nother) blatant Russian lie.

So no Donald, Russia hitting the market square in Sumy was no “mistake.”

“Russia did the same kind of terror bombing of civilian buildings in Syria,” says Michael Clemmesen.

And just as you think (pray) that this cannot get any more nasty, you are wrong. Because for these attacks, on playgrounds, market squares, hospitals, Russia often uses the strategy of ‘the double-tap’; sending two missiles aimed at the same target, but two or three minutes apart, allowing enough time for first responders and family etc to rush to the aid of the wounded – and then themselves being hit by the second bomb. That way you kill the maximum number of people.

And just to make absolutely sure, the Russians often pack their missiles with cluster munition – for example, when they hit the playground in Kryvyi Rih and in Sumy.

“Mistake”, my arse, Donald.

On Wednesday night, after the negotiations in London had been derailed, Russia again bombed Kyiv, 12 people were killed and 90 injured.

It I difficult to decide whether the response of the U.S. President was more bizarre or more disrespectful.

My initial reaction was one of ‘does it feel good to play God, Donald?’

When exactly would it be 'necessary' to murder 9 innocent Ukrainians sleeping in their beds, Donald?

When exactly would murdering 9 innocent Ukrainians sleeping in their beds be 'good timing', Donald?

Anybody still in doubt whether the U.S. President has chosen sides?

Americans should look at these terrible photos and realize that their president - and thus, officially their own country - is now on the side of the perpetrator of these war crimes, not the innocent people killed in their beds. Europeans should look at these photos and tell their governments to hurry up and increase our help for Ukraine. Because Ukraine is now our responsibility - it is clear by now that Trump has chosen side. He has joined Putin’s team.