Ukrainian Reactions to Trump's Victory
Ukrainian Reactions to Trump's Victory
Ukrainians are not sure what to think about Trump. But they are toasting the departure of Jake Sullivan, Biden's national security advisor.
Trump was seen in the USA as the change candidate. Turns out many Ukrainians are looking for a change as well.
I was at a reception celebrating the US election hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce and Ukrainians were optimistic.
Sure, they are concerned about Trump cutting off the flow of weapons from the US, but seven months of the Biden administration slow walking weapons to Ukraine, preceded by six months of Congressional disfunction, has made the Ukrainians pretty accustomed to fighting without US weapons.
President Zelensky last week, in a news conference swamped by election coverage, announced that only ten percent of the weapons promised in the April aid package had arrived in Ukraine seven months later.
Zelensky is for real on this. This is consistent in what we are seeing in our trips to the front. The majority of the weapons used by the troops are homemade Ukrainian kamikaze drones.
The man the Ukrainians see responsible for this is Biden’s feckless National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. Euromaidan, a respected Ukrainian news publication, led its election coverage with a tweet condemning Sullivan that received 111k views so far. The comments are vicious.
One Ukrainian friend in the music industry told me “Although Biden presented himself as a friend to Ukraine, from what I know, he didn’t actually do as much as he said he would.”
Sullivan is well-known and widely hated, as his promise of weapons and taking months to supply them has been particularly cruel and cost many Ukrainian lives.
In a rational world where repeated failures had consequences, Sullivan would be assistant manager at a Chipotle right now. The new Bob Woodward reports that Sullivan’s disastrous pullout from Afghanistan emboldened Putin to enter Ukraine. A week prior to the Hamas attack on Israel, Sullivan famously said “The Middle East region is quieter today than it has been in two decades.”
He is the architect of Biden’s policy of “managed escalation,” the effort to keep Russia’s war on Ukraine from becoming World War III or a nuclear conflict. In 2022, Ukraine was at war with just one nuclear power - Russia. With the addition of Iran and North Korea, Ukraine is now at war with three nuclear powers.
Early this year, Sullivan flew to Kyiv to browbeat Zelensky into ceasing his very successful attacks on Russian oil refineries, an effort which took out 12% of Russia’s refining capacity. This crippled profitable exports, increased the price of gas for Russians and limited the available fuel for tanks and jets.
It also made the Biden campaign at the time fear a jump in US gas prices, which would have been bad for re-election prospects.
Last night’s result demonstrates that Sullivan’s ineptitude extends beyond national security to campaign politics.
With Sullivan as a bar, how much worse could Trump be? Trump is unpredictable. Maybe he could do better.
Valentyn, an amazingly courageous doctor operating on soldiers at the front says of Trump “I hope that Trump will be more decisive in terms of supplying weapons.” Decisiveness seems to be key with Ukrainians. The Biden/Sullivan rollercoaster of promising weapons and not delivering them has been destructive to morale.
Masha, a young broadcast journalist, says “If he doesn’t end the war in Ukraine and Israel - let’s say - in six months, I’ll be very disappointed. Another question how he’s gonna do that...”
Yuri, a judge who spends many of his nights shooting down Iranian made drones with WWI era machine guns echoes Masha’s interest in learning more about Trump’s strategy for ending the war.
“l like Trump’s words that he would finish the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. However he didn’t told how he could do it. His idea not to help Ukraine will not finish the war in 24 hours, because we will fight, but for sure we will lose soon without US help.”
Yuri asked me something more than a year ago that has haunted me.
"Steven, I understand Trump's position. I don't like it, but I understand it. Stop giving us weapons, we can't fight and the war is over. And I understand a position of giving us the weapons we need to win and letting us use them to win. What I don't understand is Biden's position of dripping weapons out slowly and keeping us from using them for our victory.”
“We view ourselves as America's partner in taking out your longtime adversary of Russia. You supply the weapons, we supply the lives of our very best people. But when your contribution slows down, our contribution goes up."
Nobody quite knows what to think of Trump, but nobody is sorry to see Biden and Sullivan go.
The delay in supplying weapons to Ukraine over the past several months has been influenced by several key factors:
1. Industrial Capacity and Supply Chain Challenges: Defense industries in both the U.S. and Europe are dealing with constrained production capacities and supply chain issues, worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic. Many weapons require specific components like electronic parts, which are now subject to lead times that have extended from 19 to 34 months. This affects the timely production of ammunition, missiles, and other essential weapons systems.
2. Funding and Contracting Issues: Europe’s weapon manufacturers, many of which are private and accustomed to producing limited quantities of high-quality ammunition, need financial stability to ramp up production. They have called for multiyear contracts and consistent funding guarantees, which have been slow to materialize. Furthermore, EU member countries have struggled to agree on the necessary funding increases, with some countries like Hungary and Slovakia opposing further arms aid to Ukraine.
3. Bureaucratic and Political Hurdles: U.S. Congress has approved substantial funding to replenish U.S. stockpiles and support Ukraine, but securing continued bipartisan support for future arms transfers remains a challenge, especially as Congress debates budget priorities. Similarly, EU decisions are hampered by the need for unanimity among member states, which has led to significant delays in approving additional funds.
4. Reallocation of Existing Stockpiles: The U.S. and European nations have depleted many of their own stockpiles, limiting their immediate ability to supply further weapons without compromising their national defense readiness. In response, the U.S. has invested billions to boost production of critical munitions like 155mm artillery shells, though these measures will take time to yield result.
5. Time Required for New Production: Even with accelerated contracts and increased production goals, complex weapons systems and high-demand items like artillery shells and missile systems can take two to three years to produce and deliver. As a result, there is a natural lag before Ukraine receives many of the promised supplies.
These issues illustrate the complexities of sustaining Ukraine’s defense needs while managing the demands on domestic resources and navigating the intricate political landscape involved in international defense support.