As Trump and Harris face off, Ukraine sees its survival on the ballot

Many countries around the world have been paying close attention to the upcoming presidential election in the United States. But few, if any, have as much at stake in this race as Ukraine. In fact, some Ukrainians believe that their country's survival depends on this race's outcome.

There is good reason to conclude that Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump would approach the NATO alliance and the Ukraine war very differently.

As a "liberal internationalist" surrounded by Atlanticists such as Philip Gordon, Harris would probably continue the Biden administration's Ukraine policies. She has pledged her commitment to maintaining Washington's support for Kiev as this war of attrition grinds on.

On the other hand, Trump has tended to approach the Western Alliance more transactionally. He has expressed his opposition to spending more of the US taxpayers' money on Ukraine and called President Volodymyr Zelenskyy the "greatest salesman."

When referring to a massive aid package that the US sent Ukraine earlier this year, the former president said, "Every time (Zelenskyy) comes to our country, he walks away with $60 billion."

Europe's fears

While anxiously awaiting the results of next week's election, many policymakers in the European Union (EU) fear the possibility of Trump winning and then halting Washington's aid to Ukraine. These are valid concerns considering that the US is by far Ukraine's top backer.

Sascha E. Ostanina, an EU Security Policy Fellow at the Berlin-based Jacques Delors Centre, does not see Ukraine's European partners being able to fill in the gaps that could result from the US drastically reducing its military aid to Kiev if Trump returns to the White House.

"The EU's growing efforts to boost its member states' defence industries continue to aim at redirecting its member-states' increased defence budgets from third-country suppliers to domestic defence manufacturers. As a result, the measures adopted by the EU to increase defence production will not suffice to provide Ukraine with the weapons and ammunition necessary to sustain the current war of attrition,” she tells TRT World.

Trump has vowed to freeze this conflict through a diplomatic settlement negotiated with Russian President Vladimir Putin's government. Yet, the terms that Trump and Putin would agree on for freezing the war in Ukraine are unclear. Many voices in EU and NATO members worry that those terms would amount to Kiev's complete capitulation to Moscow.

At the same time, there are some in the EU and NATO, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who support Trump's position on this war. These Europeans assess that there is no viable pathway to a Ukrainian military victory and thus saving lives by freezing the conflict is a moral imperative.

Andrej Matišák, a journalist who works for the Slovak daily Pravda, believes that Trump "doesn't care about Ukraine at all."

He tells TRT World, "I think he is ready to talk to Putin over Kiev's head and he is ready to support any deal, even if this deal will literally mean total Ukraine surrender…I think it will be less funding, if any for Ukraine, if Trump wins, and he will blame Europe for not filling the gap. Frankly speaking, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump believes that if he stops the war, though on total Russian terms, he will get the Nobel Peace Prize and finally he will be equal to Obama."

Some analysts, however, do not assume that US support for Ukraine would necessarily end if Trump is elected.

Wolfgang Pusztai, a senior adviser at the Austrian Institute for European and Security Policy, notes that a decisive Russian victory over Ukraine would harm US national interests and severely damage Washington's credibility in the eyes of countries worldwide.

This leads him to conclude that a second Trump administration would continue backing Ukraine, albeit in different manners.

"I expect a potential Trump administration to continue military support for Ukraine, but it would no longer come for free. There would be no more grants and aid packages, only loans. In other words: I expect that the Ukrainians, or the Europeans, would have to pay for everything that America provides," Pusztai tells TRT World.

Transatlantic (dis)unity if Trump returns

Beyond Ukraine, there is a sense among many European officials that Trump lacks any interest in the Transatlantic Alliance.

"I don't believe Trump cares about NATO. He will be very transactional toward the Alliance,” says Matišák. "He will push Europeans to buy American weapons but if something happens in Europe, nobody knows if he will be ready to support NATO. And this simple uncertainty weakens the whole Alliance," adds the Slovak journalist.

Other experts agree that a Trump win would negatively impact NATO's cohesion and send a message to the Kremlin about the West being weak and divided.

"While it is certainly necessary for some member states to increase their defence spending, statements such as that America would not defend NATO allies against Russia if they did not meet the 2 percent of the GDP spending target undermine confidence that the United States would honour its commitments in the case of a Russian aggression,” Pusztai tells TRT World.

In the event that Trump secures a second term, transatlantic relations would be subjected to a "stress test," holds Petr Tůma, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Europe Center.

"Trump would distinguish between friendly EU member states and the rest. This would lead to even more disunity in the EU, which could bring a whole host of problems," he tells TRT World.

The return of Trump, however, would strengthen those in Europe who call for the continent to gain greater autonomy from Washington, notes Tůma.

Implications of a Harris presidency

For Ukraine, a Harris victory would be a "gift," Dr. Serhat Suha Cubukcuoglu, a senior fellow at TRENDS Research and Advisory in Abu Dhabi, UAE, tells TRT World.

This outcome would result in Washington doubling down on efforts to strengthen Kiev's fighting capacities through training, arms shipments, and financial assistance.

A Harris presidency would likely lead to the Ukrainians receiving a significant morale boost, motivating them to stonewall negotiations with Russia while pushing ahead with their military campaign.

The Ukrainians "will want to capitalise on the stronger position from Kamala's win and the guarantee of US assistance for the next four years," explains Cubukcuoglu.

Despite a Harris victory next week giving Ukrainians a short-term morale boost, in the long run it would "deplete more manpower, money, and blood on the battlefield," Cubukcuoglu said.

He added that he doubts that there will be much tactical change on the ground in the upcoming years, even if Harris is at the helm in Washington and it remains a "big question mark" whether a continuation of material aid to Kiev would bode well for the long-term interests of Europeans, including Ukrainians themselves.

Tough decisions

Looking ahead, the US will need to make difficult strategic choices irrespective of who wins on November 5. The chances are good that the US, with either Harris or Trump in the Oval Office, will focus on the Asia-Pacific region—specifically the perceived Chinese threat—and the conflicts in the Middle East at the expense of Ukraine.

In sum, regardless of who wins this upcoming US election, decision makers in Washington will probably eventually conclude that America's current approach to Ukraine will not prove sustainable and negotiating with Moscow, in one way or the other, will be necessary. Nonetheless the differences in how Harris and Trump would approach Ukraine do matter.

"Even in the event of a Harris victory, the US would seize the opportunity to push for an end to the war, albeit more on Ukraine's terms than in the case of Trump," Tůma tells TRT World.

"With Harris, NATO will remain a cornerstone of European security, with a push for better burden sharing, despite Washington's increasing focus on the Indo-Pacific."