The Election process in the USA is full of unpredictable turning points and controversial statements. Trump was announced as an official candidate for the presidency by the Republican Party, whereas Biden withdrew his candidacy. His Vice President, Kamala Harris replaced him. This article discusses how to interpret candidates’ statements and what they could mean for the future of Ukraine.
Debate
On the 28th of June, the debate between two by the time not confirmed officially candidates for the presidency, Joe Biden and Donald Trump, took place. The first round started the active Presidential race. It has changed the statistics and caused public reaction. Only on broadcasting by the Wall Street Journal on Youtube, it reached 20 million views.
The statements about the Russo-Ukrainian war were also made in the discussion of internal US issues the statements about the Russo-Ukrainian war also were made. Time for the answers was limited to two minutes, and one minute each for responses and rebuttals as well as an additional minute for follow-up. During the question about Ukraine and Russia also remarks regarding the previous one about the USA troops leaving Afghanistan took time. Regarding this candidate’s strategies for dealing with the Russian aggression remain uncovered. However, the articulated replicas were eloquent.
Trump: it must not have happened
The moderator, Dana Bash, asked Donald Trump whether Putin`s negotiations settlement conditions to keep the Ukrainian territory and Ukrainian refusal to join NATO are acceptable.
As far as Russia and Ukraine, if we had a real president, a president that knew — that was respected by Putin, he would have never — he would have never invaded Ukraine, — answered Donald Trump.
He added that Putin had observed American withdrawal in Afghanistan (on August 30th, 2021, The United States Armed Forces withdrew from Afghanistan, ending the 2001–2021 war) and decided to invade Ukraine after that:
When Putin saw that, he said, you know what? I think we’re going to go in and maybe take… I talked to him about it, his dream. The difference is he never would have invaded Ukraine. Never.
A lot of people are dead right now, much more than people know. You know, they talk about numbers. You can double those numbers, maybe triple. He did nothing to stop it. In fact, I think he encouraged Russia from going in.
When the moderator read the question about the ceasefire in Ukraine one more time, Trump said that the Russian side’s conditions were not acceptable.
Right after, he emphasised the financial side of the issue:
But look, this is a war that never should have started. If we had a leader in this war — he led everybody along. He’s given $200 billion now or more to Ukraine. That’s a lot of money. I don’t think there’s ever been anything like it. Every time that Zelenskyy comes to this country, he walks away with $60 billion. He’s the greatest salesman ever.
In the end, Donald Trump promised to settle the Russo-Ukrainian war as president-elect before taking office on January 20th.
In his expertise for “The Ukrainian Review”, Christopher Atwood, American media expert and researcher of the Russian genocide in Ukraine, suggested what did Trump mean by his phrases:
Donald Trump is a populist who speaks vague terms while making grand promises. He repeatedly claims that, if he had been President in 2022, Russia would never have invaded Ukraine, yet he never elaborates on how he would have achieved that. He simply suggests that Vladimir Putin would have feared Trump’s response, but this is a meritless claim.
Ultimately, I tend to take the view that Donald Trump is a self-interested politician, so the only way Trump can change his view on Ukraine is if He believes it’s in his own self-interest to change his view on Ukraine. Ultimately, we can only speculate on what might change Trump’s position. Perhaps it would be possible to appeal to his ego and insist that history will remember him as one of the greatest American and Western leaders if he is capable of delivering a total Ukrainian victory.
Biden: Putin is a war criminal
In opposition, Biden is convinced that Trump permitted Russia to invade Ukraine because of the indifference:
Number three, we found ourselves in a situation where, if you take a look at what Trump did in Ukraine, he’s — this guy told Ukraine — told Trump, do whatever you want. And that’s exactly what Trump did to Putin: encouraged him, to do whatever you wanted. And he went in.
He emphasised Russian troops losts to oppose Trump`s statement that a lot of Ukrainians were killed purposelessly:
And listen to what he said when he went in. He was going to take Kyiv in five days, remember? Because it’s part of the old Soviet Union. That’s what he wanted to re-establish, Kyiv…And they’ve lost over— they’ve lost thousands and thousands of troops, 500,000 troops.
The fact is that Putin is a war criminal. He’s killed thousands and thousands of people. And he has made one thing clear: He wants to re-establish what was part of the Soviet Empire. Not just a piece; he wants all of Ukraine. That’s what he wants.
The current US president also outlined that Russia will not stop in Ukraine, and then NATO member countries would suffer:
And then, do you think he’ll stop there? Do you think he’ll stop when he — if he takes Ukraine? What do you think happens to Poland? What do you think of Belarus? What do you think happens to NATO countries?
He counter-argued that money, given to Ukraine, stay in the US weapon industry:
By the way, all that money we give Ukraine and weapons we make here in the United States. We give them the weapons, not the money, at this point. And our NATO allies have produced as much funding for Ukraine as we have.
The second debate is scheduled for September 10, 2024.
