Trump’s Ukraine Policy - Scott Ritter

The Insider’s Verdict: Biography and the Uncomfortable Truth

---

An analyst whose authority comes not from proximity to power, but from confrontation with it.

Scott Ritter is a veteran of intelligence analysis and arms control whose career led him directly into the deepest trenches of geopolitical conflict.

• The Insider: Between 1991 and 1998, Ritter served as a central weapons inspector for the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) in Iraq.
• The Officer: Prior to that, he served as a Marine Intelligence Officer for the United States Marine Corps—including during the Gulf War—dealing directly with missile and Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) threats.
• The Whistleblower: As an inspector, he led numerous missions. But his resignation in 1998 was an early warning sign: the UN and the U.S., Ritter claimed, were not determined enough to actually eliminate all forbidden weapons.

In the following years, Ritter became one of the sharpest critics of U.S. foreign policy, particularly the wars and interventions justified by the alleged existence of WMDs—a claim that proved to be a fundamental lie after the 2003 invasion.

💬 “You can’t smash an empire by bombing it with lies.”

His transformation from inspector to warning signal clarifies Ritter’s central thesis: States deceive their populations—not only in the name of security but for geopolitical power politics.

Trump’s Ukraine Policy: Between Rhetoric and Reality

---

While Washington publicly speaks of peace, it quietly delivers the instruments of war — a cynical double game played at the expense of Ukrainian lives.

Trump’s Ukraine policy is framed in the language of strength and deal-making, promising a rapid end to the war through negotiation and leverage. Yet the structural realities in Washington tell a more complex story: bipartisan security commitments, defense industry interests, and NATO cohesion limit any abrupt strategic reversal. Even if rhetoric shifts toward diplomacy, the machinery of military assistance and strategic containment continues to operate, shaping facts on the ground long before any settlement table is convened.

💬 “Wars are not ended by slogans, but by the alignment of power, interests, and timing.”

For Kyiv, this duality creates a dangerous ambiguity. Signals of potential negotiations may weaken morale and bargaining power, while continued arms deliveries prolong the conflict’s destructive equilibrium. For Moscow, it reinforces the perception that Western policy is designed to manage rather than resolve the war. Between promises of peace and the steady flow of weapons, Ukraine risks becoming the arena where great-power signaling overrides the urgency of human survival.

The ATACMS Announcement: Campaign Theater Instead of Strategy

---

3,000 missiles that will never arrive — Trump’s masterstroke of deception

Donald Trump’s public statements on Ukraine follow a clear and consistent pattern: He presents himself as a peacemaker protecting American taxpayer money, while at the same time allowing massive weapons deliveries to continue.

In his most recent statement, Trump emphasized:

💬 “We are no longer involved in financing Ukraine. But we are selling missiles and military equipment to NATO countries — billions of dollars’ worth.”

This statement exposes the central contradiction of his policy. Scott Ritter, former UN weapons inspector and intelligence officer, analyzes this strategy without restraint: Trump is not attempting to pursue a coherent foreign policy, but rather trying to appease multiple domestic constituencies simultaneously. His MAGA base wants to see no American money spent on Ukraine, while the Washington establishment rejects any policy that would end the conflict under terms acceptable to Russia.

The announcement to sell 3,000 ATACMS long-range missiles to Ukraine illustrates this paradox perfectly. As recently as December 2024, Trump had acknowledged that the Biden administration’s authorization of such weapons systems had brought the United States to the brink of nuclear war. Now he is pursuing the same policy — merely with a different weapons system and under the pretense that “NATO will pay for it.”

The reality behind these announcements is sobering:

• The promised Patriot batteries still need to be manufactured and will not be available before 2027/2028
• The ERAM missile system does not yet exist as a mass-produced weapon
• Even at maximum production capacity, the United States can manufacture only 1,000 missiles per year
• Ukraine cannot deploy these weapons without U.S. targeting authorization

Ritter summarizes the situation succinctly:

💬 “Everything gets pushed back by six months. I think Donald Trump is hoping that in six months there will be a new reality on the ground that forces the Ukrainians to accept Russia’s terms without compromise.”

