Biden Condemns U.S. Pressure on Ukraine as 'Modern-Day Appeasement' Without Naming Trump

In a pointed departure from the long-held tradition of former presidents avoiding direct criticism of their successors, Joe Biden has sharply rebuked recent U.S. pressure on Ukraine to cede territory to Russia, calling it “modern-day appeasement” in an interview with the BBC published May 7.

Though Biden never mentioned Donald Trump by name, his remarks were a clear condemnation of the current administration’s evolving Ukraine policy, which reportedly includes recognition of Russia’s occupation of Crimea and a de facto acceptance of its broader territorial claims.

Biden warned that forcing Ukraine to accept territorial losses would not lead to peace but would instead embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin, weaken the credibility of American leadership abroad, and set a dangerous precedent for future global conflicts.

“Anybody that thinks he is going to stop if some territory is conceded as part of a peace deal is just foolish,” Biden said, referring to Putin without naming Trump.

“I just don’t understand how people think that if we allow a dictator, a thug, to decide he’s going to take significant portions of land that aren’t his, that that’s going to satisfy him. I don’t quite understand.”

His remarks arrive at a moment of heightened anxiety among Ukraine’s allies and democratic nations worldwide. The Trump administration, now over 100 days into its second term, has declined to approve any new military aid for Ukraine despite growing urgency on the battlefield.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that Ukraine’s NATO aspirations provoked Russia’s full-scale invasion and has argued that Crimea, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014, “will stay with Russia.”

The administration’s unofficial peace framework, according to multiple sources familiar with backchannel discussions, includes American recognition of Russia’s control over Crimea and a proposal for Ukraine to negotiate directly with Moscow over its occupied territories—Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson—none of which Russia fully controls.

Biden, who made support for Ukraine a cornerstone of his presidency, emphasized that the fight in Ukraine is not just about regional borders, but about international norms and the future of global order.

“Conceding territory doesn’t bring peace. It invites more aggression,” he said. “And when the world sees the United States stepping back from that fight, it questions everything we stand for.”

He argued that any effort to pressure Ukraine into concessions ignores the lessons of history and dangerously underestimates Putin’s ambitions.

Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has been defending against Moscow’s attempts to redraw its borders by force. While Russian troops continue to hold parts of eastern and southern Ukraine, Kyiv has refused to accept any peace deal that recognizes Russian control over its territory.

Biden expressed confidence in the Ukrainian people’s determination to defend their sovereignty and said his administration gave them “everything they needed to provide for their independence,” while also signaling readiness to respond more aggressively if Russia escalated further.

The contrast with the current U.S. stance could not be starker. Since taking office in January 2025, the Trump administration has avoided direct confrontation with the Kremlin and taken no new steps to pressure Moscow.

Although Ukraine accepted a U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire on March 11, Russia dismissed the plan and presented a set of demands widely viewed as maximalist and unrealistic, including Ukraine’s formal renunciation of NATO membership and recognition of Russian sovereignty over all occupied regions.

The U.S. response to Russia’s rejection has been muted. There have been no new sanctions, no escalation of diplomatic pressure, and no significant follow-up on the initial proposal.

On May 1, State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce confirmed the administration’s intent to reduce American involvement in the conflict. “That is now between the two parties, and now is the time that they need to present and develop concrete ideas about how this conflict is going to end,” Bruce said.

The remark appeared to confirm earlier warnings from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the president himself that the United States would step back if no tangible progress was made.

Biden, in his interview, expressed deep concern about the broader implications of this policy shift. “When the United States retreats from its commitments, the world becomes more dangerous,” he said.

“It sends a message that autocrats can act without consequence if they simply wait out democracy.” His comments suggest a profound divergence in worldview from his successor, rooted in a belief that America’s role on the global stage is not simply to manage conflicts but to lead with moral clarity and strategic consistency.

Ukraine’s leaders, for their part, have shown no willingness to accept a settlement that legitimizes Russia’s territorial claims. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly vowed that Ukraine will never surrender its sovereignty or trade land for peace.

Kyiv has also warned that any softening of Western support could prolong the war and deepen the suffering of millions caught in the crossfire.

Inside the U.S., the Trump administration’s stance on Ukraine has sparked unease among national security officials, both current and former. Critics argue that the administration’s prioritization of rapid diplomacy over long-term strategy risks rewarding aggression and alienating key allies.

Meanwhile, European leaders have expressed frustration over Washington’s new posture, with several NATO countries increasing their own military aid to Ukraine in an attempt to fill the gap left by American inaction.

Biden, now out of office but clearly still engaged in foreign policy discourse, has continued to speak out on matters he views as critical to America’s identity and role in the world. In recent months, he has kept a relatively low profile, avoiding frequent public appearances.

But his decision to weigh in on the unfolding Ukraine situation marks a significant moment—one that underscores the stakes not only for Ukraine, but for the credibility of the West.

“I understand the desire to end the war quickly,” Biden said. “But peace without justice is not peace. It’s surrender disguised as diplomacy.”

As the war in Ukraine drags on and the U.S. recalibrates its involvement, the debate over America’s moral and strategic obligations will likely continue to intensify.

Whether the current administration’s approach ultimately leads to a negotiated settlement or emboldens further aggression remains to be seen. But for Biden and those who share his view, the cost of appeasement is far greater than the price of continued resistance.