Christopher Atwood thinks that the clarification regarding the Russo-Ukrainian war may not come on the next broadcast:
I don’t think we can expect much different from future debates. Americans broadly support Ukraine, and both candidates know this. Kamala Harris will likely seek to continue Joe Biden’s policy on Ukraine and insist on maintaining support, while Donald Trump is entirely unpredictable. He has an affinity for right-wing politicians, so he might echo Viktor Orban, who is obviously antagonistic towards Ukraine, but he also might instead emulate someone like Andrzej Duda or Boris Johnson, who are supportive of Ukraine. Donald Trump is always a wildcard.
Assassination of Trump attempt
On July 13, Donald Trump performed in a public Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, and got shot and wounded in his upper right ear by Thomas Matthew Crooks.
However, Jason Jay Smart, an American political technologist and political scientist, is convinced that this incident would not impact the election outcome.
A few days later, it appeared that the only clergy member on stage before Trump`s speech was a Priest of the Ukrainian Catholic Church in America, Jason Charron. In his interview for the Voice of America, he said that he had a small conversation with Trump about Ukraine before the performance, in which he told the 45th President that he considers his support to Ukraine since 2017 underestimated and assured the journalists:
I don’t think it’s necessary to go into details here. But I can say that he supports Ukraine’s position regarding Ukraine’s right to self-defence.
Convincing in self-interest: is it possible to change Republicans views?
On the 15th of July, Thrump introduced his Vice President candidate. It is Ohio Senator James David Vance, who is an opposer to supplying aid to Ukraine. In his column for the New York Times, he wrote:
Ukraine’s challenge is not the G.O.P. (Grand Old Party, the other name for The Republican Party); it’s math. Even with draconian conscription policies, Ukraine needs more soldiers than it can field, even with draconian conscription policies. And it needs more matériel than the United States can provide.
He supports the concept of “America first”, which is why he also blocked the aid to Ukraine in April 2024.
Christopher Atwood expressed his opinion on whether JD Vance could change his attitude towards Ukraine:
Some of my colleagues in the US insist that JD Vance can change his views on Ukraine if he is only told the truth about it. However, I am extremely sceptical of this viewpoint. JD Vance is a sitting US Senator who has had access to the truth about Ukraine. He has not changed his views on Ukraine yet. Instead, he aligns himself with organisations like the Heritage Foundation, which has been sceptical and often antagonistic towards continued support for Ukraine.
He has already shown he is willing to modify his moral and political views, so it is, of course, possible he will change course on Ukraine. However, I do not believe we should expect him to do so.
On the 16th of July Boris Johnson met with Donald Trump to discuss the support for Ukraine. The Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom proposed his formula of peace, according to which America and partner countries must allow Ukraine to use ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles to target airfields on Russian territory; Russia must withdraw to the borders as of February 24, 2022, and Ukraine has its right to join EU and NATO.
Later, on the 20th of July, Donald Trump had a phone call with Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
The President of Ukraine expressed his gratitude to the USA for the vital assistance for Ukraine and emphasised the decisive role of bipartisan and bicameral support in the US Congress for the protection of our country from the Russian invasion.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump agreed to discuss in a personal meeting what steps can be taken to restore a just peace for Ukraine as soon as possible, — which is written on the official Ukrainian President’s website.
Biden’s withdrawal
On the 21 of July, almost four months before the election Joe Biden withdrew his candidacy. Four days before he got the positive COVID-19 test. The 46th President of the United States stood for Kamala Harris, his Vice President to run for a next term instead of him and soon after Kamala Harris was formally chosen as Democratic nominee.
She supports Ukraine and has been articulating this position since 2014. A month before the full-scale invasion she said that if Putin invaded, they have a response for him.
We have withnessed Russian forces engaged in horrendous atrocities and war crimes. Their actions are an assault on common values. I know firsthand the importance of gathering facts and holding them up against the law, — she said at the Munich Security Conference and added that these are the crimes against humanity.
Jason Jay Smart, an American political technologist and political scientist who conducts his activities in Ukraine, commented on the changes for “The Ukrainian Review”:
She has not developed her own policy yet on Ukraine because as Vice President her job is just to follow the policy of the President. So now that she’s going to begin doing a campaign, we will see if she has a different policy than Biden.
As her running mate Kamala Harris announced Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. He is in favour of Ukraine.
The Democrats as a whole support Ukraine. I think the real question is are they going to be more aggressive than Biden was because his White House is much more concerned about escalation so hopefully, whoever the Democratic candidate will be, will be more aggressive towards Russia and not be worried about escalation.
Christopher Atwood does not consider the candidates’ willingness to support Ukraine as their potential leverage in the election:
While the vast majority of Americans generally believe foreign policy is important, the unfortunate reality is that very few Americans consider foreign policy when making their choice at the ballot box. It is an important issue for Americans, but it’s not one of the most important issues. So, outside of a handful of Congressional districts, it’s unlikely that a candidate’s support for Ukraine would impact their electoral results.
Instead, Americans have the ability to leverage their support for Ukraine to compel their representatives to act. This is a critical part of the democratic process, and a lot of Ukrainian organisations in the US encourage their audiences to call, write, and even meet with their Representatives in Congress in order to encourage continued support for Ukraine.
This election company story has shown how unpredictable can the outcome be and how many turning points are on their way. This analytics shows risks and probabilities within the known facts, however, it is impossible to predict and determine the policy regarding Ukraine, that would be implemented. Our media will continue to cover the US election process.