The “Grand Negotiating Table” and the Frozen Assets

---

Scott Besson’s Dangerous Illusion: How Stolen Russian Assets Could Destroy the Western Financial System

Scott Besson, Trump’s Treasury Secretary, recently floated the idea of using frozen Russian assets as a “trump card at the negotiating table.”

In an interview, he stated:

💬 “The frozen Russian assets are a trump card at the negotiating table. That’s why we should not seize them immediately.”

This notion is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Russia’s position. Scott Ritter describes Besson’s approach as “fundamentally flawed” and warns of the catastrophic consequences that an actual seizure would trigger.

Why confiscation would fail:

• Russia will categorically refuse to play this game
• Europe itself — especially Belgium — opposes confiscation
• It would trigger a “catastrophic chain reaction” that would destroy the Western financial system
• Countries such as Belgium and Luxembourg, whose economies depend heavily on banking, would face existential threats
• Trust in the dollar and the Western banking system would be irreparably damaged

The irony is that Besson speaks of a “grand negotiating table” while this very strategy prevents access to it. Ritter explains:

💬 “You will never get to that grand table as long as the United States is holding hundreds of billions of dollars in Russian state assets hostage.”

The real “grand table” Besson dreams of would involve entirely different issues:

• Strategic arms limitation and nuclear disarmament
• Joint Arctic exploration and resource development
• The return of American energy companies to Russia (Chevron has already received a green light)
• Lifting sanctions and normalizing relations
• Massive bilateral investment opportunities

Yet all of these possibilities remain blocked as long as Washington clings to the illusion that frozen assets can be used as leverage.

Domestic Maneuvering: Between the Base and the “Traitors”

---

Trump’s Foreign Policy Team: A Collection of Russia-Haters Who Preach Peace and Practice War

Donald Trump is navigating a complex domestic minefield.

Scott Ritter identifies two main groups that constrain Trump’s room for maneuver:

The MAGA Base: This constituency is “tired of American money being spent to support Ukraine.” It wants a clear break with the interventionist policies of previous administrations and expects Trump to take his “America First” promise literally.

The Establishment Opposition: Ritter sharply labels this group “the traitors among us” — those who claim to support Trump while vehemently opposing any policy that would end the conflict under terms acceptable to Russia.

He explicitly includes the following figures in this camp:

• Marco Rubio (Secretary of State): “A war-driven hawk who hates Russia”
• Keith Kellogg (Ukraine envoy): “One hundred percent a Ukrainian handler”
• Scott Bessent (Treasury Secretary): “A nonsensical approach to Russia”
• Steve Witkoff: “Has not the slightest understanding of Russia”

According to Ritter, these advisers pursue their own agendas, which do not align with Trump’s stated peace objectives. They are remnants of a foreign-policy elite trapped in Cold War thinking and incapable of grasping the new geopolitical reality.

Trump himself, meanwhile, lives in a “fantasy world” in which Russia is losing more soldiers than Ukraine and Ukrainian losses remain “sustainable.” This misreading of the military reality leads to the absurd logic that prolonging the war could somehow pressure Russia — while in truth Ukraine is bleeding out month after month.

Ritter issues a stark warning:

💬 “He’s getting absolutely terrible advice — terrible advice from people pursuing agendas that are not the president’s.”

This constellation recalls Trump’s first term, when John Bolton and Mike Pompeo sabotaged his efforts to advance denuclearization talks with North Korea.

The Military Reality: Ukraine’s Death Struggle

---

1.7 Million Dead and No End in Sight — The Numbers the West Refuses to See

90,000 Ukrainian losses per month — an industrialized mass slaughter history will not forget.

Leaked data from the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense paint a devastating picture. According to Scott Ritter’s analysis, approximately 1.7 million Ukrainians are now dead or missing — a figure that official Western reporting systematically obscures.

The developments in 2025 are particularly alarming:

• 625,000 dead or missing in this year alone
• This corresponds to an average of 90,000 losses per month
• The figure continues to rise as Russia dominates the battlefield
• Soon, losses will reach 100,000 per month

“These are enormous numbers,” Ritter emphasizes. “If Trump truly cared about Ukraine, he would say we have to end this war, because these figures are only going to get worse.”

The casualty ratio between Russian and Ukrainian forces is devastating:

💬 “For every Russian soldier killed, ten to fifteen Ukrainians die. Russian losses are significantly lower.”

