02 01 2025

Why Trump may not end the war in Ukraine

Donald Trump has chosen Neo-con hawk Marco Rubio as his Secretary of State. On the photo they are at a campaign rally in Raleigh on November 4. 2024. Donald Trump has chosen Neo-con hawk Marco Rubio as his Secretary of State. On the photo they are at a campaign rally in Raleigh on November 4. 2024. https://apnews.com/article/trump-marco-rubio-secretary-of-state-25664371f80dcf3332838352165e4d48

The EU is worried that Donald Trump returning to the White House will mean peace in Ukraine, as Trump has claimed that he can achieve peace on his first day in office. That is unlikely to happen. The reason is that Trump will have to show that he has made a bargain which favours the US, but Russia is unlikely to deliver that. So the war is more likely to continue in 2025, and may even escalate before it ends. Unfortunately. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

2024 has not been a good year for the US and its European vassal states. The EU economy is stagnating, the US economy might be growing, but it is built upon an unsustainable mountain of public debt, and the war in Ukraine is not going well for their friend Zelensky. Public opinion is gradually changing and now favours peace in Ukraine, even if Russia is not defeated – except for some radicalised small Northern and Eastern European countries that are willing to go on to the bitter end.

The success of Israel in its war against the Palestinian population and the West’s jihadist friends’ arrival to power in Syria are the only bright spots for the US and EU in the international arena. However, this bright spot is a bit spoiled by the Global South’s almost universal condemnation of Israel’s genocide against the Palestinians and the US and EU unconditional support for it, but as the Roman Emperor Caligula famously said: “Let them hate me, as long as they fear me”. Israel’s neighbours have no love for Israel, but they still fear it. However, the usual fear of the military and economic might of US and its allies is gradually eroding in most of the Global South.

One of the few foreign policy successes for US and EU in 2024 was the rise of their Jihadist ally, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, to power in Syria. He was part of Al Qaeda in Iraq, and in 2011 he founded Al Nusra Front as an affiliate of Al Qaeda in Syria. In 2016 he rebranded the group as Jabhat Fatah al-Sham and in 2017 as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) presenting himself as a moderate yihadist. It is al-Jolani in the centre of the photo from 2016.

There is no doubt that Trump and his closest allies as James Vance and Elon Musk don’t care much for Zelensky and the people around him, and that they genuinely would like the war in Ukraine to end. It is also probable that, apart from the military-industrial complex, an important part of the US establishment would prefer the war to end. But the Neo-Cons, who dominate the Democratic Party, are also a strong force in the Republican Party. Just take the neo-con Marco Rubio, who Trump has chosen as his Secretary of the State. During his first presidency Trump didn’t start new wars, but he didn’t end the US’ “forever wars” either. He left the unthankful task of pulling the US military out of Afghanistan to his successor, Biden. So there is no reason to believe Trump 2.0 means a peace president.

Trump likes to present himself as a genius business man, who can cut advantageous deals. But as the Ukrainian army is receding everywhere, despite plentiful military and financial support from US and the EU, the question is what deal he would be able to propose, that would be acceptable to Russia.

Trump would love to cut a deal where Russia stops its cooperation with China, and he would probably be willing to offer a lot to get it: let Russia get a good deal in a Ukraine peace agreement, lift some of the sanctions and so on. But that is not going to happen. China is a neighbour and a rising power, and Russia has a long term strategic interest in cooperating with China. The Russian and Chinese economies are to a high degree complementary, while Russia and the US are competing in many of the same fields: Exports of LNG, grain, nuclear power plants, arms and so on. Why would Russia want to tie its destiny to a flagging US?

The war in Ukraine is not going particularly well for NATO. On New Years eve Russian troops took control of Kurakhove, a town with around 20,000 inhabitants, 50 km. west of Donetsk City. Photo shows a drone shot of the town (Telegram Channel).

