[ad_1]
Waiting for the U.S. Congress to pass an aid package for Ukraine feels like waiting for Godot. During a recent visit to Washington, I met with officials from President Joe Biden’s administration, Republican senators and representatives, and experts from various think tanks. They all assured me that Congressional approval of the additional funding bill was only a matter of time. Some speculated that House Speaker Mike Johnson would split the $95 billion aid package for Ukraine and Israel, while others expected it to pass as a single aid package, with most predicting It means April or May.
These guarantees would carry more weight if similar commitments had not been made in November, December, January and February. Adding to the uncertainty, Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has filed a new motion to vacate the Speaker’s chair, just six months after her predecessor Kevin McCarthy was ousted. That could later lead to Johnson’s dismissal. Infighting among Republicans could cripple America’s political system, already crippled by partisan divisions.
And all this is happening under an internationalist president who is passionate about supporting Ukraine. One can only imagine what will happen if former US President Donald Trump wins November’s presidential election. President Trump’s recent speeches, including his 90-minute diatribe at the Conservative Political Action Conference in February, underscore his desire for retribution against individuals, countries, and groups he perceives to have wronged him. . European NATO members appear to be at the top of this list, which does not bode well for European security.
President Trump’s desire to withdraw U.S. aid to Ukraine goes beyond an aversion to a protracted military conflict. Trump holds Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky personally responsible for his first impeachment, and many of America’s top Russia experts, including some who worked for Trump, I believe he was complicit in this fiasco. President Trump’s position on NATO is similarly personal, as evidenced by his recent threat to let Russia “do whatever it wants” with “delinquent” members.
For the past three years, a sophisticated ideological ecosystem has focused on transforming his personal grievances into workable policy as Trump prepares for his second term in office. The Center for American Renewal’s “dormant NATO” concept, in which the United States would maintain a nuclear umbrella over Europe but withdraw its ground forces from the continent, is a classic example.
To be sure, Trump is not the first US president to criticize America’s European allies for not contributing enough to the alliance. However, the “dormant NATO” proposal goes beyond simple “burden sharing” and advocates a new “burden shifting” policy that seeks to transfer responsibility from the United States to its European allies. Under the plan, a European general would become Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), the U.S. would commit to stopping NATO expansion, and the U.S. military would shift its focus from Europe to China.
Despite the real possibility of a Trump victory, European governments have been slow to acknowledge the ominous implications of this agenda. But as Ukraine struggles to defend itself, the difficulty of passing additional funding legislation through Congress is forcing U.S. policymakers to face reality. Many in Washington are unhappy with the Ukrainians, especially Mr. Zelenskiy, for his failure to transition from offensive to defensive tactics and his reluctance to draft players under the age of 27. .
American policymakers also seem perplexed by the divisions within Europe. Last month’s European Council summit highlighted the Union’s contradictory approaches. While European governments are finally starting to get serious about national defense and its financing, self-centered infighting continues, particularly between France and Germany, with leaders displaying an inexplicable lack of urgency. There is.
Over the next six months, European countries must find ways to secure the necessary ammunition and increase defense funding. It is also necessary to develop a plan to strengthen Ukraine’s position. Russian President Vladimir Putin is unlikely to negotiate if he believes Ukraine is on the brink of defeat and that its Western backers are losing resolve. European countries seeking a ceasefire are now effectively shooting themselves in the foot.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is unlikely to agree to negotiations if he believes that Ukraine is on the brink of defeat and that the Western powers supporting it are losing resolve.
Against this backdrop, many fear that June’s European elections could trigger a global shift to the far right. However, a recent report from the European Council on Foreign Relations found that while opinion polls across Europe show support for far-right parties rising, this trend does not necessarily portend the emergence of a global Trump movement. That’s what it means. In Hungary, only 28% of respondents said they would welcome a second term for Trump.
The most convincing argument mainstream European parties can make heading into the elections is that a geopolitically oriented EU is urgently needed. Regardless of what happens with the US aid package, the future of Europeans should be determined by their own elections and political processes, not US political dynamics. This is the only way to prevent Europe’s absurd political theater from becoming a complete tragedy.
This article was first published project syndicate April 3, 2024.
The European Council on Foreign Relations does not take collective positions. ECFR publications represent only the views of the individual authors.
[ad_2]
Source link
