Ukraine in the US Elections: How Not to Turn From Hostage to Victim
The U.S. presidential election is not due until next fall, 2024, and the U.S. Congress is already in the throes of election fever. The topic of Ukraine is almost never left the lips of the country's top officials, having become the field of the fiercest battles between Democrats and Republicans. The entire civilized world is waiting for the second round of confrontation in the budget process, which is still under threat precisely because of the electoral context.
The pre-election storm overseas has already turned into a tailwind for Russia's aggressive policy. Thus, the question remains whether Ukraine will be a temporary hostage to the US elections or, albeit inadvertently, become a victim of both the aggressor and its own partners.
Start Before the Race Begins
As in most liberal democracies, the real competition for power in the United States is during elections. As of now, a year before the vote, it is impossible and pointless to try to predict the outcome of the US presidential race. Currently, the two main political forces in the United States - the Democratic and Republican parties - are in a fierce battle for voter sympathy. Therefore, Ukraine's status as a partner of the United States makes our country, in one way or another, an object of competition between the policies offered to its voters by each of the two main parties.
For Ukraine, the real problem is that the issue of support for the country as a whole has become electorally colored. To put it very simply, for the American voter, strong support for the US foreign partners, including Ukraine in its war for independence, is associated with the Democrats. The same "land deal" to Ukraine by current President Joe Biden certainly reflects, first and foremost, American national interests, but through the electoral prism it is perceived as the result of the policy of the "Democrats." Instead, today's "Republican" approach to Ukraine was largely shaped by the previous president Donald Trump's policy of isolationism and isolationism. It is not for nothing that the program to strengthen the southern border of the United States is conventionally called "Trump's wall."
That is why today not only the American voter, but also any observer of American politics can easily find a correlation between the policies of the Democrats and Republicans towards Ukraine. The problem is that partisanship in supporting Ukraine harms many partners, not only Kyiv, but also the national interests of the United States.
The "Pre-Election Syndrome" of the United States
Even before the official start of the US presidential election race, the entire segment of support for the US external partners is suffering because the Republicans have turned the issue of US strategic interests into a field of election battles with the Democrats. Supporting, in particular, the young Ukrainian democracy is a segment of the policy of protecting, first of all, the national interests of the United States itself. Secondly, it is a segment of the policy of protecting the entire family of liberal democratic countries. The paradox of the United States is that the "first among equals" democracy is scaling up the pre-election period, which is the most vulnerable, by itself. The "pre-election syndrome" of the United States has traditionally resulted in political turbulence for Washington and all its partners.
Today's crisis in the US budget process regarding the allocation of sufficient military and humanitarian support to Ukraine should be a wake-up call that indicates the danger of excessive politicization of US national interests for the sake of potential electoral gains. "Israel and Ukraine must win, that is clear. However, American taxpayers are tired of funding the endless stalemate in Ukraine without a vision of victory," the Republicans said in a statement on the conditions for unblocking the aid package for Ukraine.
This is just one of numerous examples of manipulation, where the thesis that Ukraine needs to win is seemingly not denied, and in the very next sentence, the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin's war of aggression is called not "a stalemate" but "without a vision of victory" in the affirmative. Victory, which largely depends on the volume and pace of military assistance from partners.
The truth is that Russia is one of the geopolitical opponents of the United States, defined by the US National Security Strategy of 2022 as a "significant threat." The document also explains in detail the destabilizing role of Russia in the world, the quintessence of which is an unprovoked full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Therefore, the excessive politicization of the issue of the amount of military and humanitarian support for Ukraine by the "Republicans," which can be observed in the budget process today, only contributes to the success of the United States' geopolitical opponents. Not only Russia, which is an obvious beneficiary of the reduced capabilities of the Ukrainian Defense Forces, but also China, which may decide to annex Taiwan. Or Iran, which is still wary of openly helping Hamas precisely because of its position as the world's geopolitical leader.
A Bad Example Is Contagious
The openness of the democratic election process in the United States allows not only its geopolitical opponents to influence the course of the elections. Undoubtedly, the Kremlin has been the most successful in this regard. The American political establishment, regardless of party affiliation, should realize that Russian interference in the internal affairs of the United States is a very broad concept. It is not only through formal instruments such as money or media. The Kremlin skillfully uses the divide-and-conquer strategy, which is particularly effective among democratic regimes, and unfortunately, the United States is no exception.
While political squabbles are taking place in Washington, the essence of which is supposedly the search for the most effective forms of support for partners, including Ukraine, the Kremlin, on the contrary, is consolidating all efforts both on the battlefield in Ukraine and in the domestic arena. Putin's signing of the decree on holding elections in the newly occupied territories of Ukraine is an indisputable signal that the Kremlin's aggression will continue. After all, we are talking about the presidential election, the de facto position of the regime's leader. By increasingly suppressing any manifestations of democratic institutions in Russia, the Kremlin has no problem mobilizing significant internal resources to continue its aggression. In the eyes of the zombified population of the Russian Federation, their regime is waging a "just" and successful war against the West, which is why it is necessary to "tighten the belt" even more.
Symbolic, ochlocratic approaches to politics promoted by the "Republicans" among American voters blur the awareness of Americans of real threats to US national interests, including the issue of sufficient military support for Ukraine. The relatively recent case of Afghanistan should serve as an excellent reminder that insufficient support for partners is very costly for the United States in all respects, including in the form of lost U.S. taxpayer dollars.
The United States should demonstrate leadership among the liberal democratic world not only in the geopolitical arena, but also in the domestic arena. Political competitions for voters' sympathies should be conducted after the official start of the rather lengthy presidential election process, rather than trying to harm their political counterparts before it starts. Turbulence during the election process is probably difficult to avoid, and there is no point in initiating it earlier, jeopardizing national interests in the United States in the long run.