Battle for Trump. How to win the hopeful US president over in favor of Ukraine

We have just processed the news about the Ukraine "peace plan" proposed by Donald Trump's advisers, when a new stress came about: Joe Biden, Donald Trump’s rival in the presidential race, lost to Trump in a televised presidential debate. This made American voters and Democrats wonder if they bet on the right candidate, and us - what will happen to Ukraine if Mr. Trump returns to the White House (which looks highly realistic now). If everything in the Trumpists' views remains as it is, and Ukraine will be pressurized into accepting the "reconciliation" plan, we will have to make a difficult choice between bad and worse.

“I will have that war settled between Putin and Zelensky as president-elect before I take office as president on Jan. 20,” former President Trump said at last week's televised face-off with incumbent Joe Biden. “ I will end this war in 24 hours”. Then he said that he would first meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and then Russian President Vladimir Putin. Since then, Trump has been reiterating this on multiple occasions.

In the presidential debate, Trump even said that Biden had imposed war on Putin. If he had been the president, this war would never have happened.

“I will end this war….It would never have started with me. ... He (Joe Biden, - ed.) has put us in such a bad position now, because Ukraine will not win this war," - this is exactly how Donald Trump sees the situation and his role in it; it is exactly these intentions he once again reiterated during the TV debate on June 28 .

These are more than outright expectations, which cannot satisfy us at all, because the search for "peace in Putin’s eyes" has proven its futility. So what should Ukraine do while awaiting an anticipated victory for Trump? Bottom line: all is not lost.

TARGETING TRUMP’S PEOPLE WITH CHINESE ARGUMENTS

The position upheld by this temperamental politician can be tried to be influenced, and there are ways and means to do so, experts say. "I'm uncertain if we can directly influence Trump's position by way of meeting and talking with him, but we can influence collective Trump," says political scientist Oleh Saakian. The plan that we saw was a program developed for Trump by his closest advisers. Competitions are currently taking place for who will be appointed to which positions in the event Trump wins the presidency again, which think tanks will be awarded contracts for cooperation; so, they are drawing up their proposals based on these predictions. The expert says: "This “look-at” phase could be availed of for working together with potential appointees and analysts affiliated with the Republican team, to make sure the proposals to be put on Trump's table are adequate to the situation and more in line with our expectations from the United States," explains Mr. Saakian.

Trump doesn't get his ideas from nowhere, says Yehor Braylian, a Ph.D. (History), member of the Ukrainian Association of American Studies, and an analyst with Detector Media. Trump has lots of advisers, including the “peace plan” co-authors who were serving in the US National Security Council during the first Trump administration. This is an advisory body at the White House, whose members should be explained that Ukraine's victory would be beneficial for the US national security interests, because it will bolster the United States’ deterrence against China, Mr Braylian says. "Trump actively uses anti-Chinese rhetoric like, you see, China is taking over the world, while America is weak and being mocked at; and this must be stopped," the expert in American studies explains.

Donald Trump is a contradictory personality: he is inclined to isolationism ("America first") on the one hand, but on the other, is concerned about the United States’ image in the world. Trump is confident he will be able to put an end to the war, but at the same time he branded as unacceptable Putin's conditions for ending this war. This all leaves us room for maneuver. In Ukraine, there are several public opinion leaders, retired politicians, athletes, and religious figures who maintain personal contacts in the US with the Republicans, particularly, members of the Trumpist wing. "We need to use these informal channels of communication," says Oleh Saakian. And in order to better communicate with Trump specifically and the Republicans in general, it is necessary to get a better understanding of the US agenda, which is far from focused primarily on Ukraine, points out Mr Braylian.

FROM HOUSEWIFE TO THE TOP US ESTABLISHMENT

Ukraine's communication with the USA is three-levelled -- the highest political establishment, the military community, and the civil society -- and it is vital to communicate a common narrative to everyone, says Yehor Braylian.

Mr Saakian, for his part, says that work with the American population, soft power, cultural diplomacy will help portrait Ukraine in the light that we need. "Various public opinion leaders in the US can be used as envoys of Ukraine to mobilize all Ukrainians who could become ambassadors of culture to the USA, he goes on to note.

Yehor Braylian recommends working out the themes that concern Americans and can be instrumental in forming a strategy for the victory of Ukraine and the defeat of Russia. "Donald Trump is a populist politician who seeks to maintain and increase his popularity among the Americans by appealing to the agenda that worries common people, says the member of the Ukrainian Association of American Studies. These are abortions, illegal immigration, economic challenges from China, Islamic terrorism and other issues Trump is playing on in his election campaign. The Ukrainian factor is present in this agenda among other things. If Ukrainian politicians and members of civil society devote more attention to getting the American population more deeply involved in discourse on the Ukrainian topic, then we can expect a change in Trump's attitude to the challenges facing Ukraine. "Our attention must be focused on strategic communication targeted at the US southern states where Trump's core electorate and a significant portion of the US arms industries are located”, Brylian believes.

