askchapo

The timing may have been different but the core conditions likely would have remained. It's possible that Russia would not have invaded during his term because Trump is not an ideological and cunning imperialist and he fights with the NatSec ghouls who are, so the exact escalations that occurred during the Biden admin may not have occurred. One can imagine a Minsk III under Trump. Minsk I and II created the conditions that became intolerable for Russia, so this should be understood to be kicking the can down the road, not a reversal in overall policy strategy.

It's important to look at the proximal causes to get a sense of the timing. The Biden admin pushed Ukraine to badger Russia and ramp up the campaign in Donbas after icing them out of diplomatic talks or implementing any aspects of Minsk II. Russia lined up a mobilization due to the failing diplomacy and hawkish lines drawn by Washington and their proxy with Zelensky. We figured that this was a bluff and Russia was just trying to get leverage for talks, but it's clear that this was some kind of test, where if shelling escalated an invasion would proceed.

In addition, we shouldn't forget that Russia still wanted diplomacy after the invasion. They sought a Minsk-like status quo again and those talks were undermined by the US and its proxies. The official US policy was that this was a good situation for the US and the war should be extended. I think it's also reasonable to think that Trump could have had the opposite policy due to him being at odds with some of the ghouls or literally just so he could take credit for the treaty.