Trump's Pivot to Russia
Who Will Lead Europe When Uncle Sam Goes Home?
In March of 2024, I wrote Plan B for Ukraine speculating on how Europe might act after it becomes clear that Biden’s ‘Plan A’ to bleed Russia dry with sanctions has failed to prevent Russia from defeating Ukraine. I wrote that the European governments supporting Ukraine would then be replaced in a wave of anti-war populism:
The Euro elites are slowly but inevitably loosing political power to Euro-sceptic populist parties who are opposed to continued war. This is similar to the US where the populist right is gaining, and the internationalists are losing power to conservative nationalists.
I wrote that after coming to terms with a Russian military victory, the US would fall back to a “Plan B” which would preserve the core goals of Plan A but cloak it in a new form:
But it is important to understand that Plan B is not a plan to rescue Ukraine. Plan B, just like Plan A will implement historical American policy which is intended to weaken Europe (namely Germany) and maintain US hegemony. Specifically Plan B posits that if Ukraine is "lost" it is better for the US if Europe is engaged in a futile struggle over control of Ukrainian territory than the alternative, a real peace and accommodation between Europe and Russia. Therefor Plan B is to encourage Europeans to fight Russia on the territory of Ukraine.
In March of 2024, I had not anticipated the return to power of President Donald Trump. How did my predictions hold up 11 months later under a new President? Is it true that “Trump changes everything”? And does Trump really want to end the conflict, or just transfer it to the Europeans, as I had predicted in March 2024?
I proposed in Plan B for Ukraine that the US real aim is to preserve US hegemony in Europe and that defending Ukraine was never a policy as such, but rather an instrumentality in service of other long-term US policies. Those policies include dominating Germany and preventing the German led EU from becoming fully integrated with Russia’s resource rich economy.
At the time of this writing in February 2025, President Trump is negotiating an end to US military involvement in Ukraine. President Trump wants to re-integrate Russia into a European security architecture that prevents Ukraine from disappearing entirely, while preventing the too-tight embrace of the Russian and German economies. Russia will agree to the independence and neutrality of Ukraine but will insist on both territorial concessions and Western economic integration. The US will have to choose how much and what mix of these it will offer Russia.
European leaders need a little time to internalize their political master’s will. Trump is going to force Europe to drink the castor oil of defeat in Ukraine, and they will do so just like they followed US policy for NATO expansion after 2008 against their own wishes. Remember, that before 2008 France and Germany were dead set against NATO expansion. There has been some superficial resistance because America’s European vassals are temporarily disorientated by Trump’s rapid policy shifts, but they will not challenge their hegemon. As usual, France will pretend to resist, but it will just be performative - a show of Gallic pride.
In return for peace, Russia will demand specific territorial concessions and improved trade relations, including removal of sanctions and improved access to EU markets. Would the US prefer giving Ukrainian territory to Russia over offering Russia generous sanctions relief? I think large territorial changes are on the menu. I’ll speculate a little on what kind of bargain the US might pursue with Russia. I expect Trump to push for unexpected Ukrainian territorial concessions to Russia. These concessions would have the effect of increasing Germany’s military insecurity and therefore military spending. Importantly, increasing European military insecurity serves US hegemonic interests. Trump values hegemony positively as long as it is cheap.
During negotiations President Trump would face pressure from Russia and Germany to allow Russian oil and gas back into Germany. By offering Russia more of Ukrainian lands, Trump can offset the economic benefit to Germany. Trump will agree to peaceful post-war economic relations between Germany and Russia, but Germany will have to “pay” with geopolitical insecurity. I expect that as part of post-war agreements the EU states will continue to accept some US LNG in return for having the freedom to use Russian pipeline gas. Is this scenario credible? Does resolving the Ukraine war in this way serve long-term US hegemonic interests? I think there are problems.
The UK, France, and the smaller EU countries will be very uncomfortable with a possible Russo-German economic block inside Europe. If the USA forces Ukraine to conclude peace and the post-war result is a Russo-German economic conglomeration, how long would US hegemony in Europe last? The balance of economic power would inexorably shift against the US and toward a Europe dominated by a Russo-German condominium.
The real danger in this scenario is that the turmoil produced by the rest of Europe resisting Russo-German domination might see Europe become a source of violent instability such as in the 1930s.
Therefore, Trump may be embarking on an impossible task: How to allow Germany to pursue an economic destiny with Russia that may inexorably lead to the political destabilization of Europe and the exit of American hegemony over the continent.
This may be compatible with Trump’s vision to restructure American government and foreign relations. Trump’s America may be in a process of geopolitical retrenchment, a retreat into Fortress North America. However, when Uncle Sam goes home will Europe still be our friend? With these possibilities in mind, Trump’s negotiators and advisors may conclude that keeping the Ukraine war on perpetual simmer may be the safest course of action for the United States. Trump, who in my opinion, is truly an anti-war idealist, may resist such realpolitik arguments.