US Policy Toward Russia and Ukraine Under Donald Trump: Reorientation, Continuity, or Withdrawal?

The inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2025 triggered widespread speculation about the future direction of United States foreign policy. Particular attention has focused on US policy toward the war in Ukraine and relations with Russia.

The United States, as the principal guarantor of transatlantic security and the largest provider of military assistance to Kyiv, plays a crucial role in maintaining Ukraine’s defensive capabilities and the region’s strategic stability. At the same time, Donald Trump’s rhetoric, his earlier decisions during his first term in office, and personnel changes within the administration have raised questions about the future direction of this policy during his second term.

The purpose of this analysis is to examine the initial political, personnel, and strategic signals that have emerged following Trump’s return to office. The analysis covers the legacy of his first term, the decisions taken during the first months of the new administration, and an assessment of possible scenarios for future developments. The central question remains whether we are witnessing a reorientation of US policy, its continuation, or a withdrawal from active engagement in Eastern Europe.

The Legacy of Donald Trump’s First Term (2017–2021)

The foreign policy of President Donald Trump between 2017 and 2021 was guided by the slogan “America First,” which shaped a strategy aimed at limiting American involvement in conflicts considered distant from core national interests. In practice, this approach involved pressuring allies to increase their defense spending while simultaneously criticizing multilateral structures such as NATO as burdensome to the U.S. budget. Trump repeatedly accused European states of failing to meet their financial commitments within the Alliance, which created tensions in transatlantic relations and reinforced the perception that the U.S. president was undermining the principle of collective defense.

At the same time, however, Trump’s term also included actions that strengthened security on NATO’s eastern flank, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe. The United States increased its military presence in Poland, supporting the rotational deployment of American troops and investing in military infrastructure. President Trump declared his willingness to establish a permanent U.S. military base in Poland—the so-called “Fort Trump”—which was intended to serve as a deterrent to the Russia. Although the project was not ultimately realized in its proposed form, its symbolic and strategic significance was considerable.

The Trump administration also supported the Three Seas Initiative, viewed as a mechanism for strengthening the infrastructural and energy independence of Central and Eastern European states from Russian influence.

In this context, a key element of Trump’s policy was his unequivocal criticism of the Nord Stream 2 project. The president not only opposed the construction of the second gas pipeline but also imposed sanctions on companies involved in its implementation. The administration argued that the project deepened Europe’s—especially Germany’s—dependence on Russian gas, potentially creating far-reaching consequences for regional security and the political cohesion of both the EU and NATO. On this issue, Trump clearly positioned himself against Russian interests, which contrasted with accusations of his alleged pro-Russian sympathies.

At the same time, Trump sought to redefine relations with Moscow, expressing a desire for a “reset” and for personal dialogue with President Vladimir Putin. The culmination of this approach was the meeting in Helsinki in July 2018, during which Trump publicly questioned the findings of U.S. intelligence agencies regarding Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. His remarks triggered sharp criticism from both the Democratic Party and numerous members of the Republican Party, as well as national security experts.

Another critical moment was the impeachment procedure initiated in December 2019. It concerned allegations of abuse of power by Trump, who—according to a United States Congress investigation—had conditioned the release of military aid to Ukraine on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announcing an investigation into Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, who had ties to the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings. Despite the ongoing political crisis, the administration continued military assistance programs for Ukraine and maintained—and in some areas expanded—sanctions against Russia, including measures imposed in response to election interference, the annexation of Crimea, and hybrid activities in Syria and Eastern Europe.

The overall balance of Trump’s first term was therefore complex and ambiguous. Although his rhetoric often raised doubts about his stance toward Russia, many of his administration’s actions aligned with a policy of countering Russian influence in the region. The strengthening of the U.S. military presence in Poland, support for Ukraine, sanctions against Moscow, and opposition to Nord Stream 2 suggest that the actual security policy of the United States under Trump was more anti-Russian than his controversial statements might have implied.

Read more