Select Language:
In recent months, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been intensively advocating for increased military support from the United States and European allies, aiming to realize his “victory plan” against Russia.
In September, Ukraine made a bold move by launching an incursion into Russian territory for the first time, successfully seizing part of the Kursk region. Concurrently, Ukraine renewed its requests for long-range Western weapons to hit targets within Russian borders.
Zelensky appears motivated by a desire to fortify Ukraine’s position before the upcoming U.S. presidential election. The outcome may significantly influence the war’s trajectory, regardless of who emerges victorious.
Implications of a Harris Presidency
Should Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris win the election, it is expected that U.S. foreign policy will remain largely stable, along with continued military support for Ukraine.
For Ukraine, gaining NATO membership could be transformative. Although Zelensky has publicly dismissed the idea of surrendering any territory for Russia to accept Ukraine’s NATO membership, it remains a potential avenue for negotiation.
After more than two and a half years of intense conflict, polls from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology show a rising number of Ukrainians—now 32%—who are willing to consider some territorial concessions for the sake of peace. Still, just over half oppose any form of territorial compromise. Additionally, Zelensky has emphasized that joining NATO is a top priority for his administration.
However, Harris has refrained from fully committing to supporting Ukraine’s NATO aspirations, while Russian President Vladimir Putin has outright rejected any possibility of including NATO membership in discussions.
Without NATO membership, a Harris administration could lead to a prolonged war of attrition with Russia—one that might only conclude when both sides find peace preferable to ongoing conflict. Historically, resolving such confrontations can take many years.
Caption: A Russian glide-bomb attack damaged a residential building in Kharkiv, Ukraine, earlier this week. (Sergey Kozlov/EPA)
Implications of a Trump Presidency
Donald Trump, on the other hand, claims he could swiftly resolve the conflict through negotiations, although evidence to support this assertion is lacking. During his previous administration, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a populist approach, often placing emphasis on his personal relationships with other world leaders to achieve outcomes. He sought quick fixes to complex issues, with mixed results.
If elected again, Trump is likely to focus on his relationship with Putin as well as his occasionally tense rapport with Zelensky to push for a rapid resolution to the conflict. However, Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, has hinted at a peace plan favoring Putin’s interests, which would involve recognizing Russian control over occupied Ukrainian territories and ensuring Ukraine’s neutrality without NATO ties.
Such an agreement could be presented by Putin as a triumph to the Russian public, who are weary of the ongoing war and anxious about Ukraine’s advances into Russian territory. Nevertheless, as long as the majority of Ukrainians oppose ceding any territory, it would be highly controversial for Zelensky to consider such a trade.
In the face of potential pressure from Trump and the risk of losing crucial U.S. military aid, Zelensky may find himself forced to negotiate. Currently, Ukraine is grappling with a severe shortage of military resources, and while European support has remained steady, it may not suffice without American backing.
Trump has previously referred to Zelensky as “the greatest salesman of all time” and pledged to resolve the issue of military aid swiftly if he wins. However, it remains ambiguous whether this would involve compelling Zelensky to accept a political settlement.
While Ukraine can continue to resist Russian advances independently, a withdrawal of American support might embolden Russia to claim additional territory from an increasingly vulnerable Ukraine.
An alternative scenario has recently emerged, suggesting the conflict could reach an impasse without a formal ceasefire or political solution, leading to a situation akin to the aftermath of the Korean War—with constant tensions and no final resolution.
Consequences for Zelensky’s Leadership
Zelensky saw a surge in popularity following Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, but his support has steadily declined since then. Recent polling indicates that trust in him has dropped from 90% right after the invasion to 59% by September 2024.
This year, Zelensky also postponed anticipated presidential elections due to the state of martial law in Ukraine. His decision was initially welcomed by the public, but as faith in his leadership wanes, public sentiment may shift.
Zelensky’s domestic standing hinges on his ability to secure ongoing Western support for Ukraine in its fight against Russia. Should the public perceive that he is prepared to make unacceptable territorial compromises or can no longer procure assistance from allies, his support may plummet.
If that scenario plays out, Zelensky could face pressure from Western allies to hold presidential elections, even during wartime. Some conservative figures in the U.S. have already begun advocating for this. Additionally, Zelensky’s political rival, former President Petro Poroshenko, has announced his intention to run in the next elections.
Ultimately, the future of Ukraine hangs in the balance, heavily influenced by the results of the upcoming election in the United States. A win for Harris would likely provide Zelensky with continued support and possibly pave the way for future NATO membership. Conversely, a Trump victory could jeopardize Ukraine’s aid and international backing, potentially threatening Zelensky’s presidency and leaving the nation in a precarious position.
Add us on ChatGPT
Add us on Perplexity
