Skip to main content

If Trump wants Ukraine's minerals, he should offer security

Yesterday's meeting with Zelensky at the White House was hard to watch. It was tense, not just because the situation is extremely delicate, but because people were shouting in a rare display of complete lack of control.

For a man who preaches diplomacy, JD Vance showed he has none. When asked how you can deal diplomatically with a dictator like Putin, who has violated diplomatic agreements in the past, and who has, you know, invaded Ukraine, Vance started raising his voice and shifted the conversation from facts to ad personam attacks, asking Zelensky why he hasn't "said 'thank you' once" since coming into the meeting, and blaming him for asking a completely legitimate question the vice president simply didn't have an answer to.

We all understand the war must end, as it cannot go on forever. We also understand that Ukraine cannot win against Russia without support from the West. What we need to figure out is a solution where, even if we let Russia keep the territories it is occupying (something that isn't ideal, but might end up being inevitable, especially with this US administration), a deal is signed that provides the security Ukraine needs to prosper without the fear that Putin will eventually come for another piece of its country.

And the only way you do that, dear Mr Vance and Mr Trump, is by providing real security. A piece of paper that says the fighting can stop will do nothing to deter Putin from coming back.

There's more. Ukraine now has one card to play. Trump said yesterday that "without us, you don't have any cards". But he's wrong. Ukraine has one card only and Zelensky knows its worth: the US wants Ukraine's minerals, and Trump has shown us just how desperate he is for them. He's repeatedly complained about how the US has "gas and oil" but no rare earths, and he needs them if the US is to keep up in its race against China (a side note: if you're going into a meeting with someone who has what you want, you shouldn't look like a desperate buyer, or the price will increase; you'd think this was obvious to a guy who wrote a book about the "art of the deal", but once again we are reminded of how Trump isn't just an incapable politician, he's also an incapable businessman).
And so Ukraine must push as much as it can for security guarantees by the US. The UK and France are ready to put boots on the ground to defend Ukraine in case of future attacks, but the US too must commit to its security. Unless the US commits to it, I'm afraid another invasion of Ukraine might be inevitable: Putin will take some years to rebuild its army and prepare to come back for more. If Trump wants to "dig dig dig" he should be ready to "fight fight fight".
Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

The UK needs more, not less, austerity

  First of all let me say that this is a hill I’m willing to die on. In fact, when I hit “publish” and Starmer’s thought police inevitably come knocking on my door, I will proudly tell them that I regret none of what I’m about to write. My goal with this article is to divide my readers into two groups: the ones who love austerity (most of you will fall into this category by the time I’m done brainwashing you) and the ones who never have, and never will, understand the intricacies of primary school maths. Let’s start with a definition: what is austerity? Austerity is a broad term used to refer to policies that reduce the deficit/debt of a country, either via spending cuts, increased taxation, or both. The objective is to drive the deficit (and ultimately the debt) down, something that can hardly be argued is a bad thing to do, especially in countries that face the challenges of a rapidly ageing population. Quick note for everyone: the deficit is the difference between what the state...
Read more

Introduction

Each one of us has a set of guiding principles that shape our thought. These may be principles we have blindly inherited from our family, surroundings, or cultural exposure, or they may be ideas we have spent countless hours actively thinking about and debating, maybe even changing our mind a few times along the way before ultimately settling on a set of core principles we felt comfortable with. Regardless of where your principles come from, or how you came to holding them dear, I believe that the vast majority of us have at least some of these in common, and that it is very rare for someone to have a completely unoverlapping set of core beliefs with the rest of the population. Extremes do exist, of course, but I (maybe naively) believe that most people are good-natured, and that at least on the theoretical plane common ground can be found with almost anyone. Before we get to my core beliefs, I should say three things. The first is that core principles can translate differently into ac...
Read more

Italy’s love for the big state is a cultural remnant of fascism

 Today we are going to make Italians mad. And no, we will not be breaking spaghetti – something that my Italian family has been doing for generations, no, centuries, before TikTok videos started circulating claiming that Italians don’t break spaghetti. We do, in fact, break our spaghetti, just like any sane person with a functioning brain would do when the spaghetti clearly doesn't fit into the pot. I actually used to sometimes not break my spaghetti, but now I always do so out of spite: it gives me both physical and emotional pleasure to know that the Italian gods are frowning upon my heartless breaking of spaghetti. As much as I would love to talk about how only people living in a hopeless country could get brutally angry about other people’s freedom to break spaghetti, and how this relates to Italy still being a fundamentally fascist-loving country at heart, the topic I suggest for today is the following: the link between Italians loving the big state and Italy having experienc...
Read more