Opinion | The Trump Factor: Redefining Russia-Ukraine War

As the world watches the unfolding drama of the 2024 US presidential election, geopolitical analysts and policymakers alike are recalibrating their expectations for global stability.

With Donald Trump having won the elections for the second time, one question looms large: How will a Trump victory alter the landscape of the Russia-Ukraine war? To answer this, we must delve into Trump’s past foreign policy decisions, his “America First” doctrine, and what that means for Ukraine, NATO, and Russia.

Revisiting Trump’s Foreign Policy: A Precedent of Uncertainty Donald Trump’s presidency from 2017 to 2021 was defined by a brand of foreign policy that sought to pull back US engagement in long-standing conflicts.

His “America First” approach resonated with voters who were tired of seeing America’s resources drained by overseas military ventures.

Trump’s interactions with NATO members showcased his willingness to disrupt alliances that had long been the bedrock of US and European security.

He famously pressured NATO members to increase their defence spending, asserting that the US could not continue bearing the lion’s share of the financial and military burden.

This precedent raises the question: Would a re-elected Trump reinforce or reduce US support to Ukraine? Given his past, Trump’s approach to Ukraine would likely pivot towards limiting military aid while emphasising diplomatic negotiations, a stance that could shift the current status quo.

The Significance of US Military Aid to Ukraine Since Russia’s invasion in February 2022, the US has funnelled over $75 billion in military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine.

This assistance includes critical weapon systems like the HIMARS rocket launchers and advanced air defence mechanisms that have bolstered Ukraine’s ability to counter Russian offensives.

The importance of this aid cannot be overstated; it has been the only reason Kyiv’s resistance survived for so long and has been the symbol of Western solidarity against Moscow.

However, Trump’s record provides clues that this support could be in jeopardy.

In 2019, Trump temporarily withheld military aid to Ukraine over concerns about corruption, a move that sparked political controversy and led to his impeachment.

This episode, combined with Trump’s critical view of “endless wars,” suggests that a future Trump administration might view Ukraine’s conflict through a lens of American pragmatism rather than a moral obligation.

Trump Administration’s Strategy: Deal-Making or Concessions? Trump has consistently positioned himself as the master negotiator, the dealmaker who can resolve conflicts that have stumped seasoned diplomats.

In this presidency, it’s plausible that Trump would advocate for a peace settlement between Ukraine and Russia.

He had hinted at this, stating he would “end the war in 24 hours” — a bold claim that had raised eyebrows among foreign policy experts.

Yet, the terms of such a peace settlement are likely to come at a cost.

The risk here is clear: if Trump’s approach leans toward pushing Ukraine into making concessions, such as ceding territory currently occupied by Russian forces, it would represent a significant victory for Moscow.

For Ukraine, this would be a strategic blow, as it would not only weaken its sovereignty but also finish Zelenskyy as the premier.

Impact on NATO and European Solidarity Trump’s return would undoubtedly raise alarms in NATO headquarters.

While his first term did not see a withdrawal from the alliance, it did shake its foundations.

He once labelled NATO as “obsolete” and repeatedly questioned the value of Article 5, which enshrines the principle of collective defence.

European allies, particularly those in eastern Europe like Poland and the Baltic states, have relied heavily on NATO’s commitment, viewing the US as an irreplaceable security partner.

If Trump signals a pullback or a conditional commitment to NATO, it could embolden Russia, which has always sought to exploit divisions within the alliance.

Vladimir Putin may interpret this as a window of opportunity to press further into Ukraine or test NATO’s resolve in other strategic areas.

This would force European nations to reconsider their security architecture, potentially accelerating plans for a more autonomous European defence mechanism.

While this would increase European military spending and cooperation, it might also leave Ukraine wondering what to do next.

Economic Sanctions: A Wild Card in Trump’s Playbook Trump’s stance on sanctions has historically been bold.

While his administration imposed stringent sanctions on countries like Iran, his attitude toward Russia was notably more lenient.

Trump often spoke about fostering better relations with Moscow, a position that fuelled criticism from both political opponents and European allies.

A renewed Trump presidency could potentially scale back economic sanctions on Russia, arguing that engagement could lead to peace.

However, this would not sit well with European powers who view sanctions as a critical tool to curb Russian aggression.

For leaders like Germany’s Olaf Scholz and France’s Emmanuel Macron, maintaining a robust sanctions regime is essential for signalling unified Western resolve.

Reducing sanctions without securing tangible Russian concessions would fracture the Western front and weaken efforts to pressure Moscow economically.

Domestic Realities: Public Opinion and Political Calculations Public opinion in the US has been increasingly divided over prolonged military engagements.

According to a 2023 Pew Research Centre poll, support for continued military aid to Ukraine has waned among some American voters, particularly in rural and conservative regions.

This shift aligns with Trump’s base, which often views foreign aid sceptically and prefers focusing on domestic issues.

Trump’s campaign could leverage this sentiment to justify policy shifts that reduce American involvement in the Ukraine war.

Such a move would resonate with voters who are frustrated with inflation, high energy prices, and perceptions of “foreign entanglements.

” However, this policy shift would be a double-edged sword, as it would signal to Russia and other adversaries that the US foreign policy is susceptible to domestic political winds, potentially emboldening them.

Russia’s Gambit: Betting on Trump For Moscow, a Trump victory would be a geopolitical boon.

Putin is well aware of Trump’s admiration for strong leaders and his transactional approach to foreign policy.

With a less confrontational US president, Russia could recalibrate its strategy, buying time to consolidate gains in Ukraine and plan further military manoeuvres without fear of new, harsher sanctions or escalated military aid to Kyiv.

The Kremlin might choose to extend the conflict into 2025, banking on the hope that a Trump-led US administration would be more amenable to negotiations or reduced military engagement.

This would fundamentally alter the dynamics of the conflict, shifting from one of fierce resistance supported by Western unity to a diplomatic game where Moscow holds more cards.

The Strategic Crossroads The re-election of Donald Trump could set the Ukraine-Russia war on a different course.

While Trump might champion peace talks as a quick fix to the war, the terms of such negotiations would be under intense scrutiny.

Would they honour Ukraine’s sovereignty or cement Russian territorial gains? The balance between peace and concessions will define the future of Ukraine and reshape the Western alliance’s approach to deterrence.

Meanwhile, European allies would need to brace for potential shifts in NATO’s reliability and recalibrate their defence and foreign policies accordingly.

This could accelerate European defence initiatives and push for deeper integration, a pivot that might ultimately foster a new era of European security independence.

Navigating a New Reality When Trump takes office, the world will need to adapt to a new reality in which the US’s support for Ukraine is measured against domestic political calculations and an “America First” doctrine.

The immediate future would hold both promise and peril, with diplomacy dangling as a double-edged sword.

For Ukraine, the stakes have never been higher, and for Russia, the strategic calculus could tilt in its favour if Trump’s approach veers from the current policy line.

The coming months will be pivotal, not just for the US electorate but for the fate of a conflict that has already redrawn the map of European security.

Group Capt MJ Augustine Vinod VSM (retd) tweets at @mjavinod.

Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author.

They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.

.