Harris versus Trump on Ukraine
Harris’s Peace Through Strengths Defends American Interests and Values; Trump’s Peace Through Appeasement Does Not
President Zelenskyy’s visit to the United States this week once again allowed American voters to witness how Vice President Kamala Harris and Mr. Donald Trump would approach one of the biggest foreign policy issues of the next presidency—the war in Ukraine.
Vice President Harris once again signaled her unwavering support for Ukraine’s fight for its sovereignty, freedom, and democracy. Yesterday, in her seventh meeting with President Zelenskyy, she reaffirmed her position: “My support for the people of Ukraine is unwavering. I have been proud to stand with Ukraine. I will continue to stand with Ukraine. And I will work to ensure Ukraine prevails in this war.”
Former President Trump took a very different approach. He blamed the United States for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and called Zelenskyy “the greatest salesman in history” because “every time he comes to the country, he walks away with 100 billion.” While Trump rightly talked about the tremendous loss of life and property in Ukraine as a result of war, he never once blamed Putin for such killing and destruction. That has been a consistent pattern for Trump for almost a decade now. He doesn’t criticize Putin and instead admires his strength and justifies his barbaric actions. Standing next to Zelenskyy today, Trump said, “I have a very good relationship with President Putin” – the Russian dictator who invaded Zelensky’s country and continues to terrorize his civilians and kidnap Ukrainian children. (I wrote more on why Trump’s admiration of Putin is dangerous for America here.)
The two candidates also have opposing views on the bigger implications for the U.S. interests that are at stake in this war. Harris, after she met with Zelenskyy, affirmed:
“Putin’s aggression is not only an attack on the people of Ukraine, it is also an attack on fundamental principles such as sovereignty and territorial integrity...To be safe, secure, and prosperous, the United States must continue to fulfill our long-standing role of global leadership. We must stand with our allies and our partners. We must defend our democratic values and stand up to aggressors. And we must stand for international order, rules, and norms. Each one of these principles is at stake in Ukraine, and that is why Ukraine’s fight matters to the people of America.”
She highlighted that “history is so clear in reminding us: The United States cannot and should not isolate ourselves from the rest of the world. Isolation is not insulation.”
Trump has a different view. He is an isolationist who wants to see a U.S. retreat from global leadership. When he does engage with the world, he wants to do so unilaterally, not together with our strategic allies in Europe and Asia. He has also so far failed to promote and defend American democratic values. Instead, he embraces dictators like Putin. There are other fundamental differences to Harris’s approach to foreign policy that were on display again this week.
During Zelenskyy’s visit, there was also much discussion on how to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. Zelenskyy emphasized on numerous occasions that Putin would only begin to talk after he was stopped on the battlefield. Russia’s invasion is progressing slowly but is moving forward. There is no reason for Putin to stop his war now. At a minimum, he will keep sending more Russians to die in Ukraine until he controls the four Ukrainian regions he annexed on paper almost two years ago. Harris understands that we cannot quit on Ukraine now. She agrees with Zelenskyy that Putin cannot be coaxed into stopping his invasion by a phone call from the White House; he will only stop when he can no longer keep going.
Trump does not. Instead of supplying the Armed Forces of Ukraine with the weapons and ammunition it needs to stop invading forces, Trump, in case of victory, will try to pressure Ukrainians to give up significant chunks of their country in return for peace. This approach is dangerous not only for Ukraine but the United States and the world. As the human rights lawyer and Nobel Peace Prize winner Oleksandra Matviichuk rightly said, “Occupation is not a peace. Occupation doesn't stop human suffering, it just makes [it] invisible.”
Remember, “land for peace” failed before. Putin’s first invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea in 2014 simmered until an even bigger invasion in 2022. Trump seems to forget for the four years he was president, Putin never agreed to a permanent peace agreement. War continued, and so did occupation. (If you want to read more about this, The War in Ukraine’s Donbas, a book edited by David Marples.) So why should anyone believe that land for peace today would not just be a temporary truce for Putin to recuperate his forces and invade again?
Moreover, letting Putin keep the territory he illegally annexed would set a terrible precedent for other power-seeking autocrats and regimes. In fact, we know what happens next: we witnessed how poorly appeasement works in the 1930s. As Harris reminded us this week, “History has shown us if we allow aggressors like Putin to take land with impunity, they keep going. And Putin could set his sights on Poland, the Baltic states, and other NATO Allies.”
If Trump were to become president again, Putin would test him. He might threaten a NATO ally, say Estonia or Lithuania, to see if Trump would actually respond. Putin wouldn’t need to launch a full-scale invasion. He could order a special force strike in one of the NATO countries bordering Russia, then bring his forces home, and wait to see if Trump rallies NATO to strike Russia back. If Trump does nothing, NATO will begin to fall apart, and that’s exactly what Putin wants.
This week, Harris also rightly noted that what happens in Ukraine and Europe has implications for what happens in Asia. She said, “We also know that other would-be aggressors around the world are watching to see what happens in Ukraine. If Putin is allowed to win, they will become emboldened.” She’s right. And when she made this comment, I think she had in mind Chinese leaders Xi Jinping.
If Trump is reelected, Xi Jinping will also see if he could benefit from Trump’s appeasement impulses. Xi will be tempted to offer his own version of a “land for peace” deal – China gets to take Taiwan in return for no war between the United States and China. Trump has already hinted that sometimes you have to make bad deals. If Trump is unwilling to stop Putin from annexing the territory of a sovereign country recognized worldwide in a war that does not require American boots on the ground, why should anyone believe that he will be willing to stop Xi from annexing Taiwan—an island not recognized as an independent country by most of the world – in an effort that most likely would require direct involvement of American soldiers?
Harris’s approach to Ukraine defends American interests and values, both in Europe and beyond. It echoes Ronald Reagan’s approach: peace through strength. Trump embraces peace through appeasement. History has shown which strategy has worked best. I hope American voters will appreciate these lessons from the past.
I just submitted the following letter to JD Vance:
My father is Ukrainian, my mother is Russian and I am an American. I grew up in Kiev and Moscow, and I support your plan for Ukraine. This bizarre war makes no sense, the same people are on both sides, it is like a hypothetical war between Ohio and Pennsylvania. The politics of Zelensky's government is based on a lie of the Ukrainian nationalists: they want us, Ukrainians, to pretend that we are culturally separate from Russia, and position Ukrainians as a US proxy against Russia - to get some benefits from the West. Instead of investing in education and stimulating business - they demolish monuments to Russian writers and force the predominantly Russian-speaking population of Central, East and Southern Ukraine to pretend they all speak Ukrainian. This is like forcing everybody in California to use only Spanish in the government and education system. Ukrainian politicians like Podolyak are planning to squeeze the Russian-speaking population out of Crimea by making their life hell - with help from America! And the US politicians like Nuland and Biden support this. I hope you and Mr.Trump will come to the White House and there will be some return to normalcy.
Thank you,
Yuri Panchul