According to the expert, Ukraine doesn’t use the religious factor to full extent. Americans are mostly Protestants, and Protestants are among Ukrainians as well. "In their propaganda, the Russians are sharing the narrative that Ukrainians are 'fighting the Christians,' referring to measures being taken against Ukrainian Orthodox Church subordinate to Moscow Patriarchate (UOCh-MP), says the expert. And in communication with the Americans we should make an emphasis on the repressive measures being taken against believers in the currently Russia held parts of Ukraine as well as the demolition of church buildings as a result of hostilities." This must be done to counter Russian propaganda machine, which is working proactively in the USA. "Quality journalism, joined with the promotion of Ukrainian-American relations, Ukrainian history and culture can change the situation for the better," the expert believes. "Social networks, of which Trump makes an extensive use for his manipulations, have minimized personal communication."

It goes without saying that the Ukrainian embassy in the USA as well should work looking for additional points of contact, including at the level of the president and his office, notes Oleh Saakian. But in formal diplomacy, hands are tied to a degree, so it is less effective at the moment. "The presidential campaign is in full swing, and any active efforts being made at the official level (even if this is not the case) can be interpreted as a tool of internal political struggle, and so it’s critical for us not to do any harm," believes the political analyst.

Yes, indeed, American politicians are thinking about the upcoming elections, says Mykola Kapitonenko, associate professor at the International Relations Institute of Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University.

“We came to thinking about how to establish such contacts about a year ago and discovered that there is a physical lack of people in Ukraine who could do this. "A significant part of Ukrainian politicians criticized Trump too much and aggressively in the past, and now there are few heavyweights left who had not spoiled relations with Trump and his associates," explains the international relations expert. This challenge must be tackled urgently.

WHAT WE ARE ASPIRING FOR AND WHAT ARGUMENTS WE CAN OFFER

The key goal we need to achieve is to make sure that the US attitude towards the Russo-Ukrainian war is not perceived to be a dispute in which the parties need to be reconciled, but a crime in which there is a victim and an aggressor, says Oleh Saakian. "The aggressor must be stopped, and the victim must be supported, and how Trump will do so - there is a lot of room for maneuver," he continues to note. “There can be different scenarios that are more or less to our liking, but what matters most is that no attempts are made to reach a conciliation with the aggressor at the expense of Ukraine."

What could theoretically affect the position upheld by the impetuous personality like Donald Trump? Kapitonenko is convinced that we should try and speak with the Trumpists using the language of pragmatic arguments, not emotions nor rhetorics about a confrontation between democracies and totalitarian regimes. "Trump and a significantly large part of the American establishment well understand the language of pragmatic arguments. If we support Ukraine, then for how long, how much does it cost, what kind of risks does it create, what can it entail?  And what makes it better to support Ukraine instead of negotiating with Russia?" If answers to these questions are clear and convincing, then they can be tried to be communicated to Trump, Kapitonenko says.

Aside from the argument that military aid to Ukraine is contributive to the US arms industry development, and the money spent on armaments is left in the States, emphasis should be on the situation in the currently Russia occupied parts of Ukraine, says Yehor Braylian. "In the West, little is known about the regime of repressions and the difficult humanitarian situation that have developed out there since 2014. This, again, is a matter of Ukrainian communication, the expert says. - Now we need to tell and explain more that the freezing of the conflict will amount to the continuation of the occupation of these areas by the Russians, consequently the continuation of human rights violations, persecution of people, etc”.

There is an opinion that, for Donald Trump, a very influential source of information regarding the situation in Eastern Europe is the Prime Minister of Hungary, Viktor Orbán. As this man draws the picture, so will the US presidential candidate perceive it. But "for every Orban, there is another Duda or Cameron, i.e., top officials who are entrees to Trump personally and to members of his team," Oleh Saakian says and continues: It is vital for us that the balance (these top officials - ed.) is in Ukraine’s favor. Although Orbán will definitely use this influence both for his own benefit and as a bargaining chip with Moscow and Beijing.

“Unforeseen events – escalation, terrorist attacks – often influence the decisions made by the actors responsible for the geopolitical balance of power. Not long ago, we discussed how the Venezuelan-Guyanese crisis would affect us, Ukraine, not to mention Taiwan or the boiling Middle Eastern cauldron. An aggravation in other regions of the world will work against us more sooner rather than later, as we saw it when Israel's war with Hamas began, says Mykola Kapitonenko. “How should Ukraine position itself in this conflict, given a split in public opinion in the West? "As more attention was being paid to the Middle East, the question arose - why to support Ukraine, not Israel or Taiwan," explains the associate professor at the International Relations Institute.

