Republicans fight with Trump’s team over Ukraine talks

KENNY HOLSTON/THE NEW YORK TIMES

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) questions Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during a hearing to examine the department’s 2026 budget estimates before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee in Washington on June 11. McConnell feuded on social media on Tuesday with Vice President JD Vance, a key player in the ongoing talks, scolding him in a series of posts for defending an emerging deal that McConnell argued would not secure Ukraine and would play into Russia’s hands.

WASHINGTON >> Congressional Republicans who view Ukraine as a bulwark against Russian aggression are openly blasting President Donald Trump’s team for an approach they argue amounts to appeasing the Kremlin in a bid to swiftly draw the conflict to a close.

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky feuded on social media on Tuesday with Vice President JD Vance, a key player in the ongoing talks, scolding him in a series of posts for defending an emerging deal that McConnell argued would not secure Ukraine and would play into Russia’s hands.

“A deal that rewards aggression wouldn’t be worth the paper it’s written on,” McConnell, the longest-serving Senate Republican leader and one of his party’s most vocal proponents of U.S. support for Ukraine, wrote in conclusion. “America isn’t a neutral arbiter, and we shouldn’t act like one.”

The diatribe came in response to a long post from Vance in which he accused McConnell of making a “ridiculous attack” on the peace plan Friday, when the Republican had written that Russian President Vladimir Putin had “spent the entire year trying to play President Trump for a fool,” and added that if Trump’s top negotiators were “more concerned with appeasing Putin than securing real peace, then the President ought to find new advisers.”

The bitter exchange reflected deep divisions among Republicans about the direction of the negotiations and the Trump administration’s handling of them. It also reflected a broader dispute within the party between hawkish traditionalists and those who espouse an America-first posture of disentangling the United States from foreign intervention.

The White House has insisted that the peace plan being discussed was developed by Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, and White House envoy Steve Witkoff, who met on several occasions with Russian officials before releasing the proposal last week.

Don't miss out on what's happening!

Stay in touch with breaking news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!

Email Sign Up
By clicking to sign up, you agree to Star-Advertiser's and Google's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. This form is protected by reCAPTCHA.

But several GOP lawmakers were alarmed when Secretary of State Marco Rubio told senators over the weekend that it was a Russia-led proposal, before backpedaling and saying it was a U.S. document.

And several Republicans have condemned the plan that served as the basis for talks in Geneva over the weekend, saying it did not properly take into account Ukrainian demands and made concessions to Russia that Kyiv would not accept. Chief among them were proposals that Ukraine reduce its military forces and cede territory to Russia.

“We hate appeasing Putin’s Russia & throwing Ukraine, who wants freedom and independence, under Putin’s bus,” Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., wrote on social media. “The Thursday 28-point surrender plan was disgusting.”

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., a co-chair of the Congressional Ukraine Caucus, described the plan as “Russia’s absurd wish list,” and called for it to be “shredded for the garbage that it is.”

“The only peace plan that should be taken seriously is one that is 100% drafted by and approved by Ukraine,” Fitzpatrick added in a post on social media. “They are the victims here, and we will stand behind them 100%.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who is both a leading hawk and a loyal ally of Trump, praised the president’s effort to end the war.

“However,” he added in a post on social media, “it is clear to me that there will be no peace as long as Putin believes he is in the driver’s seat. He will insist on capitulation, not peace.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2025 The New York Times Company

See more:PoliticsRussia Attacks Ukraine

38 Comments
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the Terms of Service. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. If your comments are inappropriate, you may be banned from posting. Report comments if you believe they do not follow our guidelines. Having trouble with comments? Learn more here.
Please log in to comment