Under Biden’s administration, the US is providing sustained financial and military aid to Ukraine and holds sanction pressures over Russia. Over two and a half years since the escalation of the war, President Zelenskyy has a “victory plan”, and despite severe setbacks on the ground, claims he could be on a clear path to defeat Russia and end the war in Ukraine. But how would the US election impact the Russia-Ukraine war? There are dramatic differences between the positions of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.
President Zelenskyy visits the US with a “victory plan”
In the last week of September, President Zelenskyy paid a crucial visit to the US to discuss his “victory plan” with both presidential election candidates. The full details of the plan remain unknown, but Zelenskyy has made clear that he wants to increase pressure on Russia to gain leverage over it and get Putin to the table. We do know that Zelenskyy wants permission to fire western-made long range missiles into Russia from Ukraine, to hit military targets and weaken Russia’s military strategy. However, Putin recently announced changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, serving as a warning that the firing of long range missiles into Russia would serve as a declaration of war by the west. This could certainly be a bluff from Putin, but Biden remains cautious with his current approach, assuring his complete support for Ukraine without granting permission to strike Russia (the Biden administration has quietly given Ukraine permission to strike inside Russia solely near the area of Kharkiv but to date, the US and UK have not given Ukraine permission to use long-range missiles against targets inside Russia, for fear of escalation).
During his visit to the US, Zelenskyy met with Harris, where she gave her full support for Ukraine, saying that the US will “continue to provide the security assistance Ukraine needs to succeed on the battlefield”. The Ukrainian President also met with top Democrats at an arms factory in Scranton, Pennsylvania, a visit that Republicans have labelled as “election interference” to benefit Harris’ campaign. Despite this tension with the Republicans, as well as Trump mocking Zelenskyy for being the “greatest salesman on Earth” for securing more US military aid, the two had a “very meaningful meeting” in New York, according to Zelenskyy. After his meeting with Zelenskyy, Trump said “we both want to see this end, and we both want to see a fair deal made”. However, Trump’s recent actions call into question how “fair” the deal would really be for Ukraine. Trump speaks openly of his strong relationship with Putin and said in June that he would cease aid to Ukraine if he returned to office. The future of the Russia-Ukraine war hangs in the balance until the new president takes office in January 2025.
How could a Harris administration impact the Russia-Ukraine war?
If Kamala Harris was to become US president, she would likely continue with many of Biden’s current policies, including the provision of financial and military aid to Ukraine, supporting Ukraine’s independence and imposing sanctions on Russia. Like Biden, Harris would also respect the way Zelenskyy wants to negotiate peace with Russia and not rush a deal that would fall short of Ukrainian aims in the war. In a recent interview, she said she would not sit down with Putin unless Ukraine was at the table. “Ukraine must have a say on the future of Ukraine”, Harris said. This is a very different approach to Trump’s, who aims to reach a settlement and end the war as soon as possible. Kamala criticised Trump’s approach during the recent presidential debate, saying that if Trump were still president, “Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now”. Harris has always been pro-Ukrainian, saying that the US “will stand strong with Ukraine and our NATO allies”, and accusing Russia of committing “crimes against humanity”. Her support for Ukraine is evident, but there is no clear end in sight for the Russia-Ukraine war. Biden has been accused of providing Ukraine with sufficient support to fight against Russia, but not enough to defeat it; Harris is likely to receive similar criticisms. This is likely to be because the US is avoiding an all-out war with Russia; what Biden often refers to as avoiding World War III.
With Zelenskyy requesting additional aid and requiring US permission to fire long range missiles into Russia, Ukraine’s position in the war is heavily dependent on the US. Its position will likely be strengthened by a Harris administration, even though that would likely result in a prolonged war.
How could a Trump administration impact the Russia-Ukraine war?
Trump has made clear that he aims to end the Russia-Ukraine war but not how he intends to do so. Trump said that if he won the election, the first thing he would do is “call up Zelenskyy and call up President Putin” and say “you gotta make a deal, this is crazy”. “I’ll get them together” he says, but this would not be as straightforward as it may seem. A quick settlement instigated by Trump would likely result in ending the war with the current frontlines and therefore Ukraine would lose land to Russia, including the areas of Crimea and Donbas. This would undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty and some argue that it could also give Russia a strong precedent for future territorial aims in former Soviet states. Moreover, in one of his recent rallies, Trump suggested he would cease aid to Ukraine if he became president again. This is what Ukrainians fear as the US election approaches; a withdrawal of support and essentially being abandoned in the middle of the war. The withdrawal of US support from Ukraine would likely set a precedent for the involvement of the US in NATO, which some view as posing an additional risk to European security.
When Trump was asked if he wanted Ukraine to win the war against Russia, he said “I want the war to stop”. His commitment to end the war has been met with cynicism, in view of the close relations between Trump and Putin. At the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine war, Trump complimented Putin calling him “smart” and “genius” for the invasion, and he continues to praise Russia’s military record. There is fear in Ukraine that Trump’s soft approach with Moscow would result in further losses for Ukraine. Trump has already suggested he would lift the US sanctions currently imposed on Russia if he were to become president, further weakening Ukraine’s position.
Meanwhile, Trump’s candidate for vice president in the election, JD Vance, has been more direct about his plans for the Russia-Ukraine war. He has called for an immediate ceasefire and proposed a plan that calls on Ukraine to demilitarise all its territory currently controlled by Russia, creating neutrality. In his plan, Vance did not state who would control this territory or whether it would have a measure of autonomy, but in terms of ceding land to Russia, his plan could be very similar to Putin’s. JD Vance has also been very clear about Trump ending the war if he were president, saying that he would do it “by not being weak and not being dumb”. Vance’s view on the Russia-Ukraine is said to be one of his signature foreign policy issues; his isolationist stance is more radical than other Republicans and appeals to Trump’s loyal MAGA (Make America Great Again) voters.
Final remarks
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have very different approaches to the Russia-Ukraine war, albeit both have been elusive on their exact plans. Harris would likely follow in Biden’s footsteps, providing unwavering support to Ukraine but with no clear end in sight for the war. On the other hand, Trump aims to end the war quickly, which risks threatening Ukraine’s sovereignty and, arguably, European security through NATO as well as strengthening Russia’s position with the west. These different approaches represent the candidates’ wider aims for the US; Harris, following in Biden’s footsteps, aims to strengthen the US’ global alliances, whereas Trump is becoming increasingly isolationist. As the US election date approaches, it not just the future of the Russia-Ukraine war that hangs in the balance. There could be wider implications for Putin’s relations with the west, European security and the US’ position on the world stage.
Images by HK_M and Ray_Shrewsberry on Pixabay.