Another deal Trump could try to cut with Russia is to isolate Iran. Iran is Russia’s big neighbour on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea. It is vital for Russia as part of the International North-South Transport Corridor, linking it by land to Pakistan, India and other Southern Asian countries, and it is a potential future market for its revitalised industry, among these the reemerging aeronautic industry. To preempt any attempts by Trump in this direction, Russia and Iran are going to sign a comprehensive cooperation agreement on January 17th, three days before Trump’s inauguration. This is an unequivocal signal to Trump: “forget it!”.

Advisers to Donald Trump have been floating ideas for “freezing” the conflict along the present frontlines and postponing the invitation to Ukraine to join NATO. The chance that Russia will accept that deal is zero. Russia has stated that it wants a peace agreement, not a Korean style ceasefire, and that the agreement shall include a neutral status for Ukraine and guarantees for the rights of ethnic and linguistic minorities, including the Russians. Furthermore, they want that Ukraine cedes the four provinces that Russia is presently almost completely controlling (Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia).

As things stand, there is little chance that Trump will accept that. It would look more as a defeat than a deal and he will probably not be able to live with that.

The risk is that if Trump can’t get a deal he can describe as the result of his fabulous negotiation skills, he might say: “OK, the carrot is not working, so we go for the stick, so they can see we are a serious world power”. That means escalation.

How can he escalate? The easy thing is to lift the ban on the use of US missiles deep inside Russia, as always based on intelligence provided by the US. That will make the conflict more dangerous, but it will not change the military balance and it will probably harden the Russian’s determination to go for an unconditional surrender of Ukraine. It will be difficult to invent more sanctions than those that are already in place, but he can physically block the Russian oil exports. The small radicalised countries around the Baltic Sea are all keen on blocking Russian ships, but they can only do that with backing from the US. Trump can provide that. The Russians will no doubt retaliate, for example sending its navy to escort its ships through the Danish Straits, and this can quickly escalate into something that will be difficult to avoid spinning out of control. But it seems that the Danish Government doesn’t care about the risk.

He can follow in the foot-steps of Biden and scale up the military and financial support for Ukraine to ‘force Russia to the negotiation table. As he has criticised Biden’s unconditional handouts, he can insist on providing it as a loan backed by a Ukrainian collateral, for example the country’s mineral resources or fertile agricultural lands. That can be presented as a good business deal, Trumpian style. As he once said to justify his continued military intervention in Syria: “We’re keeping the oil”. He did, and Biden continued doing that. So it could for example be “We kept their lithium”. Marco Rubio would be fine with that.

This means that it is not a given that peace will come to Ukraine soon, despite the many predictions in this sense. An increased financial and military support will prolong the war, imply further tens of thousands of deaths, particularly Ukrainians, and increase the financial burden on Russia, but it is unlikely to change the final outcome: an unavoidable defeat for the Ukrainian nationalists.

In conclusion: I am not very optimistic that peace will come to Ukraine soon. It may have to become worse before its becomes better. But I sincerely hope I am wrong.

 

***************

I have commented on the Ukraine conflict since 2014. Click on the links below to read.

October 2024: All wars eventually end. So will the Ukraine war.

August 2024: The President in his labyrinth

July 2024: How to perpetuate slaughterhouse Ukraine.

February 2024: It is now it is becoming dangerous

October 2023: Just wondering: Who is it exactly that is being strategically defeated in Ukraine?

July 2023: What are the Ukrainians dying for?

May 2023: And what if Ukraine loses the war?

January 2023: Oh, what a lovely war!

April 2022: Seems NATO did decide to throw Ukraine under the bus

December 2021: Has NATO decided to sacrifice Ukraine?

November 2021: How to conserve the peace in Europa

September 2014: Will sanctions hurt Russia?

April 2014: Does the EU know what it is doing in Ukraine?

 

Read 76 times
Rate this item
(0 votes)
Thorbjorn Waagstein

Thorbjørn Waagstein, Economist, PhD, since 1999 working as international Development Consultant in Latin America, Africa and Asia.

Related items

More in this category:

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.