Date: 2025-07-02 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00027839
THE UKRAINE WAR
WILL TRUMP SUPPORT UKRAINE?
UkraineAlert: As the US election nears, anxiety is mounting in Ukraine
WILL TRUMP SUPPORT UKRAINE?
UkraineAlert: As the US election nears, anxiety is mounting in Ukraine
Original article: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/as-the-us-election-nears-anxiety-is-mounting-in-ukraine/
Peter Burgess COMMENTARY
I don't know much about Kate Spencer, the writer of this piece, but what has been written here disturbs me a lot.
I was born in 1940 in the UK. We lived in a suburb of London and we witnessed the air battles of the Battle of Britain, the bombing raids and later the 'doodle bugs' V1 flying bombs!
The USA missed the first two years of WWII ... not joining in as a belligerent until after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour.
Before the USA got involved in the 'fight', they had given material support to the UK ... but much of the support was in the form of 'lend-lease' a clever way of structuring a transaction so that the seller gets paid no-matter how much the buyer gets to use the material. In the early days of WWII U-boats sank a lot of ships that were delivering Lend-Lease war supplies from the USA to the UK creating a mountain of war debt that subsequently had to be repaid. It took the UK more than a decade of serious austerity post war to repay this debt ... but it was done.
'War profiteering' was a serious crime in the UK during the war years. Not the same in the USA! More it was a badge of honor!
The war in Ukraine has some of the characteristics of the WWII period. I am hearing reference to 'Lend Lease' in connection with the supply of military equipment and munitions and am not at all optimistic that it will be any fairer now than it was for the UK during WWII. The UK had no choice and no leverage ... and Ukraine is in pretty much the same situation now!
The modern economy is, of course, very different in the 2020s than it was in the early 1940s ... but much of the basics remain the same.
War is very expensive ... and simply having a big powerful military is expensive even when there is no war!
And inflation is a problem, though not well understood by the general public nor most political decision makers. When I was a student ... in the late 1950s ... there was a lot of discussion about the difference between 'cost push' and 'demand-pull' inflation but that does not seem to have been part of the dialog for the past several decades ... since Ronald Reagan!
For me, this is important. The media anables useless discussion because there are now a majority of reporters who simply do not understand economics sufficiently well to explain critical issues. One of these is is to do with the stock market. If the US economy is so bad, then how is it that the stock market has been at record high levels for the past three years?
A big part of the answer is that inequality has been growing at a record pace in recent years. There is now more wealth at the top of the pyramid in the USA ... and most everywhere in the Western world ... than at any time in history.
A big part of the problem is that much of the wealth that is now at the 'top' has come from a wealth decline for almost everyone else,
This gained momentum a long time ago ... under Ronald Reagan who famously promoted the idea of 'Trickle Down' ecomomics which actually delivered the exact oppoisite!
Back then about 50% of the US population earned less than the average and about 50% of the population earned more than the average ... but almost 50 years later it is about 20% of the population that earns more than the average and a huge 80% of the population that earn less than the average, with a growing number of this group being in poverty.
The stock market goes up. GDP goes up. Food prices go up.
But satisfaction with the state of the economy is dismal ... and for perfectly understandable reasons which the media chooses to ignore.
Profits are too high!
This is because prices are too high ... for consumers but not for corporate owners!
There is also the problem of taxation and government spending ... neither of which has been addressed particularly well for a very long time in the USA.
President Biden has done more than any recent President to improve these aspectc of Government, but it is not sufficient by a long way. President Trump in his first term made things worse and will likely do it again in his next term!
I am worried,
A rocky ride is coming!
Peter Burgess
October 15, 2024
As the US election nears, anxiety is mounting in Ukraine
Written by Kate Spencer
As the US election nears, anxiety is mounting in Ukraine
The coming United States presidential election will have truly global ramifications. Few countries have more at stake than Ukraine, which is heavily reliant on continued US support to maintain the fight against Russia’s invasion. As the November 5 vote draws nearer, Ukrainians are anxiously observing the final weeks of the campaign.
