President-Elect Donald Trump And Quandary Over The Russia-Ukraine War – OpEd
Amid the uncertainties surrounding the incoming Donald Trump administration’s likely position and role in the Russia-Ukraine war, Moscow has escalated its war efforts and launched missiles on Kyiv on November 13 – its first missile attack on the Ukrainian capital since August. In response, Ukraine has received temporary solace in the US Secretary of State Blinken’s pledges that the “Biden government will do what it can for Ukraine before leaving office.”
With Trump’s second term as president in US at the beginning of coming year, uncertainties spiral as to which direction more than three years of Ukrainian resistance and fight against the Russian territorial incursion would take. While President-elect Trump has made it clear he is going to end the war in just one day, it has generated anxiety and debate as to how he is going to accomplish this. He has asserted that the US has no appetite to remain entangled in the wars in distant places where the country does not perceive any direct interest being served.
Trump does not want to uphold the international liberal order underlining American exceptionalism either. His transactional worldview suggests that there are no deep ideological divisions in the world as many would like to pit the liberal values upheld by the US against the convergence of authoritarian values championed by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. During his campaign trail, he not only stressed his previous tenure being successful in its diplomatic manoeuvres by managing the great power relations without getting the US entangled in wars but emphasized the way it could successfully fight against the ISIS as well.
Ukraine and Russia would Prefer Negotiations to War
Ukraine being a small power compared with Russia has been holding off Russian invasion by putting up stiff resistance with its will power and military as well as financial assistance from Europe and the US. It has also enhanced its indigenous capability of producing more weapons. However, external assistance has plateaued even as it needs far more arms and ammunitions to fortify its frontline.
While the Western powers have instilled in Ukraine the hope that it can get back its lost territories and restore its 1991 borders, their assistance was not up to the level and proportion that could overpower Russia. The NATO moved cautiously so as not to cross the Russian redlines and allow Ukraine to use long range missiles that could target any part of Russian territory let alone grant membership to it. Meanwhile, Ukraine entered into bilateral security agreements with certain European countries but that is not enough to assure Ukraine of protecting its territories against Russian creeping invasion.
In the absence of negotiations tilting in favour of it, Ukraine was not replenished with sufficient military assistance and not allowed to muster enough military muscle to turn the tide of war decisively in its favour. While Russia received fighters from North Korea to maintain its predominance, Ukraine could not receive men in boot from its supporters despite the dire need of them. It has not been able to fortify its defences against the Russian forces within its territory losing ground to the latter. To recover these territories from Russian control, Ukraine would need massive western assistance. Ukrainians would never like to see losing these territories to Russia.
Any negotiation that Ukraine enters into from a position of weakness would allow Russia to redraw its map by formally including these territories to its existing boundaries. On the other side, the Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky whose popularity is gradually dwindling can escape a change of regime by defending these territories from Russian occupation. In the hope of greater and steady assistance from these powers and to demonstrate Russia that the game was going to be a tough one, Ukraine, for the first time, made an incursion into the Russian territory and occupied parts of Kursk region. Now, perceiving the Ukrainian hopes destined to get faded soon, Russia has upped the ante by escalating the war.
Both Ukraine and Russia although have been worn out in the protracted war, they will want a negotiated settlement but will never want to be perceived to be in the losing side by their people following the loss of so many lives from their armed forces including mercenaries and conscripted soldiers and civilians. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s stated objectives of demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine while remain opaque in their definitions, Russia can demonstrate victory to its people by formally annexing the Ukrainian territories it has occupied over these three years of war.
On the negotiating table, it would want guarantees that Ukraine would not be a part of NATO and the military pact would stop eastward expansion by withdrawing all kinds of military activities around and assistance from Ukraine. President-elect Trump would use different tactics to bring Russia to the negotiating table to end the protracted war given his transactional world views. Apparently, he shares good equations with President Putin but Moscow has viewed his electoral victory tepidly. Trump reportedly said unless Russia comes to a negotiating position, Ukraine would be armed to teeth to force it to compromise.
War Gravitates Towards Negotiations But Without Blueprint
The US under the Biden administration and the European countries have so far refrained from devising and offering any viable plans to end the war through negotiations. These powers as well as Russia and its informal allies continue to buttress their positions in the war without any plans for ‘the day after’. Although some neutral powers have taken initiatives to make peace through negotiations, these have not been effective due to their plans being removed from ground realities. Ukraine and the European powers are unlikely to be moved by plans which cede Ukrainian territories to Russia.
The European powers without American support cannot push Ukraine to a position of strength. The recent Presidential elections in US suggest that people have lesser appetite for supporting the causes and squandering of American resources for distant countries whereas economic concerns such as inflation and immigration have greater resilience with the masses. In this light and keeping in with speeches of the President-elect Trump during campaign trail, it is obvious that Ukraine is most likely to be bereft of substantial amount of American funds and military assistance which could turn its fate in its favour.
There is a growing realisation within the political circle as well that the US has been hard-pressed to sustain military supplies to allies in various theatres of wars and conflicts such as simultaneous supplies of military aircrafts and missiles to Israel and Taiwan have led Pentagon to cancel supplies of the same to Ukraine. Once the Republicans come to dominate both the houses of the Congress, Ukraine in need of desperate military and financial assistance would face further hiccups in the chances of getting them.
However, if Ukraine is pushed to negotiation from the current battlefield realities, Russia is sure to gain almost all the advantages that a victory in the war would have allowed. War-fatigued Russia has been sticking to wait out the Western commitment to Ukraine, if that happens then Moscow has everything to relish.
There are neoconservatives from the GOP who still believe that American primacy in world affairs must prevail and Russia must pay a heavy price for its invasion of Ukraine. In February 2024, twenty two Senators/national security hawks from the Republican Party supported military assistance to Ukraine joining with the Democrats and defying the GOP’s stance. President-elect Trump himself might not want Russia to win all these advantages let alone the believers of American exceptionalism and its primacy. Nobody knows what is on the anvil a ceasefire, armistice or a frozen conflict. However, it is really a matter of concern how both the parties to the war can be brought to a negotiation table without any of them being perceived defeated by their own people.
