 |
|
| Anatol Țăranu | |
In the Western press, a series of experts are looking for an answer to the question: If Trump becomes U.S. president, what will happen to Ukraine? And to the whole Europe? Added to this not at all rhetorical question are the uncertainties caused by the results of the recent European Parliament elections, which predict an increase in the influence of populist, Eurosceptic and anti-immigration parties in the European Parliament. Even though pro-European parties, including pro-EU enlargement ones, won the majority of seats in the European Parliament, however, far-right parties will now have a much more pronounced say in European politics.
Double challenge
It’s known that European far-right parties show pro-Russian sympathies and for this reason they could oppose the EU’s enlargement policy, thus posing a danger to the course of European integration of Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. But even greater complications come with the case of Trump, who recently repeatedly said that, if he was elected president of the United States, he would end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours. As The Washington Post reported, his plan to pacify Ukraine involves the transfer of occupied Crimea and Donbass to Russia, as well as a slowdown in the process of NATO’s expansion to the east.
In this connection, many experts draw attention to the fact that Trump’s rhetoric carries a pronounced electoral accent and is formulated in line with the expectations of American voters. Trump is mainly concerned with American domestic policy and, in foreign policy, he seeks, first of all, benefits for the United States, regardless of the treaties and promises that the country has with its allies. The warnings about the possible abandonment by the U.S. of NATO derive from this logic, Trump arguing his position as follows: “As long as it is beneficial for us to help, we help. As soon as we understand that this is unprofitable, we will get out of this story and we don’t tie ourselves to the idea that we owe or have promised something.”
Not everything depends on the President
However, concerns about Trump’s policy towards NATO and Ukraine can be exaggerated, Americanists explain. After winning the 2016 election, Trump was already expected to make drastic changes in the relations with Ukraine, but then this did not happen. Just as, despite the full significance of the results of the US presidential election, the issue of the majority in the Congress will be no less important. In the American political system, not everything depends on the President. As an example, one can invoke the current situation, when, under a Democratic President, his party has a majority only in the upper house (Senate), while the Republicans control the House of Representatives. It was seen how the lack of total control over Congress prevented President Biden from allocating the $60.8 billion military aid package to Ukraine for a long time, with Republicans blocking the approval of the law for about six months.
Despite Russia’s violent attack on Ukraine, European citizens and, in particular, Europeans in Central and Eastern Europe feel safe today. They trust NATO as an organization led by the United States and, therefore, seen in Moscow as a formidable adversary. But, at the same time, Donald Trump’s statements regarding the U.S’s attachment to its NATO obligations motivate many politicians, diplomats and experts in Eastern Europe to wonder what will happen to their countries if Donald Trump wins the upcoming U.S. presidential election in November 2024?
But also a problem for the Kremlin
It’s true that some experts see Trump’s election victory as a potential problem for the Kremlin due to his unpredictability. An argument in favor of such a conclusion is one of Trump’s recent statements that if he had been U.S. President in 2022, he would have ordered the bombing of Moscow in response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Probably, such approaches on Trump’s part made Putin talk about Biden and the American Democrats as more preferable political dialogue partners for Russia, to the detriment of Trump and the Republicans due to the risk of the latter’s unpredictability.
In the Eastern European states, there is increased concern about the potential diminishment of Washington’s commitment to NATO, which may lead to an increase in Russia’s imperialist appetite in relation to the sovereignty of the peoples of these countries that have found their security guaranteed under the umbrella of the Euro-Atlantic Alliance. What it means to be outside NATO and what dangers you are exposed to is clearly demonstrated by the recent fate of Ukraine, Georgia and the Republic of Moldova - the first two states have directly felt the Russian military aggression, while the Republic of Moldova is on the waiting list for a Russian military invasion.
The EU is looking for new forms
Even if these three post-Soviet states are not directly defended by NATO, the functional logic of this defense alliance objectively limits Moscow’s hegemonic aspirations. But this logic risks being affected in the case of Trump as U.S. President. Washington could then become incapable of pursuing a determined foreign policy of countering Russia’s imperialist policies. In this case, the risks to the sovereignty of the Republic of Moldova and to the maintenance of the political course of integration into the European civilization space would increase exponentially.
The danger of weakening the role of the U.S. in NATO has intensified the debate on the need to transform the European peoples into a community of nations with a new qualitative degree of cooperation in security, foreign policy and defense, for which they have an unsatisfactory experience at present. By granting EU candidate status to Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, the community has become indirectly involved in the territorial conflicts between these European countries and Russia. Under these conditions, the EU states have started to look for new forms of cooperation in guaranteeing the security of its partners, including the practices when an increasing number of European states have concluded, since the beginning of 2024, bilateral security agreements with Ukraine. An EU security and defense partnership was also signed with the Republic of Moldova
Interstate treaty of brotherhood
At the same time, at the present stage there is no certainty that these security measures are sufficient to temper Moscow’s aggressive aspirations. At least, from the statements articulated by Putin, it can be deduced that Moscow will accept talks about peace in Ukraine only on the condition of annexing the territories occupied by the Russian army in this country, but also of limiting the rights of post-Soviet states to join NATO and the EU. In fact, Moscow demands the recognition by the international community of its preferences for geopolitical domination in the post-Soviet space as a condition for pacification in Ukraine.
The Trump phenomenon in U.S. politics and also the rise of the ultra-right in EU politics create a certain corridor of expectations favorable to Russia’s interests in the future negotiations on peace in Ukraine. Seen from such a perspective, the development perspective of the Republic of Moldova suffers from a pronounced vulnerability, being threatened by the maintenance of the Moldovan state in Moscow’s geopolitical sphere of influence, in the fiefdom of the Russian world. As it happened more than once in the past, the success of overcoming the war, often even being illusory, could be paid with the interests of small players like the Republic of Moldova. The categorical delimitation from the Russian world by identifying the Republic of Moldova as closely and deeply as possible with the Romanian world, with Romania is the only salvation. At the present stage, this Romanian identification could most easily take place through the signing of an interstate treaty of brotherhood and special relations between the two states from the banks of the Prut. Only in this way, at the future negotiations on peace and restoration of the European order, the interests of Romania and the Republic of Moldova will not be examined separately, but will represent a whole that will be much harder for the big geopolitical players to ignore.
IPN publishes in the Op-Ed rubric opinion pieces submitted by authors not affiliated with our editorial board. The opinions expressed in these articles do not necessarily coincide with the opinions of our editorial board.
