The frenetic and nonstop pace of the Trump Administration’s actions and initiatives since the President’s inauguration on January 20th has impacted the American public with sensory overload. The actions taken on immigration, government spending, DEI, tariffs, trans issues, foreign policy, etc. have had media heads spinning and the American public experiencing periodic vertigo.
It has been the busiest first 100 days (April 30th is the 100th day) since President Franklin Roosevelt’s commencement of the New Deal in 1933. I believe it is safe to say that President Trump’s administration’s actions have made all the segments of the American electorate, wherever they currently reside on the political spectrum, experience some degree of discomfort, if not vexation.
Many of President Trump’s initiatives carry with them potential long-term consequences both for Americans and for people across the globe.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.
However, none of the issues has the potential for long-term harm and danger to more people both in America and around the world than the initiatives to seek to bring a cease fire and peace in the Russo-Ukraine War.
The war in Ukraine, precipitated by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, has already become the bloodiest war in Europe since the end of World War II. The casualty figures are regarded as closely guarded national security secrets by both countries, but independent estimates by highly trusted third-party intelligence agencies, including the U.S. Department of Defense, estimate that Russia has suffered between 462,000 and 728,000 killed or wounded, and Ukraine has suffered approximately 307,000 killed or wounded.
While it is estimated that approximately 2% of all Russian men between 20 and 50 have been killed or wounded since February 2022, the Russians appear to be winning a war of attrition with Ukraine. Why? While significantly more Russians are being killed than Ukrainians, the population differential is such that Ukraine will be bled out long before Russia will. Why? Russia’s population is currently approximately 146 million and Ukraine’s is 37.8 million.
No matter how brave the Ukrainians are (and they have amply demonstrated their courage), Russia has four times the population of Ukraine, and they will simply run out of soldiers before Russia does. Plus, the war is being fought almost exclusively in Ukraine, and thus, its civilian casualties are much higher.
The Trump Administration has signaled in recent days that if the Russians and the Ukrainians do not react more positively to the President’s peace initiatives, the U.S. will withdraw as a sponsor of peace talks and “move on.”
If by “moving on,” it means also withdrawing military aid from the Ukrainians, the Russians will eventually wear down the Ukrainians.
Such a military defeat will be devastating to the Ukrainians, but also to the West, to the United States, and to President Trump. As Stalin biographer and historian Stephen Kotkin noted recently, Americans hate war, but they hate losing a war even more.
All Americans should remember that when the U.S.S.R. ceased to exist in 1991, for a brief moment, Ukraine, which had been one of the Soviet Republics, was the third largest nuclear power in the world because of its share of the Soviet nuclear weapons housed on its soil.
The Ukrainians agreed, at the urging of President Clinton, to give up their nuclear arsenal in return for promises from the United States and the United Kingdom guaranteeing their security (mainly from any future Russian aggression). These guarantees were embodied in the Budapest Memorandum (1994).
Does anyone today seriously argue that Ukraine did the best thing for Ukraine by surrendering its nuclear arsenal and trusting instead in the signed word and promise of the U.S.A. and the U.K.? Does anyone think Russia would have invaded Ukraine if Ukraine were a nuclear power?
If we abandon the brave Ukrainian people to Russia and we break our solemn word to protect them, the international consequences will be dire indeed.
The dictators and aggressors of the world will take notice. And the countries of the world that are in potential danger, according to their ability to do so, will either strengthen and modernize their nuclear arsenals or seek to acquire nuclear weapons as soon as possible.
As far back as President De Gaulle, the French have doubted whether “when push comes to shove,” the Americans would risk nuclear attack to defend France. Thus, he developed the “Force de frappe,” an independent French nuclear deterrent. Currently, the French nuclear force is the fourth largest nuclear force, following the U.S., the Russian Federation, and the People’s Republic of China.
The French have already announced plans to modernize and strengthen their nuclear forces. The United Kingdom has announced similar plans. Other countries, such as Poland, have hinted at nuclear development as well.
If the U.S. allows Ukraine to be defeated by Russia, the International Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaties will be considered obsolete, and only countries that possess independent nuclear deterrence will be considered safe in a very dangerous world. One can imagine Japan joining the nuclear club and India and Pakistan modernizing their nuclear arsenal. And unless Iran is prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt will do whatever is necessary to defend themselves from nuclear blackmail, which will inevitably include the acquisition of nuclear weapons.
The more nations that have nuclear weapons, the more likely they are to be used, with the resulting humanitarian catastrophes. And when people both internally and externally object to new nations going nuclear, the answer will be, “remember what happened to Ukraine!”
Is this really the legacy President Trump wants for himself or for our country?
Dr. Richard Land, BA (Princeton, magna cum laude); D.Phil. (Oxford); Th.M (New Orleans Seminary). Dr. Land served as President of Southern Evangelical Seminary from July 2013 until July 2021. Upon his retirement, he was honored as President Emeritus and he continues to serve as an Adjunct Professor of Theology & Ethics. Dr. Land previously served as President of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (1988-2013) where he was also honored as President Emeritus upon his retirement. Dr. Land has also served as an Executive Editor and columnist for The Christian Post since 2011.
Dr. Land explores many timely and critical topics in his daily radio feature, “Bringing Every Thought Captive,” and in his weekly column for CP.
