Ukraine could be Trump's fall of Saigon
This chain of events dealt a devastating blow to US prestige and marked an ignominious end to its two-decade-long struggle against communist expansion in Southeast Asia. The humiliation stemmed not just from South Vietnam's state failure but from the voluntary nature of the US's surrender to communism. President Richard Nixon's desperation to end the Vietnam War resulted in him declaring 'peace with honour' in January 1973 and set the stage for North Vietnam to militarily overwhelm its depleted southern neighbour.
A half-century later, the US is at a similar inflection point. After more than three years of stoic resistance against Russian military aggression, Ukraine faces overwhelming headwinds. Russia is unevenly expanding its grip on eastern Ukraine and has structural war materiel and manpower advantages. If President Donald Trump stops US military aid to Ukraine, he risks repeating Nixon's fateful mistake and facilitating a Saigon-style fall of Kyiv.
The events that immediately followed Saigon's demise underscore the grave consequences of such an abdication. Under Pol Pot's despotic tyranny, the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia perpetrated a genocide that killed three million people. The Pathet Lao movement leveraged North Vietnamese assistance to place Laos under communist rule in December 1975. While the much-feared domino effect of communist takeovers in Southeast Asia did not transpire, the US was a spectator to totalitarian consolidation and mass murder.
If Russia can outlast US military assistance and capitalise on Europe's defensive limitations, it could eventually overthrow Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and establish a puppet regime in Kyiv. President Vladimir Putin's neo-imperial delusions suggest that he will not stop there. President Alexander Lukashenko's retirement or death could trigger a Russian invasion of Belarus. Georgia and Moldova lack ironclad security guarantees and are sufficiently vulnerable that Russia could turn partial occupations into complete ones.
Even if Russia does not test Nato's Article 5 by invading the Baltic States, the end of Ukrainian sovereignty would have harrowing spillover impacts. Given Russia's track record of levelling of major cities and gun-barrel cultural assimilation in Ukraine, the human costs of Putin's further aggression would be catastrophic.
Taking the Saigon precedent a step further, the aftershocks of Trump's abandonment of Ukraine could lead to the unravelling of US primacy. After South Vietnam's collapse, the aura of invincibility that surrounded the US after World War II fell apart. The Soviet Union transcended economic stagnation and expanded its sphere of influence in Africa. China embarked on the course of economic reform that would make it the world's second most powerful country. Japan and West Germany continued their economic booms.
A bipolar world where the US had material superiority over the Soviet Union became somewhat more multipolar. This shift also encouraged malign actors to carry out aggression with impunity. Sensing the US's Vietnam-induced crisis of confidence, Iran took fifty-three Americans hostage in November 1979 and the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan a month later. It took President Ronald Reagan's defence spending boom, the collapse of the Soviet Union and rapid-fire US triumph in the 1991 Gulf War to eviscerate these negative trendlines.
A Saigon 2.0 in Kyiv would have even more disastrous consequences for US primacy and the world order. China's appeal as an alternative superpower partner would rise precipitously. Europe could eventually reconstitute itself as an independent pole detached from US hegemony. Russia's expanded territorial reach and India's economic dynamism could further erode US dominance. In the name of America-First, Trump risks overseeing the end of American exceptionalism and birth of a post-hegemonic multipolar world order.
If Russia is rewarded for its neo-imperialism, China could follow a similar path in the Indo-Pacific region. Much like after Saigon, nuclear proliferation and proxy warfare would intensify. Trump's pledges to prevent World War III and make America safe again would ring alarmingly hollow.