Over the past two-and-a-half years of Russia’s full-scale invasion, Ukrainian officials, military personnel, and members of the public have gone to considerable lengths to express their gratitude for US support and acknowledge the critical role this has played in their country’s war effort. However, there is now a sense of disquiet over the future of US aid.
Ukrainian concerns are primarily focused on the potential consequences of a Donald Trump victory in the forthcoming election. While Ukrainian officials and commentators generally prefer not to make any public statements about the presidential race in order to avoid accusations of interfering in domestic US politics, many acknowledge a growing nervousness.
Uncertainty in Kyiv over the former president’s position is not a new phenomenon and can be traced back almost a decade to the 2016 US presidential race. “Trump’s view of Ukraine has been persistently negative for the last eight years at least,” Odesa National University Center for International Studies director Volodymyr Dubovyk commented in September 2024. “Much of this view was shaped by people antagonistic to Ukraine.”
Trump’s support for Ukraine while in the White House, which included the delivery of Javelin anti-tank missiles, did much to rebuild confidence in Kyiv. He also chose not to use his influence over Republican members of Congress to block aid for Ukraine earlier this year. Nevertheless, there is currently considerable unease over the former US president’s vague plans for peace with Russia, which many Ukrainians fear would involve unacceptable territorial concessions.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has sought to downplay concerns by referring to Trump’s more troubling campaign trail rhetoric on Ukraine as “election messages.” Despite these efforts, there remains significant uncertainty over what a Trump victory would mean for Ukraine, with some worried that he would be likely to adopt a softer approach toward Russia.
The sense of anxiety in Ukraine has been heightened by recent revelations in a new book by US journalist Bob Woodward, who claims Trump sent COVID-19 testing equipment to Russia in 2020 for President Vladimir Putin’s personal use. The book also alleges that Trump and Putin may have spoken up to seven times since Trump left the White House in 2021, according to an unnamed aide.
Trump campaign officials have denied these accusations. The Kremlin has confirmed that Russia did receive COVID tests from the United States, but has downplayed the significance of the gesture.
Throughout the current election campaign, Trump’s comments on Ukraine have centered on his commitment to ending the current war in one day, while also claiming that Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine would never have happened if he had remained in office. Speaking alongside Zelenskyy in New York in September, Trump highlighted his “very good relationships” with both Putin and Zelenskyy, while insisting that he could broker a settlement between the two leaders “very quickly.”
Not everyone in Ukraine is convinced a Trump presidency would be bad news for the country. Some prefer to emphasize Trump’s important contribution in April 2024 when he chose not to come out against House Speaker Mike Johnson’s Ukraine aid bill, which likely would have prevented it from passing Congress. Allies of the former president have also said that he is receptive to advice from a number of officials who have cautioned him about the potentially dangerous repercussions of a Russian victory in Ukraine.
Perhaps the most detailed outline of possible future US policy toward Ukraine during a potential second Trump presidency has come from Trump’s vice presidential nominee, Senator JD Vance. In a September 2024 interview, Vance indicated that Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine would involve allowing Russia to remain in control of the Ukrainian regions it currently occupies, establishing a demilitarized zone, and obliging Ukraine to commit to neutrality.
If implemented, such a settlement would likely be seen as a significant victory in Moscow. Critics have warned that it would also jeopardize Ukraine’s future security and could set the stage for further Russian aggression. However, it is important to underline that Vance’s comments have not been endorsed by Trump and do not represent official policy.
Trump’s often evasive statements on Ukraine may suggest that he is keeping his options open for the future. While much of his rhetoric in relation to Ukraine has set off alarm bells in Kyiv, he has also been supportive of US aid to the country and is doubtless aware that many in his own party continue to favor a strong pro-Ukrainian position.
Recent allegations regarding the former US president’s personal relations with Putin will do little to ease existing concerns in Ukraine. If Trump does win a second term next month, his approach to the Russian invasion of Ukraine may ultimately depend on the advice he receives from those closest to him. Ukrainians will be hoping that bipartisan political backing for their country and continued indications of strong support for Ukraine among the US public will be enough to prevent any major shifts in United States policy.
Kate Spencer is a program assistant at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.