Follow us on social

google cta
Screenshot-2023-05-11-at-6.34.35-am

Trump tells CNN town hall: 'I want everyone to stop dying' in Ukraine

The Republican-friendly audience applauded when he said he 'would talk' to Putin and Zelenksy and end the war 'in 24 hours'

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

Former President Donald Trump, who is running to win his seat back from current President Joe Biden, told a friendly audience of Republican voters last night that Russian president Vladimir Putin "made a tremendous mistake" by invading Ukraine last year.

When asked who he thought would win the current war, he told his interviewer, CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins, “I want everybody to stop dying. They’re dying. Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done in 24 hours.”

When asked how he would stop the war in 24 hours he said "I'll meet with Putin, I'll meet with Zelensky, they both have strengths and they both have weaknesses and in 24 hours it will be done."

Pressing him, Collins asked repeatedly, "But you won't say you want Ukraine to win this war?" Trump ignored the question, saying "I want Europe to put up more money."

Perhaps not surprisingly, the audience, which on a range of subjects, including his unapologetic responses to questions about January 6 and his recent sexual abuse conviction in civil court, applauded the president during this exchange. In poll after poll, Republicans have diverged from Democrats on this issue, including this most recent Pew survey on U.S. support for Ukraine, which found that less than half of Republicans trust Ukrainian President Zelensky to "to the right thing" on foreign affairs, and 70 percent saying Washington should focus instead on what is happening here at home.

If last night was any indication, Trump, who is the only declared Republican candidate for 2024 to come out forcefully against the current U.S. policy in Ukraine, plans to pursue that line, and it is resonating with rank and file Republicans — at least his base, which political analysts say is still formidable despite Trump's legal troubles and past performance as president. The other GOP contenders have displayed a conventionally hawkish view on the Ukraine, even criticizing Biden for not doing more, which Trump has suggested might actually lead to nuclear war.

Trump's notion of ending the war "in 24 hours" is certain to draw guffaws, even if his desire to end the war through "talking" is in the right place.

"It is highly unlikely that Trump will, as he claims, be able to end the war in Ukraine 'in 24 hours,'" noted my Quincy Institute colleague George Beebe.

"At this stage, simply getting Ukraine and Russia to the negotiating table will likely require extensive, tough-minded multilateral diplomacy coordinated between Washington, NATO partners, and perhaps even Beijing."  

When Trump was asked whether he supported sending more weapons and aid to Ukraine (Washington has already allocated over $113 billion, and of that, has now sent nearly $37 billion in weapons as of this week), he said, “we’re giving away so much equipment, we don’t have ammunition for ourselves right now. We don’t have ammunition for ourselves we’re giving away so much.”

When Collins pressed him to say whether Putin is a war criminal (the International Criminal Court has issued warrants for his arrest), Trump said:

"If you say he’s a war criminal it’s going to be a lot tougher to make a deal to make this thing stopped. If he’s going to be a war criminal, people are going to grab him and execute him, he’s going to fight a lot harder than he’s fighting under the other circumstance.”

Trump called Putin “a smart guy,” but said the Russian leader “made a tremendous mistake.”

“Of course he’s smart. They want you to say he’s a stupid person. He’s not a stupid person and he’s very cunning. Putin made a bad mistake in my opinion.”

“His mistake was going in. He would have never gone in if I was president.”


CNN Town Hall with Donald Trump (May 19, 2023) CNN Screenshot.
google cta
Analysis | Europe
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.