Serhiy Danylov, deputy CEO at the Center for Middle East Studies  believes that there is a theoretical chance that Trump's position on Ukraine can change due to global events, if, for example, allied relations between Russia and Iran will threaten the American interests as Trump sees them". Overall, Trump as President behaved very harshly with the Iranians. It was during his tenure as President when Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian general who served in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, was assassinated. "Trump claimed responsibility and ordered assassination of Soleimani. “This murder came as a true shock for the Iranians”, says Danylov, and continues: “If Iran is to pose a threat to the United States today, and Russia supports it in this, it will affect Trump's views, indeed." This will trigger processes that we cannot foresee, because this politician is unpredictable in principle. Add to this the processes going on in Iran itself, where a new president is being elected. "The Iranian system is in a deep political crisis, if not collapse; there is a great public distrust, evidenced by record low election turnout," Serhiy Danilov goes on to note. "Despite all the efforts being undertook by the current government, the candidate who promises a movement towards the normalization of Iran-West relations wins the first round of presidential elections. "Much depends on the personality of the Supreme Leader. The current one - Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - is rumored to be on the verge of death (rumors of his deteriorating health or death have been circulating in recent years; in Iran, it is open secret that the leader's condition is life threatening - Ed.). "It is highly likely that the newly elected president will see a successor to Rahbar Ali Khamenei, and we will see an indirect impact of these events on our lives ", says Mr Danylov.

ALL ATTEMPTS ARE FUTILE. IS UKRAINE HOSTAGE TO THE SITUATION?

Mykola Kapitonenko is pretty pessimistic about our chances of changing the views and intentions of the potential US president. "Eight years ago, he, quite surprisingly, won the election and, for some time, relied on the opinions of those surrounding him. Now he knows exactly what he wants and will try making key decisions without asking anyone for advice”, says the international policy expert. “US foreign policy during his presidency will be Trump's foreign policy, not his advisers'. It will be independent of public opinion, because foreign policy matters, including the Russo-Ukrainian war, by and large, are of no interest to American voters in general. Trump has his own understanding of international processes and of the prime threats facing the United States, which he believes are coming mostly from China. Trump proceeds from the fact that the PRC is the main competitor of the United States, that something must be done about this, and this confrontation will be central for the future of the United States and the world order. "The policy pursued by the USA for quite a long time, which included an extensive involvement in various conflicts, support for allies, active leadership - I think he considers it to be wrong under the current conditions; so he would like to reduce the costs involved, to transfer the risks, at least part of them, to the allies," the expert deliberates. “These views will determine his strategy, particularly with respect to Russia's war on Ukraine. Thus, we have become hostages to other people's decisions, have ultimately lost an opportunity to influence something in international politics”.

From Trump's perspective, in order to effectively confront the PRC, it is necessary to end the war at the earliest time possible. It takes away American resources, attention, creates additional risks and, most importantly, does not lead to a win. "I don't think he perceives our war with Russia as a potential success story. Rather, the USA is investing money in nothing, getting involved in this conflict without the prospect of winning, while China is getting stronger”, Mr. Kapitonenko explains Trump’s logic. “What is necessary is presumably to focus on Eastern Asia, maybe even to try undermining Sino-Russian ties. And this all will take achieving an end to the Russo-Ukrainian war."

An increase in aid for Ukraine is not going to find support with the Americans. There is a visible division observed among the public, and there has continued a lengthy, comprehensive discourse on how to continue living in a world that has ceased to be Western-centric. Should the United States continue the strategy it has followed since the end of the Cold War? "I estimate that the Americans, a significantly large part of them, agree with Trump's views on foreign policy," says Kapitonenko. “It's not that they are wrong and we need to find influential people who will open Trump's eyes. The world has changed, and whoever is trying to convince them of the need to go back to the policies the United States pursued under Clinton or Bush Jr., it’s a very inappropriate time for that. "The situation is such that the audiences of CNN (the channel is trusted by 67 percent of Democratic viewers, according to the Pew Research Center -- Ed.) and Fox News (trusted by 65% ​​of Republican viewers and Trump followers - Ed.) do not overlap each other, which is contributive to further polarization. It is extremely difficult to persuade opponents to a different point of view,“ says Yehor Braylian.

"I don't think that Trump, if he tries, will be able to force Zelensky into concessions. Zelensky will have a difficult choice to make, but he is no stranger to making difficult choices. Based on what the incumbent Ukrainian president did before in similar situations, he is not going to give in to pressure, but will raise the stakes instead, presumably thinking, well, we will fight without American aid. We have certain safeguards enshrined in security agreements with EU countries that provide for annual funding that will cover part of our needs. We are uncertain whether the terms of these agreements will be enforced by partners to full extent, but we are constantly taking risks and hoping for a miracle in our policy," says Mr Kapitonenko. Trump, for his part, will be faced with a choice - to stop aid or not, and he can take this step, unfortunately, because it will not be too painful a defeat for the USA. Alternatively, he can reduce the amount of aid by three times and check out if a collapse is occurring. It is not the first time the US has acted as patrons, aid providers, but not succeeded in a war. Ukrainian defeat will be a disappointment, but not a setback for them. So Donald Trump will have to weigh potential benefits against potential risks, as well as evaluate the long-term impact this may have on U.S. standing in other parts of the world”, Kapitonenko said in conclusion.

Tetyana Nehoda, Kyiv

Headline photo via Justin Sullivan / Getty Images