The debate between US presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump has reignited old Ukrainian fears of “what if Trump wins?” This is understandable – the rhetoric of the former US president (and especially his entourage) is hardly pro-Ukrainian. For example, during the debate, when asked “do you want Ukraine to win this war?” Trump stubbornly answered “I want the war to end”.
At the same time, it is Trump who has a clear and understandable plan for Ukraine, unlike the Democrats Biden and Harris, who “just support a democratic state”. In addition, everyone remembers how, during the 2016 election, the leaders of the Ukrainian state for some reason decided to openly support Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and lost together with her. This support definitely cost Ukraine the favour of Trump as President of the United States.
So Komersant ukrainskyi
asked domestic political experts what Ukraine should do to avoid similar problems this time around, and, again, whether Trump is as bad an option as it seems at first glance.
As political analyst Igor Reiterovich notes in an exclusive commentary , even the Ukrainian government is learning from its own mistakes, as this time, criticism of Trump is not coming from officials.
“Zelenskyy made the right move: he contacted Trump, talked to him, and voiced some of his views and expectations. So, in this context, it seems to me that from an official point of view, there can be no claims against Ukraine, unlike in previous years,”
– the expert believes.
In continuation of this policy, Reiterovich suggests a constructive approach:
“If we are hypothetically considering the possibility of his victory, and it may be, we need to prepare a plan of our own that we can present to him promptly and he will like it. This is our key task in this context.”
Political analyst Volodymyr Tsybulko adds that Trump scares Ukrainians with his unpredictability.
“On the one hand, everything he says about Ukraine is, again, the Kremlin’s narrative. During the debate [with Biden?], he brought up the idea that we should just stop shooting. This is a very well-known Kremlin narrative, designed to ensure that no one will give up the occupied territories before Putin dies,”
– emphasises Tsybulko.
Follow us on Telegram: the main news in a nutshell
As proof that the Kremlin needs Trump as President of the United States, the expert cites Putin’s recent somewhat unexpected statement.
“Putin said before the debate that Kamala Harris was more convenient for the Kremlin. This means that Putin has transferred his toxicity to Kamala. At the same time, by the way, Trump mentioned during the debate that Putin praised Kamala.”
However, the political analyst also notes the duality of Trump’s position:
“Actually, Trump even said things that were pleasant to the Ukrainian ear. He said that Ukraine should be given a lot of weapons, $500 billion. I don’t know if Ukrainians believed it – probably not.”
Therefore, according to Tsybulko, it is largely Trump’s unpredictability that causes a negative attitude towards him in Ukraine.
Be that as it may, Ukraine has experience of “cooperation” with the democratic Biden administration, and it is difficult to call it entirely positive: weapons, funds and permits are given just enough to keep Ukraine going, but not to win this war. So perhaps a hypothetical Trump policy would be no worse for us.
Given that Ukrainians do not decide anything in the American elections, we should simply be prepared for Trump’s arrival and have a plan for such a case. And we should definitely not repeat old mistakes and, at least at the official level, put all our eggs in one basket and support Harris unconditionally.