These numbers fundamentally contradict the narrative Trump receives from his advisers. He repeats figures “given to him by others,” without understanding — or wanting to understand — the actual situation. The consequence of this self-deception is stark: he views the continuation of the war as a viable strategy to pressure Russia, while in reality Ukraine is bleeding out month after month.

Russia’s Strategic Superiority

---

Moscow Controls the Battlefield and the Narrative — While the West Remains Trapped in Illusions

Russia has assumed full control over the course of the war. The much-vaunted Ukrainian counteroffensive has failed, and Russian forces are continuing their methodical destruction of the Ukrainian army.

Sergey Lavrov and other Russian diplomats communicate their position with remarkable clarity:

• They know that the United States continues to supply weapons and intelligence
• They understand that this is the current reality
• It does not alter their conduct on the battlefield
• They are prepared to endure this situation for as long as necessary

Scott Ritter explains the Russian posture:

💬 “From Russia’s point of view, they will simply endure this a little longer. This is the Russian government — it is very pragmatic.”

Russian strategy follows a clear principle:

“Peace Through Victory”

💬 “The Russians want peace through victory. Victory comes first, then peace.”

This position is non-negotiable. While Russia offers what Ritter describes as “cosmetic compromises,” it also understands that even these will not be accepted by Ukraine.

Steve Witkoff recently declared at the White House: “Russia is ready to make concessions. Ukraine is not.”

This statement reveals a fundamental misunderstanding. Russia’s so-called “concessions” are not genuine compromises, but proposals made within a framework that already fulfills Russia’s war objectives. In the end, it will not be the Russians who are required to make dramatic changes — it will be the Ukrainians who will be forced to accept unconditional capitulation.

The Bitterness of the Russian People

---

Every soldier killed by American weapons turns Trump’s peace rhetoric into a farce

While the Russian government acts pragmatically, the mood among the Russian population is markedly different.

Scott Ritter, who regularly travels to Russia, reports growing bitterness:

💬 “Every day, a family loses a loved one — killed by American weapons.”

Russians struggle to accept the idea that the United States claims to seek peace while simultaneously providing Ukraine with the means to kill Russian soldiers. This gap between words and actions has created deep skepticism toward Trump’s peace rhetoric.

The Russian public’s position has crystallized:

• They want this war to end
• But they are not willing to make concessions that would deny victory
• That victory has been “earned” with the blood of Russian soldiers
• The killing of those soldiers by American weapons must not have been in vain

This emotional dimension is systematically ignored in the West. Trump and his advisers operate under the illusion that Russia will eventually buckle under economic or military pressure. The reality is the opposite: the longer the war continues, the higher the price Russia will demand for peace — because that price is being paid in the blood of its own soldiers.

Europe’s Fragmentation: A Continent on the Brink

---

If Germany and France Fall, Europe Falls — and No One Will Be Able to Stop the Debris.

16% Willingness to Defend, Collapsing Governments, Rising “Putinists” — Europe’s Core States in Free Fall.

Europe is facing its greatest existential crisis since World War II. The two supporting pillars of the European Union — Germany and France — are in a state of advanced destabilization that threatens the entire European project.

Germany:

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is now the most popular political party in the country. Scott Ritter quotes the party leader: “Yes, if we win, we will leave the EU. We’re finished. End of story. Goodbye. Sayonara.”

💬 “Yes, if we win, we will leave the EU. We’re finished. End of story. Goodbye. Sayonara.”

The economic situation is exacerbating the political crisis.

Germany’s economy, once the engine of Europe, is suffering from:

• An energy crisis caused by the loss of Russian gas supplies
• Deindustrialization driven by high energy prices
• Loss of competitiveness vis-à-vis the United States and China
• Growing social tensions and an escalating immigration problem

Willingness to defend the country is alarmingly low: only 16% of German men say they would be willing to give their lives to defend Germany — and that figure applies in the case of an actual invasion.

Ritter asks pointedly:

💬 “What happens when Germany honors its promise to go into Ukraine? How many German men will say, ‘Yes, we’ll go die in Ukraine’? None.”

