Ukraine in Focus

By Svitlana Morenets

May 12

Donald Trump still can win the upcoming US presidential election, Niall Ferguson writes in this week’s Spectator cover piece. But what would it mean for Ukraine? ‘He would almost certainly seek to impose a compromise of peace on Ukraine, as he regards the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky with something less than respect, and has a notorious inclination to do business with Vladimir Putin,’ Ferguson writes. And he is right: if Trump wins, the war may be over – but certainly not in Ukraine’s favour.

A ceasefire is the main argument for peace that Trump uses in his pre-election campaign. But he keeps quiet about the fact that this will benefit Putin. In his latest interview, Trump refused to say who he thinks should win the war: ‘I want everybody to stop dying, both Russians and Ukrainians,’ he said, adding that he would have stopped the war in 24 hours if he had been president when it started. This stance resonates with many Americans who are fatigued from supporting and funding a fight thousands of miles away from them. But immediately afterwards, Trump said: ‘I want Europe to put up more money because they are in for $20 billion, we are for $170 billion, and they should equalise.’ It seems unclear: does Trump want to end the war or just to stop funding Ukraine?

I would say both. Republicans have been lulling voters with tales of a lightning-quick end to the war, if only Trump could negotiate with Putin on the phone. The thesis that ‘the war will be over in one day’ is more an election slogan than a plausible reality – as well as the efforts to tie Ukraine to the economic problems of the ‘ordinary American’. ‘At worst, I could’ve made a deal to take over something, there are [in Ukraine] certain areas that are Russian-speaking areas, frankly, but you could’ve worked a deal,’ Trump has said previously of a compromise. But there is no quick solution: Putin won’t call off the invasion without maintaining the occupied territories, and Ukraine won’t cede them. Trump will find it difficult to reward Putin for Russia’s efforts to put him in the White House in 2016.

Many Americans believe that aiding Ukraine will mean dragging the US into a nuclear conflict with Russia. That’s why Trump is keen to say that he would be the only candidate who could prevent world war three – by ending the fight. If Trump comes to power again, Ukraine might get much less military help (or none at all) from the US. America demonstrated its ability to be a global leader during the invasion of Ukraine; without Washington, a large pro-Ukrainian coalition of countries could simply fall apart. If that happened, it would be disastrous for Ukraine: after running out of weapons, Kyiv would be forced to cut a deal with Putin. Such a deal would certainly mean giving up land, people and freedom. However, problems may begin even before the presidential elections. The volume of financial assistance to Ukraine approved by Congress at the end of last year will expire by the end of September. A new amount of aid would need to be approved by the House of Representatives, which is dominated by Republicans who want to reduce aid to Ukraine – or even to cut it completely.

Trump is playing this card, trying to win the internal primaries within his party and some of the electorate, who believe America’s economic problems are a direct result of sending aid to Ukraine. All his statements mean that aid will be more and more difficult to allocate. In many cases, its allocation will be sabotaged and delayed by the Republicans, who will try to prove the ineffectiveness of Biden’s policy towards Ukraine, the fruitlessness of the money already spent and, accordingly, reduce Biden’s chances of re-election.

It can be argued that Biden is the presidential candidate who best understands Ukraine and the consequences the war holds for global security. But the presidential campaign will be tough for the 80-year-old. That’s why Kyiv believes the war must be won before November next year. In the words of Zelensky: ‘Who knows where we will be [when the elections are held]. I believe that by then we will win.’

Russian State Duma deputies demanded a ban on Family Guy for how it portrayed the city of Chelyabinsk, saying it was ‘offensive and has nothing to do with reality’. The backlash came after episodes 19 and 20 of the show’s 21st season. (Credit: Fox)

In pictures

.

Quote of the week

‘With [what we already have] we can go forward and, I think, be successful. But we’d lose a lot of people. I think that’s unacceptable. So we need to wait. We still need a bit more time.’

– Volodymyr Zelensky said the Ukrainian army still needs ‘some things’, including armoured vehicles that were ‘arriving in batches’, before launching a counter-offensive

The war in numbers

Range of a Storm Shadow missile

200 miles

The UK is the first country to give Ukraine such long-range weapons

Ukrainian forces have advanced

1.2 miles

in Bakhmut, according to Ukraine’s deputy defence minister

Ukrainian troops who need treatment for lost limbs

250-500 per month

Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko asked his Berlin counterpart for medical assistance

.

Svitlana Morenets was a journalist in Kyiv. She hitchhiked in Crimea to learn more about life under the Russian occupation and wrote a story about her experience in 2019. She is now in London working at The Spectator. If you enjoy the Ukraine in Focus newsletter, please forward it to someone you know: you can sign up here. Svitlana’s writing for The Spectator can be found here. This email is a work in progress: all feedback welcome: svitlana@spectator.co.uk