What Trump’s ‘The Art of the Deal’ reveals about how he could broker peace in Ukraine

Former president promises to end the war in Ukraine before he is inaugurated – if he wins the election

Donald Trump has promised to end the war in Ukraine if he wins the election.
He has said he will achieve this before he is inaugurated for a second term, if he becomes president, having previously claimed he could stop the brutal fighting within 24 hours of winning the election on November 5.
Whatever the timescale, there have been very few public hints from the Republican candidate on how he would broker the pact that has eluded every other Western leader.
However, Trump’s 1987 bestseller “The Art of the Deal” might provide a blueprint—and it suggests he could opt for a compromise that will have few fans.
Leverage is a key component of international diplomacy.
Trump describes it as “having something the other guy wants. Or better yet, needs.”
And that’s something he has in abundance over both Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky and Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
Firstly, the former president holds the keys to Ukraine’s entry into NATO. One of the Kremlin’s stated war aims was to prevent the Western military alliance’s expansion eastwards into Ukraine.
But halting Kyiv’s membership bid would result in a one-sided deal that Mr. Zelensky would be unlikely to agree to.
The Ukrainian president in his victory plan speaks of security guarantees similar to NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense clause. Mr. Trump could instead agree to U.S.-backed military intervention in the event of any future Russian attack on Ukraine, enough to deter Putin from having another crack of the whip if a ceasefire is agreed.
Both Mr. Zelensky and Putin have maintained their maximalist war aims since the start of the full-scale invasion.
For Ukraine, every Russian soldier must be ejected from every inch of its sovereign territory, including Crimea, the peninsula illegally annexed by Moscow in 2014.
While Russia has played down its goals of capturing Kyiv, toppling the government and installing a puppet regime, Western officials insist this is still the aim.
Does Trump’s home run analogy suggest he would attempt to edge the warring leaders towards the low-hanging fruit, rather than the whole fruit basket?
“The point is you can’t be too greedy,” he writes in his book.
The former president has previously said Ukraine should “give up a little bit,” a signal he will suggest Kyiv cede territory in exchange for peace.
Questions remain over what he would demand of Putin to make the deal palatable to the Ukrainians.
This passage can be read one of two ways.
It may offer an insight into why Trump might have rowed back on his claim that he could broker a peace deal within 24 hours of winning the election, settling instead on a longer timeframe.
But it also serves as the former president’s trump card in any negotiations—his unpredictability.
Boris Johnson, Britain’s former prime minister, spoke of the effectiveness of Trump’s seemingly erratic behavior in an interview with The Telegraph this week.
“One of the virtues of Trump is his sheer unpredictability,” Mr. Johnson said, adding this would have put the Kremlin off its invasion plans if the former president had won a second term.
This mantra has been both a strength and a weakness for Trump over the years.
But his single-mindedness in delivering, driving through on his public statements and ultimately wanting to be seen as a deal-maker could be the key.
No other Western leader enjoys a relationship with Putin like Trump.
That bond was formed out of the fact Trump doesn’t seek to conform to stereotypes and is happy to upset his fellow world leaders, almost as a sport.
The former president won’t mind unsettling the West’s backing for Kyiv if it wins him the prize as the man who ended the war.
To complete this deal quickly, he ultimately could have to push Mr. Zelensky, and his Western backers, into a compromise that will have few fans.
But like in the past, this achievement will undoubtedly be hailed by Trump as the “best deal ever”—even if it isn’t in the eyes of many.