What a Trump-Vance White House could mean for Ukraine, Israel

In November, Americans will decide who will lead the United States for the next four years. The decision will have a huge impact on the world stage, including current and potential wars like Ukraine , Gaza and even the Indo-Pacific .

"It is important to remember that, you know, there are serious, destructive forces out there," David Siegel, the president of ELNET-US, said. "The British are calling it the ‘Quartet of Death.’ So that's Russia, China , Iran and North Korea . The ‘Quartet of Death.’ And that's a strategic point of view that we shouldn't forget. The United States will be secure if other parts of the world are secure. And if we do it in a smart way, and do it together, that's probably the best way on the road ahead."

ELNET-US is the leading Israeli advocacy group in Europe, Israel and the United States. Siegel said right now, Israel is in a second war for its independence, essentially fighting Iran and its proxies on multiple fronts. It’s in the interests of the United States to keep Iran from growing too powerful. So, whether it’s President Joe Biden or former President Donald Trump who comes out on top in November, Siegel said he expects the relationship between the U.S. and Israel to remain strong.

"The stronger Israel is, the stronger we get the Europeans to become," Siegel said. "And the stronger that relationship is, it will enable the United States to have the tools that it needs to operate in other theaters in a world, you know, say the Far East. So, the Trump-Vance approach to the world is not dissimilar than the approach that we see, because the world is changing. The United States is not the sole policeman anymore."

For others, the decision is more binary. Mark Temnycky is a non-resident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center . His grandparents came to the United States from Ukraine in the 1950s, but he still has family there. He said in his mind, and in the minds of most of the Ukrainians he talks to, a Trump-Vance administration is not the ideal outcome in November.

Temnycky said that assessment is based on prior events. Such as in 2016, when then-candidate Trump was running against Hillary Clinton. Trump accused Ukraine of meddling in the election, but that was something the FBI and Justice Department said Russia actually did.

"Then, of course, there was the infamous scandal in 2019-2020 where President Zelenskyy and President Trump spoke together and President Trump withheld aid and defensive systems to Ukraine," Temnycky said. "In exchange, [Trump] wanted information about the Biden family. And more recently, when he has been talking about President Putin, he has said that President Putin is a ‘strong leader,’ and that he wants to end the war as quickly as possible."

Temnycky said ending the war in 24 hours, as Trump proposed, would mean leaving large swaths of eastern and southern Ukraine. This would leave millions of people under the control of a Russian regime that currently stands accused of thousands of war crimes against the Ukrainian people.

"Based on his previous track record in his first term as president, I think that things should be taken as [Trump] says; at face value," Temnycky said. "Similarly, Sen. Vance has been an opponent of Ukraine. He had said that he's not interested or cares about what happens in Ukraine. In addition, he has voted against Ukraine aid on several occasions when Congress has voted on assistance efforts."

Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, is on the record saying before and after the war started that he doesn’t really care what happens in Ukraine. He told Steve Bannon in March 2022 he was more concerned about his young child interacting with a child sex trafficker.

Vance is one of the most vocal critics in Congress of aid to Ukraine. In an April op-ed in the New York Times, Vance said the United States fundamentally can’t produce all the weaponry Ukraine would need to win the war.

But, as vice president, Vance wouldn’t necessarily be making the final decisions on U.S. aid to Ukraine. As Siegel is quick to point out, there are mechanisms in place for Congress to send aid to Ukraine, regardless of who is president.

"I don't think these choices are binary," Siegel said. "There are positives and negatives in every administration. Pros and cons. You know, foreign policy is very complicated."

If America decides a Trump-Vance White House is what’s best for the country, and if that means less U.S. aid to Ukraine, Siegel said that could create other opportunities for American allies to work together more directly. That could involve the support and direction of the United States, but not relying on the Americans for the heavy lifting. For example, an alliance on air defense using Israeli weapons to protect more European countries.

"To have those systems integrated between Europe, Israel and that alliance will enable the United States to have more flexibility, not to cold turkey withdrawal from Europe," Siegel said. "I don't think anyone is really talking about that. But to gradually encourage, you know, allies to take more on, more burden on themselves. So that the United States has more wherewithal to focus on other areas of tension, conflict, and threats such as the Far East and Taiwan. That's a responsible, measured, balanced strategy that we very much believe in and, we think that this is what, the Trump folks are talking about."

Siegel said a Trump-Vance White House doesn’t necessarily mean Ukraine would fall or lose the war, but it would mean European nations allied with the U.S. should be ready to bear more of the burden to keep the international rules-based order afloat.

The post What a Trump-Vance White House could mean for Ukraine, Israel appeared first on Straight Arrow News .