In theory, Donald Trump’s return to the White House is Ukraine’s worst nightmare. The newly elected President has persistently refused to condemn Putin’s invasion, appearing to admire his dictatorial style of governance. He has at least once attempted to blackmail Ukraine by leveraging military aid. It is therefore surprising, yet indicative of Ukraine’s situation, that many senior officials in Kyiv were hoping for a Trump victory. When faced with the dilemma between a President who provides aid in dribs and drabs and an unpredictable President who disregards rules, they seem to prefer the latter.
President Zelensky was quick to congratulate Trump on his victory, referring to his “decisive leadership spirit.” And this is not mere rhetoric. Privately, Zelensky’s team does not hide its disappointment with the Biden administration’s hesitancy and the gap between promises of “supporting Ukraine as long as needed” and actions that suggest otherwise.
America’s refusal to allow Ukraine to use its missiles for attacks inside Russia, delays in military aid provision, and the lack of substantial security guarantees are perceived in Kyiv as signs of incompetence and hypocrisy. Trump’s victory now offers a possible exit from a bloody stalemate or, worse, an impending defeat.
In his campaign, Trump promised to end the war within 24 hours. No one, likely not even Trump himself, knows what his peace plan entails. One scenario, associated with future Vice President Vance, is to freeze the conflict as it stands, requiring Ukraine to remain neutral without security guarantees. The other scenario, linked to former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, involves increasing military and economic support to Kyiv. In this latter scenario, the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO could remain open.
A complete abandonment of Ukraine by Trump seems unlikely, as such a move would face backlash from his Republican base. Trump does not want to bear responsibility for Ukraine’s defeat. However, he might request concessions, such as access to Ukraine’s natural resources.
The change in Washington comes at a challenging time for Ukraine’s armed forces. After a year of resisting Russia, which has cost the lives of 57,000 Russian soldiers, Ukraine lost 620 square kilometres in a month. Russia is advancing on multiple fronts, and Ukraine is attempting to replenish losses through conscription. However, recruitment targets have barely reached two-thirds of their goal. Meanwhile, Russia attracts soldiers with generous contracts without resorting to mass mobilisation. In six months, this disparity will be evident on the battlefields.
Trump will want the issue resolved before he returns to the White House. The question is what Putin will do. Sources close to the Russian leader provide conflicting information: one day they say freezing hostilities would be acceptable, the next day they talk about Ukraine’s surrender. As temperatures drop to zero, Russia is expected to resume attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. “They will destroy the grid, they will attempt to assassinate the Ukrainian leadership,” says former Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko. “The next three months will be terrible.”
Also read: Alert in Ukraine: Russian bombers take off
Source: AMNA
