Michał Szułdrzyński: The Trump Paradox. His Actions Could Save NATO*
The U.S. president's actions, though sometimes brutal, lead to unexpected results.
Donald Trump has an extraordinary talent for clouding the picture and complicating matters that should be obvious. Although we know perfectly well that the war in the East could end immediately if only Vladimir Putin stopped attacking Ukraine, and if he withdrew his troops from its territory and stopped directing drones and ballistic missiles at it, the U.S. president holds a different opinion.
When asked a few days ago if the agreement he reached with Russia regarding diesel exports would not prolong the war, he stated that Volodymyr Zelenskyy had already had many opportunities to end the war but decided not to do so. Let's take a closer look at this for a moment.
Rising Fuel Prices. Trump Won't Admit He Made a Mistake
The CNN journalist's question was entirely justified. The West unanimously imposed sanctions on Russia to indirectly avoid financing its aggression against Ukraine. This is why the European Union, which was still buying raw materials from Russia before the invasion, began to turn away from it. Thanks to EU decisions, the EU countries are to completely phase out imports of raw materials from Russia, and many countries have made a complete turnaround in the last four years regarding the directions from which they import oil and gas. Yes, parties like the Alternative for Germany advocate for a return to the good old days when the German economy was fueled by cheap Russian raw materials, but time cannot be turned back. And the lack of cheap gas from Russia is not the only problem for the German economy.
Yet Trump could not admit that by paying billions to Putin for diesel fuel, he was giving him financial breathing room that could allow him to wage his war even longer. Just as he had stated earlier, the war in the Persian Gulf is not the reason for high fuel prices, but rather Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries. Therefore, he repeatedly appealed to Zelenskyy to cease attacks, and this week even announced an energy ceasefire, which, however, largely proved to be a fiction. There have also been reports that the Starlink system has stopped working for objects moving at high speeds, which could mean that the Ukrainians will not be able to use it in systems with which they conduct attacks deep into Russia.
Because Trump cannot admit his mistake, that fuel prices are skyrocketing in the U.S., and diesel fuel is close to record high levels. He cannot say it's his fault, because in February, against warnings from the army, he attacked Iran hand-in-hand with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, so the Iranians, for the first time since the Islamic Revolution, dared to block the Strait of Hormuz, through which a large part of the world's oil and gas transport passed.
NATO Defense Spending. Trump's Threats Have Been Effective
The absurdity of this situation also lies in the fact that exactly one month ago, Trump himself signed a bill, prepared by Senator Lindsey Graham, imposing punitive 100% tariffs on countries that still import gas and oil from Russia, with the possibility of increasing them to 500%. The regulations, which will formally come into effect on Sunday, Oct. 18, also included measures intended to target the shadow fleet that Russia illegally uses to export raw materials. And it is precisely because of this law, which was supported by senators from both parties, that Trump's diesel deal with Putin is being criticized.
It should be noted that Trump's actions, though sometimes brutal, lead to unexpected results. In the corridors of the Warsaw Security Forum, I spoke with an important NATO military official who pointed out that the current White House resident's earlier threats to withdraw the U.S. from NATO if other members didn't stop "free-riding" had led to a true renaissance of European defense. "President Barack Obama appealed for increased spending in a very polite manner, but it yielded no results. Today we are in a completely different place," the officer explained.
And although Europe is likely still very far from the strategic autonomy once dreamed of by the French and Germans — and how dependent we are, for example, on the air, logistical, and transport capabilities of the U.S. — was described in his autobiography by former NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg. Nevertheless, if current efforts are maintained, Europe will indeed, in some time, not rely solely on the American umbrella but will be able to defend itself.
US, Russia and Ukraine. What Cards Zelenskyy Has
The NATO doctrine of victory, just presented at the Warsaw Security Forum, is a direct consequence of these changes. Previously, after a potential attack on your alliance, you had to dig in and wait for help from allies, primarily Americans. The new defense doctrine is already different. The highest NATO commander, American Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, presented it on Monday. First, one must deter with one's potential but also with one's readiness for an immediate military response. Second, the plans assume stopping the very first strike so that the enemy cannot occupy positions on NATO territory. Third, NATO must weaken the further attack and, if necessary, strike at the rear of the aggression.
WSF participants wondered if Grynkewich was speaking on his own behalf or on behalf of his superior — Trump. And who will have more to say in the event of potential aggression against NATO: a general or a president? Or perhaps the question is poorly phrased? Could it be that Trump's anti-NATO actions have made NATO stronger than ever before?
Could the same apply to Ukraine? Although a year ago in February, Trump told Zelenskyy in the Oval Office that he had no cards, his irritation with the Ukrainian president now shows how important a tool for pressuring Russia's policy, but also Trump himself, is the ability to destroy Russian refineries. And perhaps this very possibility will sooner or later become the card that allows a fair peace to be negotiated. It would be another Trump paradox.
