This commentary explores Donald Trump's recent statements regarding the war in Ukraine and how constitutional issues are a focal point in resolving the conflict.
The author points out that Trump, in pursuit of recognition such as the Nobel Peace Prize, often focuses on global rather than domestic issues. The discussion highlights how Trump brought attention to the question of whether Ukraine should amend its Constitution in light of the territorial losses since 2014.
Special attention is given to the fact that appeals to the Constitution have resurfaced in official discourse, though previously constitutional changes were not seriously discussed, even as Ukraine faced annexation and territorial losses.
International examples like Moldova and Georgia, which did not amend their constitutions over disputed territories, are raised as possible precedents for Ukraine’s approach.
The piece suggests that appeals to the Constitution may serve as justification for resisting compromise solutions related to the war or the status of certain territories. The author calls for a full restoration of constitutional rights for all citizens, emphasizing that constitutional standards should apply equally if they are invoked as the main criteria for decision-making.
In summary, the piece invites readers to consider the sincerity behind political decisions grounded in the Constitution and addresses possible formats of compromise that may be offered to Ukraine after further international negotiations.
