Successful success. Why Biden will mention Ukraine less

Joe Biden's headquarters, apparently, for the sake of electoral success, will shift the focus from Ukraine to domestic issues, пишет Vladyslav Girman, an observer of the international policy department.

US President Joe Biden

In the near future, the presence of the Ukrainian theme in the rhetoric of the White House and Joe Biden himself may significantly decrease. At least, the corresponding forecast is contained in the Politico article by Ela Stokols, Jonathan Lemeyer and Alexander Ward.

With reference to sources in the Biden administration, as well as to political advisers and experts of authoritative American think tanks, journalists write that after finally approving aid to Ukraine in the amount of $61 billion, which was a serious foreign policy victory for him, Biden will gradually begin to raise the topic less often further support of Ukraine during the dialogue with voters.

Instead, the team of the pre-election headquarters will mobilize the electorate on topics closer to them - economic, social, internal political, environmental, etc.

According to the publication, this does not mean that Ukraine will disappear from the agenda, because the issue of our support by allies, including the United States, meets both the national interests of the United States and the general security of the transatlantic community.

In addition, they say, we will be an argument in the framework of a general media campaign exposing Donald Trump as an incoherent, immature personality-phenomenon, completely opposite to democratic values. Also vulnerable to authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping.

Well If the estimates and forecasts given in the Politico article are true, the mention of the Russian Federation's war against Ukraine during the US election campaign by the Democrats may decrease. And you have to be ready for this, because certain de-actualization on the front pages is not in the interests of Ukraine.

And it is not excluded that help was agreed to the extent that would allow us to hold out until the results of the elections in the United States. And there, Washington will look at the situation. Moreover, this analysis of the situation may be affected by the change of the owner of the Oval Office.

On the other hand, yes - the recent actions of the allies, not only the USA, but also Great Britain, France and NATO as a whole - testify that we are not left to our fate.

However, one should take into account the possibility that certain circles of the American establishment - "doves of peace" and supporters of the search for ways to at least partially stabilize relations with Russia - may ask for certain hopes for radical changes even before the elections in the USA, namely for possible negotiations between Ukraine and Russia .

And such opinions are, of course, present in the American expert environment.

In this context, Mark Hanna's column for CNN, a senior researcher at the non-profit Institute of Global Affairs Eurasia Group, is very symptomatic, in which he promotes a narrative about the flip side of further support, namely that continued support of Ukraine and Israel can hinder the achievement of peace through negotiations. In addition, according to Hanna, the United States, through assistance to Ukraine, gained leverage over us, including a possible agreement to relevant negotiations with Moscow.

However, we note that hypothetical negotiations should be approached with strong cards in one's pocket, which partially compensate for the critical situation at the front, which has developed due to a long arms shortage.

Russia, for example, is now in a hurry to achieve great success in the Donbass, traditionally not considering the loss of hp. And plans for an attack on Kharkov and Sumy are in full swing, which was confirmed in an interview with The Times by the commander of the Ground Forces of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Lieutenant General Alexander Pavlyuk, who, at the same time, noted: "...we don't know how serious these plans are and whether they are capable to implement them with the forces available."

What about Ukraine? What strong cards do we have?

First, one of them may be the truly global support of the Ukrainian "peace formula" by dozens of countries at the Peace Summit in Burgenstock, Switzerland, which will be held on June 15-16.

Secondly, we remember the jubilee NATO summit on July 6-7 in Washington, at which Ukraine's chances of receiving an invitation to the Alliance are slim. However, the allies could provide some more or less significant alternative in the form of security guarantees, acceptance of Jens Stoltenberg's initiative for 100 billion aid for a period of 5 years, and increased supplies of weapons and equipment.

Although this may not be enough as a convincing argument for a response to the aggression of the Russian Federation. Probably, that is why the head of the Foreign Ministry of Great Britain, David Cameron, during his visit to Kyiv, stated that Ukraine has the right to strike the territory of the Russian Federation with British weapons. It is clear that we are talking, in particular, about long-range Storm Shadow missiles, which were provided in the last record aid package of 500 billion pounds sterling, and which, together with the American ATACMS, are already very, very "disturbing" the invaders.

Read on Newsky "Race with Putin. Why Blinken went to China" and look at Boring Pence YouTube channel.

To always be up to date, subscribe to TG channel Newsky. We also recommend the current discussion of friends of Ukraine in North America Rashkin Report YouTube channel.