Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The Bulwark: Trump's Muddled Signals on Ukraine
The Bulwark - Trump’s Muddled Signals on Ukraine
Good luck making sense of his clashing nominations and conflicting statements.
Cathy Young
Nov 18, 2024
WHAT NEXT FOR UKRAINE? The question loomed over the 2024 campaign, but answers remain elusive even after Donald Trump’s victory. It’s not that the Biden administration has been such a great partner; from the start, its Ukraine policy has been frustratingly hobbled by timidity and half-measures. But what’s replacing it is a foreboding unknown.
During the campaign, Trump repeatedly mocked Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky as a “salesman” cleverly extracting cash from the United States and suggested that Ukraine’s self-defense was pointless because Russia was unbeatable anyway. He also repeatedly promised to end the war on Day One of his presidency by getting both sides to talk—while his aides floated “peace proposals” that would let Russia keep the land it had grabbed and cut off Ukraine’s path to NATO membership. On occasion, however, Trump also highlighted his good relationship with Zelensky (as well as with Vladimir Putin) and made noises about the importance of Ukraine’s survival. Some pro-Ukraine, pro-Trump Republicans even insisted that his victory would actually be good for Ukraine.
So, what do Trump’s first dozen days as president-elect tell us about the prospects for Ukraine in his second presidency?
The day after the election, Trump had a call with Zelensky via Elon Musk’s Starlink service, with Musk briefly joining in the conversation; the next day, Trump reportedly called Putin and warned him against escalation. Then, another Trump peace proposal got floated—still calling for current front lines to be frozen and NATO membership to be shelved for the foreseeable future, but also offering Ukraine the protection of a demilitarized zone patrolled by soldiers from European armies as well as ample supplies of weapons. Such a plan would, at least, give Ukraine some genuine security guarantees, which means that Putin would be extremely unlikely to accept it without further concessions. Could that mean Putin will reject Trump’s deal and Trump will be sufficiently pissed off to give Zelensky everything he wants? Could it mean Trump will modify the proposal in a way that throws Ukraine under the bus and cut Zelensky loose when he says no? The second scenario seems far more likely than the first; but either way, it’s all pure speculation for now, especially since no peace proposal has been formally unveiled.
Last week, many Ukraine supporters felt cautious optimism when Trump picked Florida congressman Mike Waltz to be his national security advisor and Florida senator Marco Rubio to be secretary of state. Both men are internationalists and relative Russia hawks; after Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, both strongly backed military assistance to Kyiv and sanctions against Moscow. True, when Trump strong-armed Republicans into rejecting the Ukraine aid package in late 2023 and early 2024, both Rubio and Waltz went along, offering convoluted excuses for their votes; but both, at least, went out of their way to stress that they still saw Ukraine’s defense as vital to U.S. interests and to international security. Hardly a profile in courage, but not nothing. Shortly before the election, Waltz co-wrote an article arguing for a peace-through-strength agreement that would leave Ukraine “independent and more firmly anchored in the West” while dealing Putin “a strategic defeat”; he also advocated tougher sanctions as well as “more weapons to Ukraine with fewer restrictions on their use” if Putin proved uncooperative.
/snip
Good luck making sense of his clashing nominations and conflicting statements.
Cathy Young
Nov 18, 2024
WHAT NEXT FOR UKRAINE? The question loomed over the 2024 campaign, but answers remain elusive even after Donald Trump’s victory. It’s not that the Biden administration has been such a great partner; from the start, its Ukraine policy has been frustratingly hobbled by timidity and half-measures. But what’s replacing it is a foreboding unknown.
During the campaign, Trump repeatedly mocked Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky as a “salesman” cleverly extracting cash from the United States and suggested that Ukraine’s self-defense was pointless because Russia was unbeatable anyway. He also repeatedly promised to end the war on Day One of his presidency by getting both sides to talk—while his aides floated “peace proposals” that would let Russia keep the land it had grabbed and cut off Ukraine’s path to NATO membership. On occasion, however, Trump also highlighted his good relationship with Zelensky (as well as with Vladimir Putin) and made noises about the importance of Ukraine’s survival. Some pro-Ukraine, pro-Trump Republicans even insisted that his victory would actually be good for Ukraine.
So, what do Trump’s first dozen days as president-elect tell us about the prospects for Ukraine in his second presidency?
The day after the election, Trump had a call with Zelensky via Elon Musk’s Starlink service, with Musk briefly joining in the conversation; the next day, Trump reportedly called Putin and warned him against escalation. Then, another Trump peace proposal got floated—still calling for current front lines to be frozen and NATO membership to be shelved for the foreseeable future, but also offering Ukraine the protection of a demilitarized zone patrolled by soldiers from European armies as well as ample supplies of weapons. Such a plan would, at least, give Ukraine some genuine security guarantees, which means that Putin would be extremely unlikely to accept it without further concessions. Could that mean Putin will reject Trump’s deal and Trump will be sufficiently pissed off to give Zelensky everything he wants? Could it mean Trump will modify the proposal in a way that throws Ukraine under the bus and cut Zelensky loose when he says no? The second scenario seems far more likely than the first; but either way, it’s all pure speculation for now, especially since no peace proposal has been formally unveiled.
Last week, many Ukraine supporters felt cautious optimism when Trump picked Florida congressman Mike Waltz to be his national security advisor and Florida senator Marco Rubio to be secretary of state. Both men are internationalists and relative Russia hawks; after Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, both strongly backed military assistance to Kyiv and sanctions against Moscow. True, when Trump strong-armed Republicans into rejecting the Ukraine aid package in late 2023 and early 2024, both Rubio and Waltz went along, offering convoluted excuses for their votes; but both, at least, went out of their way to stress that they still saw Ukraine’s defense as vital to U.S. interests and to international security. Hardly a profile in courage, but not nothing. Shortly before the election, Waltz co-wrote an article arguing for a peace-through-strength agreement that would leave Ukraine “independent and more firmly anchored in the West” while dealing Putin “a strategic defeat”; he also advocated tougher sanctions as well as “more weapons to Ukraine with fewer restrictions on their use” if Putin proved uncooperative.
/snip
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
