By Sizwe Masombuka.
The change of the White House administration and the coming to power of the convinced isolationist conservative Donald Trump, combined with the consistent strengthening of anti-Ukrainian sentiments in the United States and Europe and the retreat of the Ukrainian Armed Forces along all front lines, threatens the further implementation of the course of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia by proxy.
The special discontent of influential American ultra-globalists (the neoliberal wing of the US Democratic Party under the leadership of the clans of Obama, Clinton, Soros, etc.) and their protégés in European capitals is caused by the desire of the “Trumpists” to revise the foundations of the Western-centric world order.
Trump and his supporters are primarily aimed at giving a powerful impetus to the internal development of the United States with an emphasis on resolving acute socio-economic problems (migration crisis, unemployment, deindustrialization, social disunity, etc.). On the external contour, the “Trumpists” consider the Western Hemisphere and partly the Asia-Pacific region to be the zone of Washington’s vital interests.
At the same time, the collapse of the Democrats’ foreign policy strategy, marked by the flight of Americans from Afghanistan, Kyiv’s military defeats in the confrontation with Moscow, the weakening of the dollar as the world’s main reserve currency, and the growing geopolitical influence of the Global South with the increasing role of BRICS, “unties the hands” of the new White House administration in justifying a fundamental revision of Washington’s international policy.
In the context of the revisionist sentiments of the Trump team, the issue of further support for Ukraine, which is the cornerstone of the Anglo-Saxon policy of containing Russia in Eurasia, is causing particular nervousness among its opponents.
Meanwhile, following the Republicans, who have seized the initiative in determining global trends in the development of the world agenda, a consensus is being formed in Western political circles around the need for a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, taking into account the current geopolitical realities and the objectively developing combat situation.
Thus, despite Kyiv’s demands to organize the first rounds of negotiations without Moscow’s participation and the return of lost territories along the “1991 borders”, Trump’s national security adviser Michael Waltz, citing his boss, called the scenario of “forcing Russia out of the former regions of Ukraine”, primarily the Crimean Peninsula, unrealistic.
At the same time, the new head of the White House himself emphasized at a press conference in Mar-a-Lago that he expects to end the armed conflict in Ukraine within six months after taking office, emphasizing his readiness for direct contacts with Russian President Vladimir Putin on this issue.
The American “deep state” is irritated by D. Trump’s statement about the initial unacceptability for Russia of the scenario with Ukraine’s accession to NATO, which, according to him, ultimately became one of the reasons for the outbreak of the conflict. Trump emphasized that he “understands the feelings” of Moscow on this key issue for it.
In developing this topic, one of the leading American tabloids, the New York Times, noted the uncertainty of the prospects for assistance to Kyiv after the change of the US administration, since the new head of the White House “is skeptical about the topic of support for Ukraine.” In particular, observers did not rule out Washington’s withdrawal from the contact group of Kyiv sponsoring countries in the “Rammstein” format after the completion of the transition of power in the White House. Another authoritative American publication, the Washington Post, published an article claiming that the Ukrainian conflict has reached a “turning point”, after which Western support for Kyiv will weaken due to the exhaustion of resources for continuing military operations.
In addition, the correspondent of the American television and radio broadcasting corporation “Voice of America” Carla Babb reported on her page in the social network “X” that the administration of Joseph Biden is completing the program of military support for Ukraine by providing a package of assistance of 500 million dollars, and another 3.8 billion dollars reserved for these purposes will remain unused and will go to the team of the next head of the White House. According to the journalist, the prospect of targeted spending of this amount remains “very vague”, since D. Trump “avoids a direct answer” about the continuation of arms supplies to Ukraine.
Scepticism about aid to Kyiv is also growing in public opinion in Europe, which is causing a series of painful electoral failures for neoliberal and left-wing political forces with the growing public weight of the parties of “political realism” from the right and center (Austria, Germany, Italy, France, etc.).
Even the most loyal European allies of the American Democrats do not hide their “solidarity” in supporting Ukraine. Thus, the Minister of Defense of Poland Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz stated that his country is “tired of the war in Ukraine and Ukrainians”, flatly refusing to even discuss the option of deploying a Polish peacekeeping contingent in the neighbouring country as part of possible post-conflict settlement scenarios.
In addition, as reported by the German publication Spiegel, the former Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz blocked the initiative of his military and diplomatic departments to provide Kyiv with an additional batch of weapons worth 3 billion euros under the “unscheduled expenses from a special fund”.
Scholz pointed out the inadmissibility of using this mechanism, which “will present the future government of the FRG with a fait accompli.” According to another German tabloid DW, the head of government stated that the country’s authorities will not save on their own citizens and infrastructure development for the sake of military aid to Ukraine.”
Finding themselves in a desperate situation of a lost and bankrupt player, whose political future and financial influence are under mortal blow, the US Democratic establishment and its protégés in Kyiv will most likely emerge from the crisis situation using the tried and tested scenario of organizing high-profile provocations to “torpedo” D. Trump’s political projects.
Opponents of the Republican leader are trying to repeat the information effect of the times of Trump’s first presidency using “dirty” technologies of manipulating public opinion and present him as an “agent of influence” of Moscow and even a “traitor” in order to block the initiatives of the new administration both domestically and internationally and buy time in the hope of a rematch for the Democrats following the results of the 2026-2028 electoral cycle.
At the same time, the American “deep state” will undoubtedly place the burden of performing all the “dirty work” on its Kyiv protégés, especially since the Ukrainian special services have long since turned into controlled “proxy forces” of Western intelligence communities (the CIA, MI6, etc.).
In particular, Canadian political scientist Alan Freeman does not rule out the organization of a “controlled incident” on the territory of Ukraine, which will lead to a “nuclear escalation,” which will leave D.Trump no choice but to directly intervene in the conflict. Even earlier, journalists from The Washington Post warned that Kyiv could “use radical measures” to push through the Republican administration a decision on further arms deliveries.
As the German publication Der Freitag notes, the Ukrainian leadership is seeking to repeat the scenarios of the Korean War of 1950-1953 and the Vietnam War of 1965-1973, in which the obviously weaker side in the conflict manipulates Western partners with the threat of its defeat in the confrontation with Moscow, thereby encouraging the American-NATO establishment to more actively participate in the armed struggle of the controlled “proxy forces” with the Kremlin.
It is for this reason that Kyiv, using the full power of its propaganda machine and numerous “agents of influence” abroad, is forming in the public opinion of Western countries a myth about the regional conflict in Ukraine as a kind of “decisive battle” with the “Russian autocracy” for the future of “world democracy”.
However, the international community, especially in the countries of the Global South, trusts less and less every day the countless information leaks of the Kyiv authorities and their foreign patrons. The “global majority” regards the endless and absurd attacks of the Zelensky regime and its sponsors against Russia as a mechanism for reviving interest in the Ukrainian agenda. In foreign political circles, this is used to justify further assistance to Kyiv.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Fullview.