Today Joe Biden signs the law already voted in Congress, which refinances American aid to three countries: Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan. The most immediately needy is Ukraine, in serious difficulty in the face of the Russian advance and short of everything: ammunition, spare parts, weapons of all kinds. This American support is months latebecause he was held hostage in Congress by resistance from the Republican Party.
Why did these resistances suddenly disappear? Because the Speaker of the House, i.e. the president of the Chamber Mike Johnson, Republicandid he unblock the aid package and accept a compromise with the Democrats?
THE backstory I am of this bipartisan clarification importantalso because they provide some element to predict which one America will make foreign policy after November 5thshould Donald Trump win.
I summarize the first explanation for Johnson’s turning point as follows: the establishment still exists. The Speaker of the House was subjected to a incessant siege by the military leaders and the secret services. From the heads of the Pentagon to the CIA to other intelligence agencies, there has been systematic information work, persuasion and pressure towards him: they explained to him how and why that support should be provided to Ukraine, what would happen in the absence of that aid, what the disastrous consequences of a final victory for Putin on the security of the United States itself, as well as of all European allies.
The military, intelligence and foreign policy establishment is mostly bipartisan or independent. It has strong and historical connections with the Republican basewhere are recruitment basins traditions of the armed forces. In short, Johnson found himself faced with an imposing barrage, he was given an arsenal of arguments in favor of aid to Ukraine, which convinced him. Faced with such effective pressure, Johnson even took into account the possibility of being disheartened by his isolationist parliamentarians and agreed to pass the law with a decisive contribution from the Democrats.
And the Trump problem? The former president had hindered aid to Ukraine by riding the isolationist current of public opinion. Even when he was in the White House – that is, before the Russian invasion of 2022 – he had expressed distrust and reservations towards the Ukrainian cause. But if Trump had wanted to openly hinder Johnson, he could have fomented a much broader revolt among his loyalists in the House than what occurred, up until the resignation of the Speaker of the House, yesterday, however, the former president also defended him calling him “a good person who is doing his utmost” and, indeed, pointing the finger at Europe which according to Trump “must do more for Ukraine”.
Johnson had the foresight to visit the former president at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, and got some sort of tacit neutrality on the measure to be voted on in the House. So with the elections approaching Trump appears to have become less hostile to Kiev.
Various explanations have leaked to the American media from the former president’s entourage. On the one hand too Trump has come under pressure from the military establishment – to whom he has always paid respect and esteem – who illustrated to him the damage of a Russian victory. The military and intelligence establishment also explained to him that, if Ukraine resists, it will be Trump’s turn (in the event of re-election on November 5) to act as mediator between Putin and Zelensky for a ceasefire or even a peace agreement. This flatters Trump, offers him the possibility of a “historical” roleand at the same time makes a prolongation of Ukrainian resistance indispensable.
Finally, someone raised the possibility to Trump that i generous and expensive American aid to Kiev may in the future turn into loans. Despite the devastation of war, Ukraine remains a country rich in natural resourcesonce the conflict has ended and reconstruction has begun, it could repay those who supported it. A second Trump in the White House could therefore move from the practice of donations to that of loans, rewarding his electoral base which expects coherence with the slogan America First: American interests come first.
Trump would even have used the services of an old friend-rival of his, Republican Senator Lindsey Grahamwho on a recent visit to Kiev put the idea of loans to Zelensky and found him in agreement.
All this leads to a provisional conclusion: they have begun the big maneuvers among mainstream Republicans to ensure that a Trump II is not excessively destabilizing to the world order, the security of the West, the protection of allies. At the same time a Trump II unlike Biden he would offer a quick opening of negotiations to Putin.
These are elements to keep an eye on, which have already attracted attention in all the capitals of the world, between friendly and enemy governments trying to carry out simulations on post-November 5 scenarios.
April 23, 2024
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
