Once the outcome of the US presidential elections was clear, a roundtable regarding the future of Ukrainian-American relations after Donald Trump’s victory took place in the western Ukrainian city of Lviv. The event was held at the United States Studies Center at Ivan Franko National University and brought together students, scientists, and young leaders.
One of the guests offering projections was US citizen Matthew Kwasiborski, a European Institutes Director of The Fund for American Studies (TFAS) known as a global non-profit educational organization.
Kwasiborski visited Lviv in 2013 for the first time, just in the midst of Euromaidan revolution. Inspired by the demand for change that Ukrainian society showed, he co-founded the annual Lviv Leadership Academy with its first enrollment in August 2016.
Before his speech about the US elections’ influence on Ukraine, Kwasiborski stressed he had never held a political office at any level and expresses his own opinion based on personal and professional experience.
Euromaidan Press visited the discussion and prepared a brief overview of the main issues Ukrainians should think of owing to Trump’s unexpected presidency.
What could Trump mean to Europe?
[Trump’s victory] will inspire the already growing far-right-anti EU politicians
Among them is the leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom Geert Wilders, who has already congratulated Trump with the victory comparing him with Ronald Reagan – “the greatest American president in our lifetime”; the president of the National Front party Marine Le Pen gaining popularity in France; numerous German anti-Islam and anti-migrant movements like PEGIDA; conservative and radically nationalistic Christian party Jobbik whose purpose is “protection of Hungarian values and interests” and many others.
All these political forces are skeptical about a united Europe and do not mind returning to the “each country for itself” basis. Taking advantage of problems in the EU (refugee, terrorism, Brexit issues) they expect to get a majority of votes in the approaching elections, and Trump’s victory will encourage their promotion of similar ideas (racism, nationalism, etc.)
From this perspective, the upcoming elections in France (April 2017) and Germany (August / September 2017) are the next reasons for the whole world to be worried.
[Trump’s victory] could weaken the trans-Atlantic alliance between US / NATO / EU
Not necessarily, but it’s possible. During the election campaign, Trump showed a restrained attitude towards NATO’s activity in Europe. For instance, he said that if Russia attacked the small Baltic States he would first assess whether those countries “have fulfilled their obligations to NATO” before coming to aid.
According to Kwasiborski, in this case Trump is guided by economic considerations. He is not enthusiastic about US funding NATO much more than other 27 nations of the alliance. So, it is up to Trump and NATO leaders to agree on satisfactory financing conditions. Otherwise “NATO could be put on a slow death march,” Kwasiborski said.
Ukraine’s interest in this situation is obvious. The weaker NATO is in the Eastern European region, the more confidently Russia could behave there. It is not a matter of military protectorate, but the same old balance of forces which provides at least some social and political stability.
[Because of Trump’s victory] Russian influence will grow significantly stronger
Kwasiborski names Putin as one of the main winners of the US elections. Trump and Russian President indeed exchange compliments rather often. Putin called Trump “a bright person” and “a clear leader of the election race” while Trump claimed Putin was a tough leader respected worldwide.
So, one of Ukraine’s main concerns after the US elections regarded the possibility that economic sanctions imposed on Russia in reaction to the illegal annexation of Crimea be lifted. Experts predict if Trump decides to start relations with Russia on a clean slate and supports canceling economic restrictions against it, European countries might follow suit.
Kwasiborski thinks EU countries are tired of the sanctions policy in the dialogue with Russia. Moreover, Kremlin’s propaganda machine does not admit the economic crisis in Russia and reports that the country is prospering. That is why the efficiency of international sanctions is mistakenly put into question.
At the same time, on 10 November, US Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner declared that Sanctions against Russia would remain until Crimea does not return to Ukraine.
What could Trump mean for Ukraine?
After Trump’s inauguration, which is planned for 20 January, a formation of new US Cabinet is expected. President will nominate the heads of 15 executive departments and the Vice President. All but the last positions need Senate approval.
WSJ has already named some of Trump’s candidates, in particular for positions of Secretary of the Interior (Bobby Jindal and Benjamin Carson) and Secretary of Health and Human Services (Mary Fallin).
Another significant detail is that US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch will not necessarily leave her post after 20 January, unlike many US ambassadors in the EU who are “merely political appointees.”
Yovanovitch is a career diplomat who was appointed to the position not because of her political allegiance but professional experience needed in Ukraine still going through a period of turbulence. So, in the short term, she is not expected to resign.
“America just elected the most unpredictable president ever”
As for now, any forecast regarding the future of US-Ukrainian relations can be based only on Trump’s statements during the election race. Full of contradictions and emotions, they are hardly suitable material for analysis. Nevertheless, here are some key points Kwasiborski suggests for Ukrainians’ information:
1. Trump does not seem to have any specific foreign policy. He has paid very little attention to Ukraine, so it is now up to Ukrainian politicians to engage in a constructive conversation with Washington;
2. According to leaked Surkov emails, Russia may seek to politically destabilize Ukraine between US elections and transition period (the time when all the major Cabinet positions are appointed). This fact may have related to estimated Clinton’s victory but still worth keeping in mind;
3. Kwasiborski argues that the real Trump policy would be less loud and resolute than he promised during the election campaign. Being a true TV-star, Trump must have exaggerated his political ambitious to appear invincible for the media. Suffice it to recall that Obama promised to close Guantanamo prison on the first day of his presidency. In practice, it still functions.