France:

France’s government is on the verge of collapse. Ritter predicts:

💬 “It may not even survive this month.”

If President Macron falls, European observers expect that the “Putinists” will come to power — Marine Le Pen and her allies.

The consequences would be dramatic:

💬 “If France and Germany exit, united Europe no longer exists. It’s over.”

This development is no longer a distant possibility, but a realistic scenario for the coming months. The very idea behind the European Union — preventing large-scale ground wars in Europe — has already failed:

💬 “They have failed — we already have one in Ukraine.”

New Alliance Lines: The Austro-Hungarian Legacy

---

Historical Loyalties Return — Europe Fractures Along Fault Lines a Century Old

As the EU disintegrates, new — or rather, old — alliance structures are re-emerging.

Scott Ritter already identifies two opposing military blocs within Europe:

Bloc 1: Kosovo–Croatia–Albania

• Two NATO members (Croatia, Albania)
• Kosovo is not a NATO member
• They have created a security framework outside NATO
• Pro-Western, anti-Russian in orientation

Bloc 2: Hungary–Slovakia–Serbia

• Serbia is not a NATO member
• They form a countervailing military bloc
• They stand closer to the Russian position
• They reject NATO’s aggressive eastern expansion

These groupings are not accidental. They follow historical lines many believed had long been buried.

Ritter points to the Austro-Hungarian Empire:

💬 “The Austro-Hungarian Empire existed a hundred years ago. The historical connection is still alive.”

The “Slavic core” of the old empire — Serbia, Hungary (though not Slavic), and Slovakia — is now regrouping in a shared defensive alliance against Western war policy. They share common values, a common history, and above all: common adversaries within Europe.

Ritter predicts: “Once Europe begins to fall apart, anything becomes possible. The sky is the limit.”

The German–Polish Territorial Conflict

---

Silesia, Pomerania, East Prussia — If Poland Reclaims Its Eastern Territories, Will Germany Remain Silent?

A particularly explosive development is emerging in relations between Germany and Poland. The logic is both historical and demographic — and equally devastating.

The Scenario:

• Poland could take control of western Ukraine following a Ukrainian collapse
• By doing so, Poland would reclaim its “eastern territories,” which were transferred to the Soviet Union after 1945
• Germany would then raise claims to Silesia, Pomerania, and East Prussia — territories it was forced to cede to Poland as compensation for Poland’s losses in the east

Scott Ritter lays out the scenario bluntly:

💬 “Do you really think the Germans will just sit there and say, ‘Yes, that’s fine’? No. So what are we looking at then? A German–Polish war?”

Alliance configurations would be complex and dangerous:

• United Kingdom has extended its nuclear umbrella to Poland
• France has issued similar guarantees
• Germany would either have to develop nuclear weapons of its own or turn to Russia
• The Baltic states would likely support Poland
• Austria and Hungary could side with Germany

The result would be final: “Europe — as we understand it — would no longer exist. It would be over.”

The Demographic Time Bomb

---

No Children, No Future — Europe Sacrifices Its Young Generation on the Altar of Meaningless Wars

Behind all these geopolitical tensions lies a fundamental demographic crisis that poses an existential threat to Europe.

The Numbers:

• Declining birth rates across all European states
• Massive immigration altering the “unique character of nations”
• Militarization draining young men from the economy
• No family, no children, no future

Scott Ritter contrasts this with Russia’s situation:

💬 “Russia has a demographic problem and is passing laws to encourage higher birth rates.”

Russia’s strategy is rational. The country would prefer to return its 1.6 million soldiers to the civilian economy, where they can earn good wages, start families, and have children. “What happens when you have a well-paid workforce?” Ritter asks. “They get married. That’s exactly what the Russians need.”

Europe, by contrast, is driving its young men into a meaningless war instead of allowing them to build families. The 16% willingness to defend in Germany is not a sign of cowardice, but of disorientation. “Real Americans would never support what is happening in Israel,” Ritter says. The same applies to Europe: real Europeans would not support their own demographic annihilation.

Immigration, in this view, is not seen as a solution but as part of the problem:

💬 “You are now introducing non-traditional values into societies shaped by traditional values. It dilutes the unique character of nations.”

