When Traditional Peace Negotiations No Longer Work

In a world shaped by transactional diplomacy, shifting alliances, and unpredictable leadership, the pursuit of peace must evolve. Traditional negotiation strategies—rooted in multilateralism, compromise, and long-term stability—are increasingly ineffective in a landscape where power-driven, zero-sum leaders like Donald Trump dictate policy.

The recent breakdown in negotiations between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy over a proposed mineral rights deal highlights this challenge. The failed agreement exposed fundamental flaws in traditional diplomatic assumptions:

1. Trump does not respond to moral arguments or long-term commitments.
2. He prioritizes personal victories over geopolitical stability.
3. Direct confrontation or appeals to shared values are ineffective.
4. He views peace through a lens of dominance, not cooperation.

If we accept that traditional peace negotiations no longer work with leaders like Trump, how can we adapt our strategies to ensure peace remains achievable? This article explores a new approach to peacebuilding—one that navigates power-driven diplomacy without sacrificing core principles.

1. Reframing Peace as a Transactional Victory

Trump does not engage in peace talks for the sake of peace. He engages in deals that enhance his power, reputation, and legacy. Therefore, the first step in negotiating peace under Trump is to reframe it as a “deal” that benefits him personally.

How Ukraine Can Reframe Peace as a Trump Win:

✅ Shift the focus from “protecting democracy” to “making America win.”

• Trump’s rhetoric centers on America First, not democracy promotion.
• Instead of framing U.S. support as a moral obligation, Ukraine should present it as a financially beneficial, strategically advantageous move for the U.S.

✅ Position peace in Ukraine as Trump’s opportunity to “correct Biden’s failures.”

• Trump thrives on discrediting previous administrations.
• Instead of asking for continued military aid, Ukraine should position Trump’s involvement as the “better deal” compared to Biden’s open-ended support.

✅ Offer Trump the optics of a “peace deal” without compromising Ukraine’s sovereignty.

• Trump’s instinct is to cut deals quickly—even if they are symbolic rather than substantive.
• Ukraine should craft a diplomatic framework where Trump can take credit for “negotiating peace” while ensuring that Ukraine’s security remains intact.

Example Messaging That Works:
❌ Wrong: “Ukraine needs U.S. support to defend democracy.”
✅ Right: “Trump is the leader who can force NATO and Europe to pay their fair share while securing the best deal for America.”

2. Understanding Trump’s Negotiation Style to Avoid Failure

The failure of the Trump-Zelenskyy mineral rights deal reveals three core misteps in negotiating with Trump:

• #1: Expecting Security Guarantees Without a Transactional Benefit

  • Trump does not give security commitments unless they personally benefit him or his political base.
  • Solution: Tie any security guarantees to economic or political incentives that he can sell as a “win.”

• #2: Challenging Trump’s Dominance in Public

  • Trump reacts badly to being corrected or contradicted, especially on the global stage.
  • Solution: Engage in private diplomacy to correct falsehoods or disagreements, rather than public disputes.

• #3: Expecting Rational, Long-Term Decision-Making

  • Trump negotiates in short-term bursts, not long-term strategies.
  • Solution: Structure agreements with immediate benefits he can promote, while ensuring long-term protections behind the scenes.

3. The New Model: Power-Based Peacebuilding

If traditional peace talks fail with transactional leaders, then peacebuilding must shift towards a model that:

✅ Accommodates the leader’s need for dominance while protecting the interests of vulnerable nations.
✅ Leverages economic incentives to create stability, rather than relying on moral or diplomatic commitments.
✅ Focuses on “win-win” optics rather than ideological unity.

Practical Applications of This Model for Ukraine

• Peace through Economic Leverage:

  • Instead of asking for continued military support, Ukraine should position itself as an economic partner that benefits American business interests.
  • Proposal: Exclusive U.S. investment rights in Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, in exchange for continued military aid.

• Shifting the Narrative from “Aid” to “Profit”

  • Trump views aid as wasteful, but investments as smart deals.
  • Proposal: Structure military assistance as an “arms-for-investment” deal where the U.S. profits from Ukrainian stability.

• Letting Trump “Own” the Peace Process

  • Trump will not engage if he feels he is following another leader’s strategy.
  • Proposal: Create a framework where Trump appears to be leading the peace process, while ensuring that Ukraine’s core security needs remain intact.

4. Can Peace Be Achieved Under a Trump Presidency?

While Trump’s instincts are combative rather than cooperative, peace remains possible if Ukraine and its allies:

✅ Redefine peace talks as a “deal” rather than a moral cause.
✅ Leverage economic and political incentives rather than security commitments.
✅ Control the optics so that Trump can claim victory while Ukraine secures real stability.

The challenge is no longer just peacebuilding—but adapting peacebuilding strategies to transactional diplomacy.

If global leaders can master this approach, peace may still be possible in an era where traditional diplomacy is failing.

Rethinking Peace for a New Era

The Trump-Zelenskyy negotiation collapse is not just a failed deal—it’s a warning sign that peace negotiations must evolve. The world is shifting away from multilateral diplomacy and long-term alliances towards power-based, transactional negotiations.

For Ukraine—and for the world—this means rethinking how peace is pursued. Peace can no longer be assumed to be a shared value. Instead, it must be:

✅ Repackaged as a deal.
✅ Reframed as a transaction.
✅ Redesigned for leaders who prioritize short-term wins over long-term stability.

The goal of peace has not changed. But the way we achieve it must now be reengineered for a world where traditional peace negotiations no longer work.

About the Ministry for Peace Australia
The Ministry for Peace Australia is dedicated to promoting conflict resolution, diplomacy, and peacebuilding strategies in an evolving global landscape. Through research, advocacy, and policy development, we explore innovative solutions to modern conflicts—ensuring that peace remains achievable even in an era of power-driven diplomacy.