Former U
S. diplomat to Ukraine openly stated that she resigned due to the unacceptable policies of the Donald Trump administration, which, in her words, effectively protected the interests of the aggressor rather than the victim. Bridget Brink, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, wrote a deep and revealing column in the Detroit Free Press, in which she honestly admitted that her decision to leave a high diplomatic post was driven by ethical considerations and outrage over policies she considered unfair and harmful to the international community. She specifically emphasized that her main disagreement arose because the Trump administration prioritized Russia's interests over Ukraine and other victims of Russian aggression. In her column, Brink explicitly declared that she resigned as a protest against policies that favored pressuring Ukraine—this country, a victim of Russian invasion—instead of focusing efforts on the factors truly responsible for the conflict. She noted that serving as ambassador to Ukraine was the most challenging position of her life, but she could no longer conceal her dissatisfaction with the situation. Brink stressed that she respects the right and duty of the current administration to set U.S. foreign policy but also emphasized that this policy must be under Congress’s control and aligned with the country’s security interests. According to her, the Trump administration’s policy towards Russia was distorted and unjust from the start: instead of fully supporting Ukraine in its fight against the aggressor, the U.S. “wavered” and concentrated pressure on the victim—Ukraine, rather than Russia, which has become the source of the threat. “I could not conscientiously implement this policy, and therefore I felt it necessary to take a step back,” Brink admitted. She added that the current global and Ukraine-specific situation causes her deep concern. From the war and mass bombings, little remains of democracy and independence in the country, and she finds it horrifying that the Russian invasion conflict has become the most terrible outbreak of violence since World War II. “The world has not seen such a level of systematic and large-scale violence as we are witnessing now in Europe. This clearly demonstrates how safe and free we can remain if authoritarian regimes like Putin’s Russia seize more territories and destroy entire countries,” Brink stated in her column. She emphasized that Ukraine’s struggle is crucial for the United States because the way this country can resist Russian aggression will tell the world a lot about the U.S. ability to defend its allies and interests. “If Putin’s invasion succeeds, it will send a signal to China that the global situation is under their influence and that they can start even more aggressive actions in Asia and other regions. This would jeopardize not only European security but also the global stability of the entire world,” Brink stressed. She expressed her belief that the U.S. must remain a global leader and actively oppose all forms of violence and dictatorship, rather than succumb to illusions of possible “peaceful resolutions,” which only provide time for new wars and greater human suffering. “Peaceful surrender is not true peace but only a prolongation of the conflict. History repeatedly proves that capitulating to an aggressor without accountability never leads to lasting peace or security,” Brink emphasized, noting that this lesson has been familiar to everyone during the darkest periods of European history. According to her, Russia’s war against Ukraine is a massive and horrifying manifestation of aggression unparalleled in modern European history since World War II. Regarding the role of the U.S. in this crisis, Brink highlights that how the country reacts to this war will influence not only Ukrainians and their fight but also global politics as a whole. “We are a country that many look up to and learn from. If the U.S. does not act as a leader in defending democracy and sovereignty, it will undermine our reputation and the trust of our allies,” she said. Her thoughts also include a reminder that, although she is no longer a diplomat, she will never lose faith in the power of American leadership and the necessity of supporting it to safeguard our future and global stability. The background of the situation shows that Brink was appointed ambassador to Slovakia in 2019, and under President Biden, she was transferred to Ukraine. She announced her resignation in April of this year amid active media discussions about her decision. Most sources indicated that her move was related to growing disagreements with the Trump administration, which arose over its strong support for Russia and unfavorable diplomatic policies. In early May, Julie Davis became the acting chief of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, temporarily taking over responsibilities until further appointments. The events surrounding Brink’s resignation further indicate internal tensions within the U.S. diplomatic service regarding approaches to supporting Ukraine and countering Russian aggression, which has already lasted over a year and had extensive social and international repercussions. Her public statement marks a new phase in the discussion about core values and priorities of American foreign policy.