NATO Collapse: The End of an Illusion

---

From Defensive Alliance to Offensive Machine — and Now a Toothless Paper Tiger

NATO Has Forgotten Why It Exists — and Russia Is Paying the Price for This Amnesia.

Over the past three decades, NATO has undergone a fundamental transformation — from a defensive alliance into an offensive one. If NATO were to return to its original defensive mission, Russia would have no interest whatsoever in conflict:

💬 “Russia wants a better relationship, economic ties with Germany. They do not want a war with Germany. That is what Russia is fighting for, in my view.”

The irony is bitter. NATO’s expansion and militarization are forcing Russia into precisely the military measures Europe claims to fear. Russia’s armed forces have been expanded from an originally planned 1 million to 1.6 million soldiers — a direct response to the perceived NATO threat.

What Russia Actually Wants:

• A reduction in military force size
• The return of soldiers to the civilian economy
• Economic cooperation with Europe
• Stable, predictable neighbors
• No chaotic, destabilized states on its borders

Ritter emphasizes: “The Russians would want nothing more than for NATO to simply say, ‘We are a defensive organization again, back to our roots,’ and then behave accordingly.”

Mark Rutte and the Illusion of Strength

---

“The Strongest Alliance Ever” — A Hollow Phrase for a Hollow Organization

Mark Rutte, NATO’s Secretary General, regularly proclaims that the alliance is “the strongest alliance ever — stronger than it has ever been.” Scott Ritter responds with biting sarcasm:

💬 “My God, it’s so strong. I’m really impressed. We can lift more than the mayoral candidate of New York City. But that doesn’t mean much, since he can only bench-press 135 pounds with assistance.”

The reality behind this rhetoric is stark:

• Only 16% of German men would be willing to defend their country
• No one in Europe wants to die in Ukraine
• Weapons production capacities are insufficient
• The economic base required for rearmament is lacking
• Political fragmentation prevents coordinated action

NATO has effectively become an empty shell — an organization that may still exist on paper, but lacks both the means and the will to defend its own members, let alone non-members such as Ukraine.

Most absurd of all: NATO and Europe are “crucifying themselves on the cross” of Ukraine, even though no one wants to die there and everyone involved knows the war cannot be won.

Great Britain: The Imperial Disruptor

---

London Plays Its Old Imperial Games — and Europe Pays the Price

A particularly destabilizing role in Europe is being played by Great Britain. Scott Ritter does not hold back in his criticism:

💬 “The British pursue policies that kill hundreds of thousands — without blinking an eye.”

Great Britain operates as an imperial power exploiting the power vacuum left behind by the United States:

British Interventions:

• A nuclear umbrella extended to Poland
• Intelligence support for Israel (surveillance aircraft over Gaza)
• Behind-the-scenes manipulation in Ukraine
• Efforts to accelerate the fragmentation of the EU

Ritter contrasts this with the United States: “As bad as the United States may be… there are, believe it or not, moral limits. There are things where we say, ‘No, this is enough.’ For the British, there is no such thing as ‘enough.’”

British intelligence services, Ritter argues, have “no soul whatsoever” and celebrate their actions with knighthoods and elegant parties. He draws a comparison with the CIA: CIA officers, he says, “all become alcoholics — because they know what they have done is evil, and they are ashamed of it.” That sense of shame, Ritter insists, does not exist among the British.

The British strategy is transparent. London is trying to preserve its imperial relevance by pushing Europe into conflicts from which it remains relatively safe as an island nation.

💬 “Wherever you find death and destruction, you will find a British hand.”

Russia’s Desire for Stability

---

Moscow Does Not Want Chaotic Neighbors — Yet the West Is Forcing Russia to Accept Exactly That

One of the greatest miscalculations in the West is the assumption that Russia would welcome the collapse of NATO and the European Union. Scott Ritter forcefully corrects this narrative:

💬 “The Russians want stability. They do not want Europe or NATO to disappear — they just want to live in peace.”

Russia’s preference for stability is grounded in rational considerations.

Why Russia Fears Chaos:

• Predictability enables better policy planning
• Stable neighbors mean fewer security risks
• Economic cooperation requires reliable partners
• Resource allocation is more efficient under clear, predictable conditions

“Russia likes predictability. Russia wants to know what is going to happen. That makes policymaking easier,” Ritter explains. The idea that Russia would welcome anarchy in Europe is, he says, “simply absurd.”

