I’ve seen several people argue that Trump might not be as bad on Ukraine as some suggest and cited his administration’s supply of arms to Kyiv as evidence for this. I understand why people are keen to find positives for Ukraine, but I think this is wrong.
On arms: the claim is often that Trump supplied them after Obama blocked them. This is only partly true. The Obama administration allowed the commercial export of weapons to Ukraine, but did not supply them directly.
The Trump administration did, but only after Trump was persuaded to change his mind on the grounds that it would be good for US business.
Trump then, infamously, suspended almost $400 million of Congressionally mandated military aid after he was reportedly persuaded to do so by Rudy Giuliani and others. Trump wrongly claimed that the Ukrainian government had acted to undermine him and to protect Joe Biden.
According to John Bolton, Trump declared that “Ukraine tried to take me down. I’m not fucking interested in helping them”. The “quid pro quo” call with Zelensky – restoration of aid in return for political favours – was the subject of Trump’s 1st impeachment.
The idea that Trump is more open to helping Ukraine than he appears is not correct, though as on many other things, his position wasn’t fixed because he was easily influenced by those who knew how to talk to him.
(This is one of many reasons 1st term Trump foreign policy was so incoherent – in the absence of knowledge or understanding of even the big picture of foreign policy, policy depended on who had his ear at any given moment.)
Trump is now surrounded by better organised people who are not likely to try to persuade him that continuing to arm Ukraine is good for US business. In any case, given his apparent decline since he last held office, it is not clear how involved he'd be in this kind of decision.
For whatever reason, one of the few absolutely consistent Trump positions since before his first election is the desire to have good relations with Russia - by which he seems to mean Putin.
Trump has refused to blame Putin for anything, ever, appears deferential to him, and behaved in a number of ways that raised serious questions about the extent of Putin's influence over him.
Since his 1st term, he's moved more strongly in this direction and is now closely aligned with Kremlin positions on Ukraine. Whatever the claims about getting both Russia and Ukraine to the table, it seems likely that he'll just try to coerce Ukraine to accept Russian demands.
However flawed the Biden admin approach has been – very – it is as good as Ukraine is likely to get from the US until at least 2029. Things are likely to get a lot worse very fast.
That has implications not just (though most importantly) for Ukraine, but for European security and for the global standing of the US. Europe needs to urgently address how it de-couples from Trump policy on Ukraine and on Russia - it's security depends on it.
Whatever the spin that his admin will push (and much of the US media will probably accept) about Trump as dealmaker, deferring to Russia on Ukraine will make the US look weak – and for good reason. That’s obviously very dangerous for the US in an unstable global environment.
One last thing for now: though predictions are always risky, if Republicans control the House, I expect that Trump will lift some/all of the sanctions against Russia.
He was blocked from trying this by CAATSA (Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) in 2017, much to his displeasure. But the check provided by Congress won't apply if a Trump-shaped GOP controls both Houses.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
