Trump one year after the election — promises and reality

One year ago, Americans elected Donald Trump back to the presidency, defeating his running mate (and opponent) Kamala Harris in a bitterly-fought campaign. Such victories were powered by strong support in battleground states including Florida, Ohio, and Texas.

From the outset, Trump made bold promises on foreign policy—especially regarding the war in Ukraine.

Trump’s "24-hour peace" promise still lingers

"The War between Russia and Ukraine is Biden’s war, not mine," Trump declared during April 2025, shifting blame for the conflict onto his predecessor. 

He went further — insisting the war "never would have happened" had he remained in office and claiming he could end it "within 24 hours." In one of his campaign speeches, Trump emphasized that point again, saying the invasion would "never have even started if [he] were president." The remark, now circulating widely online, became one of his most quoted lines from that period, fueling both support among his base and criticism from foreign-policy analysts who questioned how such a promise could be fulfilled in practice.

Trump’s Alaska summit with Putin ends without a ceasefire deal

In mid-August 2025, Donald Trump traveled to Anchorage, Alaska, for a high-stakes summit with Vladimir Putin, held at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. The meeting aimed to open negotiations on a cease-fire in the war in Ukraine, but ended without any concrete agreement. 

Despite both parties describing the talks as "productive," Trump admitted publicly that "There’s no deal until there’s a deal," placing the burden of progress onto Ukraine’s leadership. 

Analysts at Chatham House observed the summit resulted more in optics than outcomes — a public relations boost for Putin rather than a diplomatic breakthrough. 

Pivot to equipment-sales model

Following the Alaska meeting, Trump shifted his policy on US support for Ukraine. He announced that the US would no longer provide direct funding to Kyiv’s government, stating instead that American weapons would be sold to European allies — who would then supply them to Ukraine. 

The landmark deal, covered by The Guardian, confirmed that European nations such as Germany and Norway committed billions toward purchasing US-made weapons under this new model — effectively redirecting funding flows from Washington to partner states. 

This change signals a major strategic recalibration: rather than continuing large-scale direct aid, the US under Trump is leveraging allied purchases and distribution to maintain influence while reducing its budgetary exposure.

Together, these two policy shifts — a summit that failed to deliver a cease-fire and a restructured aid model — highlight the evolving and uncertain nature of US leadership in the Ukraine conflict.

Trump touts record on "ending wars" — promises Ukraine will be next

Beyond Ukraine, Trump boasted he had ended eight wars during his first term, and said during a Sunday speech that he was on the verge of ending the ninth. "I just solved eight wars, and a ninth is coming. I believe Russia and Ukraine will happen," the US President said aboard Air Force One.

Adding to the spectacle, Trump’s supporters had strongly campaigned this year for him to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. After the prize was instead awarded to Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado in October 2025, the White House accused the Nobel Committee of placing "politics over peace."

For many, the question remains: what might have happened if the voters had chosen Kamala Harris instead?

Supporters argue that a Harris administration would have pursued deeper ties with European partners and a more measured approach to Russia; critics say it would have been more of the same business-as-usual Washington bipartisan foreign-policy track.

Why this matters

Trump’s rhetoric around Ukraine has major implications: not only for global security, but for the alignment of US foreign policy with NATO allies and international institutions. His statements about "ending wars fast" and shifting funding models signal a pivot away from previous multilateral frameworks.

What’s next

Analysts will be watching Trump’s next moves closely:

• Will a true cease-fire agreement be proposed?
• How will European allies react to a Trump administration redirecting arms sales rather than direct funding?
• And if the "ninth war" promise becomes a campaign narrative again, what theatre of conflict will he target?

In the end, the 2024 election turned more than a page — it opened a new chapter in America’s global role, with Ukraine as one of its first test cases.

Read more:

Zelenskyy believes that Trump will help end the war faster

Hero and coward — US Senator on the Zelensky-Trump scandal

Putin shouts over reporters before press is forced to leave talks

Trump still open to meeting Putin — but wants results