Senator Marshall Op-Ed: Support President Trump’s Push to End Ukraine War
Washington – On Tuesday, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) published an op-ed in The Washington Times, writing that we can only end the Russian invasion of Ukraine by understanding the historical context of the region, the psychology of Vladimir Putin’s aggression, and trusting President Trump’s strength, leadership, and negotiating skills to end this war.
Read the full op-ed HERE or below:
Support President Trump’s Push to End Ukraine War
Senator Roger Marshall
The Washington Times
August 26, 2025
Make no mistake about it: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a blatant crime of aggression under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and Vladimir Putin is a war criminal and murderer.
Russian forces kidnapped some 20,000 Ukrainian children and have relentlessly targeted civilian apartments and hospitals. Mr. Putin’s history is marked by the poisoning of spies and opponents, and we must never forget his brutal role in the Chechen wars from 1999 to 2009, when atrocities scarred an entire generation.
These are undeniable facts. Yet despite this grim reality, my long-standing goals for Ukraine remain clear: to stop the killing and reunite those stolen children with their families.
As someone relatively new to Congress and the Senate, I approach this brutal conflict not as a Sunday morning pundit reciting Cold War-era platitudes but as a physician who spent decades delivering more than 5,000 babies and providing primary care to women. I am a pragmatist who understands history, human psychology and the perils of endless stalemate.
President Trump’s efforts to broker an end to the Russia–Ukraine war through direct engagement, pragmatic compromises and deadlines offer a realistic path forward.
To grasp why this war persists, we must first understand Ukrainian history.
Ukraine’s story predates Russia’s story by millennia. The East Slavs established agrarian villages, practiced self-governance and were the true ancestors of Ukrainians, Russians and Belarusians. In the ninth century, Kyiv, founded sometime in the fifth to sixth century, became the heart of Kievan Rus’, a thriving political, cultural and religious center for East Slavs.
Moscow, by contrast, first appears in records around 1147 AD, some 600 years later.
Kyiv is rightfully called the “Mother of Russian Cities,” the cradle from which Ukraine and then Russia and Belarus emerged.
Yet through Mr. Putin’s lens, this narrative twists. He views Kyiv and Ukraine as an inseparable part of “Greater Russia” and dismisses Ukraine’s sovereignty as a byproduct of Soviet dissolution and Western meddling.
He likewise sees Ukraine’s pivot toward NATO and the European Union as a betrayal and security threat, and this justifies in his mind the “protection” of Russian speakers and the restoration of historical influence.
As a physician, I have always tried to view patients’ issues through their eyes, and applying that here reveals Mr. Putin’s psychology, not as a diagnosis but as an interpretation of observable traits from his public life and writings.
Mr. Putin embodies a controlled, disciplined strategist who blends Machiavellian tactics with authoritarian protectionism. He craves control and power, is averse to chaos or threats to authority, and is likely scarred by the Soviet Union’s traumatic fall. His KGB roots foster a worldview of manipulation, secrecy and patience, favoring psychological operations over raw force.
His Machiavellian tendencies are most obvious in geopolitical maneuvers such as hybrid warfare and disinformation campaigns that divide Western alliances. Authoritarian tendencies are evident in his ruthless suppression of dissent, including the poisoning and imprisonment of rivals such as Alexei Navalny, disinformation campaigns and extending term limits to consolidate indefinite power, all while propagating a myth of unassailable competence.
Mr. Putin views the world as hostile, offensively using cyber, propaganda and economic leverage. Like his communist masters of old, he views human life as subordinate to state preservation.
His resilience and risk tolerance, honed in intelligence work, make him a formidable adversary.
So what should the West do?
The worst approach with a bully like Mr. Putin is empty threats or name-calling without punch. Saying “Don’t” without action, as President Biden did before the invasion, only emboldens him, especially after the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Threatening NATO expansion on Russia’s border predictably triggered aggression, given Mr. Putin’s defensive mindset. That’s simply the truth, like it or not.
Europe’s response has been equally feckless. Lacking robust standing armies or weapons stockpiles, fewer than half of European Union nations meet their defense pledge of 2% of gross domestic product, let alone the aspirational 5%. All the while, they flock to Washington for photo ops instead of deploying their troops and fighter jets to NATO’s front lines in Poland or the Baltics.
The EU also remains grossly dependent on Russian energy. Even now, three years into the war, it imports 13% to 15% of its gas from Russia, with oil down to 3% and a full phase-out not pledged until 2027.
Ukraine, the EU and the U.S. must choose between further escalation and negotiation.
If the fighting continues, Europe must lead and U.S. troops must stay off the table. The 100,000 American troops already in Europe, at a cost of more than $50 billion annually, should be more than enough to show U.S. support.
Mr. Trump understands this. He is threatening “massive sanctions” and up to 100% tariffs on Russia if no deal emerges, building on existing measures such as secondary sanctions on oil buyers and banks. His plan shifts to sustainable diplomacy by proposing a Putin-Zelenskyy summit, pragmatic territorial swaps with security guarantees for Ukraine and low-level talks aimed at achieving a ceasefire.
We all hoped for a 24-hour miracle, but now we must adapt yet again. By leveraging America’s influence without endless blank-check spending on foreign arms or aid, Mr. Trump has prioritized ending the war over ideological posturing.
I support Mr. Trump’s path to peace, which honors Ukraine’s sovereignty while acknowledging realities. Endless war benefits no one except the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned against.
It’s time to stop the killing, return the children and let tough diplomacy and strong actions prevail. A better tomorrow is possible for Ukraine if Europe is willing to stand up to this aggressor, with a little help from its old friend across the pond.
###
Contact: Payton Fuller