Yet it is precisely this stability that is being destroyed by those who seek to prevent a Russian victory and prolong the war through delay tactics under Trump. They are “guaranteeing only a truly, truly bad outcome for Europe — a very bad outcome: the end of the EU, the end of NATO.”

The tragedy lies in the fact that both Russia and Europe’s populations desire stability — while political elites in Washington, London, and Brussels pursue a course that produces the exact opposite.

One Hundred Years of Conflict: A Look into the Abyss

---

Europe Condemns Itself to a Century of Violence — and No One Seems Willing to Stop It

Scott Ritter’s darkest forecast concerns the long-term consequences of NATO’s failure:

💬 “Europe is condemning itself to one hundred years of conflict. It will not be confined to peripheral states.”

The historical precedents are alarming. The very idea behind the European Union was to ensure that there would never again be large-scale ground wars in Europe. That objective has already failed — Ukraine is the proof.

If the EU disintegrates, outbreaks of violence will not stop at Serbia–Kosovo or Poland–Germany:

• Historical resentments between European nations will resurface
• Territorial disputes dormant for 80 years will become active again
• The “Banderite question” in western Ukraine could lead to a Polish purge
• Nationalist movements will gain momentum across the continent
• The civilizational achievements of the postwar order will collapse

Ritter paints a chilling picture: “There will be retribution. It will be ugly.”

The crimes being committed in Ukraine today will be repeated tomorrow between European nations — only then there will be no NATO left to intervene, and no EU left to mediate.

The greatest irony of all: “The last thing Russia wants is chaos in Europe. That is not good for Russia — chaos is bad.”

In the end, Russia will stand as the only stable actor in the region, surrounded by a fragmented, war-torn continent it never wanted — but one created by Western policy.

Conclusion: Naming Those Responsible

---

Trump, Europe, and the Architects of a Catastrophe — Responsibility Has Names

NATO is not standing on the brink of collapse — it is already dead, even if the official declaration of death has yet to be issued. Trump’s Ukraine policy is not the root cause of this crisis, but it is the accelerant that has turned a smoldering breakdown into an open catastrophe.

The chain of responsibility is clear:

First: Donald Trump is not pursuing a coherent foreign policy, but rather a narcissistic project aimed at securing the Nobel Peace Prize — while simultaneously supplying the instruments of war.

Second: His advisers — Marco Rubio, Keith Kellogg, Scott Bessent, Steve Witkoff — understand neither Russia nor Europe and, in some cases, actively pursue agendas that contradict Trump’s stated objectives.

Third: Europe’s elites, instead of confronting reality, are prolonging Ukraine’s suffering and thereby accelerating their own downfall.

Fourth: United Kingdom acts as an imperial disruptor, attempting to extract advantage from chaos without regard for the long-term consequences.

💬 “Wherever you find death and destruction, you will find a British hand.”

The military numbers are unambiguous: 90,000–100,000 Ukrainian losses per month, with total deaths set to exceed two million by the end of 2026. Every additional month of this war is a crime against humanity — not because war itself is inherently criminal, but because this war has long since been decided, and its continuation serves only the ego of Western politicians.

Europe now faces a choice. Either it accepts reality, forces Ukraine to capitulate, normalizes relations with Russia, and thereby saves European civilization — or it continues on its current course and condemns itself to a century of violence, fragmentation, and irrelevance.

Scott Ritter puts it with brutal honesty: “Europe is condemning itself to another hundred years of conflict.”

The decision being made today — or deliberately avoided — will determine whether the next generation grows up in peace or among ruins.

NATO is finished. Europe stands at the edge of the abyss. And Trump continues to play domestic political games while the continent burns.

---

Thank you, Scott Ritter.

---

Sources & Geopolitical References

---

Substack – US-Edition

This article is also available as a English-language edition on Substack:

    Trump’s Ukraine Policy - Scott Ritter

---

Original conversation (video)

YouTube-Interview:

    NATO is finished - Scott Ritter

---

Support Independent Journalism

---

If you find my work valuable, you can support it with a voluntary contribution here:

---

---

Many thanks for your support!

---