*Editor's note: This article is available in its original language with a paid subscription.
Donald Trump has an extraordinary talent for clouding the picture and complicating matters that should be obvious. Although we know perfectly well that the war in the East could end immediately if only Vladimir Putin stopped attacking Ukraine, and if he withdrew his troops from its territory and stopped directing drones and ballistic missiles at it, the U.S. president holds a different opinion.
When asked a few days ago if the agreement he reached with Russia regarding diesel exports would not prolong the war, he stated that Volodymyr Zelenskyy had already had many opportunities to end the war but decided not to do so. Let's take a closer look at this for a moment.
Rising Fuel Prices. Trump Won't Admit He Made a Mistake
The CNN journalist's question was entirely justified. The West unanimously imposed sanctions on Russia to indirectly avoid financing its aggression against Ukraine. This is why the European Union, which was still buying raw materials from Russia before the invasion, began to turn away from it. Thanks to EU decisions, the EU countries are to completely phase out imports of raw materials from Russia, and many countries have made a complete turnaround in the last four years regarding the directions from which they import oil and gas. Yes, parties like the Alternative for Germany advocate for a return to the good old days when the German economy was fueled by cheap Russian raw materials, but time cannot be turned back. And the lack of cheap gas from Russia is not the only problem for the German economy.
Yet Trump could not admit that by paying billions to Putin for diesel fuel, he was giving him financial breathing room that could allow him to wage his war even longer. Just as he had stated earlier, the war in the Persian Gulf is not the reason for high fuel prices, but rather Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries. Therefore, he repeatedly appealed to Zelenskyy to cease attacks, and this week even announced an energy ceasefire, which, however, largely proved to be a fiction. There have also been reports that the Starlink system has stopped working for objects moving at high speeds, which could mean that the Ukrainians will not be able to use it in systems with which they conduct attacks deep into Russia.
Because Trump cannot admit his mistake, that fuel prices are skyrocketing in the U.S., and diesel fuel is close to record high levels. He cannot say it's his fault, because in February, against warnings from the army, he attacked Iran hand-in-hand with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, so the Iranians, for the first time since the Islamic Revolution, dared to block the Strait of Hormuz, through which a large part of the world's oil and gas transport passed.
NATO Defense Spending. Trump's Threats Have Been Effective
The absurdity of this situation also lies in the fact that exactly one month ago, Trump himself signed a bill, prepared by Senator Lindsey Graham, imposing punitive 100% tariffs on countries that still import gas and oil from Russia, with the possibility of increasing them to 500%. The regulations, which will formally come into effect on Sunday, Oct. 18, also included measures intended to target the shadow fleet that Russia illegally uses to export raw materials. And it is precisely because of this law, which was supported by senators from both parties, that Trump's diesel deal with Putin is being criticized.
It should be noted that Trump's actions, though sometimes brutal, lead to unexpected results. In the corridors of the Warsaw Security Forum, I spoke with an important NATO military official who pointed out that the current White House resident's earlier threats to withdraw the U.S. from NATO if other members didn't stop "free-riding" had led to a true renaissance of European defense. "President Barack Obama appealed for increased spending in a very polite manner, but it yielded no results. Today we are in a completely different place," the officer explained.
And although Europe is likely still very far from the strategic autonomy once dreamed of by the French and Germans — and how dependent we are, for example, on the air, logistical, and transport capabilities of the U.S. — was described in his autobiography by former NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg. Nevertheless, if current efforts are maintained, Europe will indeed, in some time, not rely solely on the American umbrella but will be able to defend itself.
US, Russia and Ukraine. What Cards Zelenskyy Has
The NATO doctrine of victory, just presented at the Warsaw Security Forum, is a direct consequence of these changes. Previously, after a potential attack on your alliance, you had to dig in and wait for help from allies, primarily Americans. The new defense doctrine is already different. The highest NATO commander, American Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, presented it on Monday. First, one must deter with one's potential but also with one's readiness for an immediate military response. Second, the plans assume stopping the very first strike so that the enemy cannot occupy positions on NATO territory. Third, NATO must weaken the further attack and, if necessary, strike at the rear of the aggression.
WSF participants wondered if Grynkewich was speaking on his own behalf or on behalf of his superior — Trump. And who will have more to say in the event of potential aggression against NATO: a general or a president? Or perhaps the question is poorly phrased? Could it be that Trump's anti-NATO actions have made NATO stronger than ever before?
Could the same apply to Ukraine? Although a year ago in February, Trump told Zelenskyy in the Oval Office that he had no cards, his irritation with the Ukrainian president now shows how important a tool for pressuring Russia's policy, but also Trump himself, is the ability to destroy Russian refineries. And perhaps this very possibility will sooner or later become the card that allows a fair peace to be negotiated. It would be another Trump paradox.
*Editor's note: This article is available in its original language with a paid subscription.
Previous article![]( "The Blue Wave and the Greenback")