The US can still pull itself back from the brink of Saigon 2.0. Trump's periodic willingness to call out Russian obstructionism provides a glimmer of hope. Now is the time for these statements to transform into the reaffirmation of US support for Ukraine and peace through strength.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SoftBank and Trump may not be enough to save Intel
Intel's (INTC) stock got a boost on Tuesday after SoftBank Group announced Monday that it would take a $2 billion stake in the struggling chipmaker. Shares of Intel climbed more than 8% in midday trading. The news followed a Bloomberg report last week that the Trump administration is considering taking up to a 10% stake in the company. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed in a CNBC interview Tuesday that the investment would involve the US government converting Intel's grants from the Biden-era CHIPS and Science Act — worth $10.9 billion — into an equity stake aimed at stabilizing the company's US manufacturing business. Bessent did not confirm the size of the stake the government would take. Intel has fallen behind in an industry it once dominated. Its manufacturing division is bleeding cash, just as its legacy computer chip segment forfeits market share to rivals Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and Qualcomm (QCOM) in the PC space. Intel is also woefully behind AMD and Nvidia (NVDA) in the AI race. The company's market capitalization of $111 billion is less than half of its value in 2021. And CEO Lip-Bu Tan has been forced to lay off 15% of the company's workforce and shelve plans to build plants in Europe. But the troubled chipmaker is the only large-scale US-based leading-edge chip manufacturer, giving it geopolitical significance as the nation looks to reshore semiconductor production. Intel's problems, however, may be too big for either SoftBank or the Trump administration to solve on their own. Intel in need of direction Deutsche Bank analyst Ross Seymore said news of the US potentially taking a stake in Intel, combined with the SoftBank investment, shows that "[Tan] is taking bold actions to solidify Intel's financial and strategic positioning during its ongoing difficult transformation process." Tan became CEO in March after Intel's board ousted former CEO Pat Gelsinger late last year. But others on Wall Street expressed skepticism that those investments would be enough to save Intel from its decline, which resulted from years of missteps. Loop Capital analyst Gary Mobley wrote in a recent note to clients that the support from SoftBank and, potentially, the US government may be "akin to a lifeline with no secure anchor at the other end," because while Intel may be "finding new buyers of its primary equity capital," that may not guarantee it can find customers for its manufacturing business. Gelsinger established Intel's third-party chip manufacturing business, otherwise known as its Foundry, in 2021 as a means of competing with rival TSMC, which produces chips for companies including Nvidia, Apple (AAPL), AMD, and others. But so far, its Foundry business has been a disappointment, struggling to secure customers. While Intel has said it reached agreements to build chips for Amazon (AMZN) and Microsoft (MSFT), the company is still its own largest manufacturing client. Intel's plan includes building chips based on newer technologies, including its 18A and upcoming 14A node design processes, part of Gelsinger's plan for five process nodes in four years. But 18A, which was initially supposed to roll out in the first half of 2025, is now slated to debut in 2026. Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon was similarly critical of Intel's cash infusion in his own investor note, writing, "We do not believe that Intel's capability gap has anything to do with money." Rasgon also questioned whether the US taking a stake in Intel would be enough to complete the company's domestic manufacturing expansions. "Intel was originally supposed to get these CHIPS Act funds for free; giving up 10% of the company for them seems worse," he wrote in a note to clients. "And if the goal is to help Intel build substantial US capacity, $10.9B really isn't enough." Moor Insights and Strategy founder and chief analyst Patrick Moorhead told Yahoo Finance that while SoftBank's $2 billion investment and the prospect of a potential US stake are good things, the company would require as much as $40 billion to build out its next-generation 14A technology. Still, getting the US government involved, at least in the short term, could prove to be a boon for the company. "My short-term answer is that the US government is a kingmaker, and they just made Intel the king, and they are going to wrap policy around that to make Intel foundry successful," Moorhead said. If the government sticks with Intel for the long haul, though, Moorhead said it could further complicate the company's development problems, leading to a lack of innovation, inefficiencies, and growing costs. "My hope is that Intel gets back on its feet, it turns itself into a reputable, leading-edge foundry, and the government sells the stake," he said. Laura Bratton is a reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow her on Bluesky @ Email her at Email Daniel Howley at dhowley@ Follow him on X/Twitter at @DanielHowley. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House aims to fast-track key Federal Reserve pick
The White House is working over the August recess to build momentum for a key Federal Reserve nominee the administration wants in place next month. Stephen Miran, whom President Donald Trump tapped to temporarily serve on the Federal Reserve's board, has been meeting with members of the Senate Banking Committee, which will need to green-light his nomination before the full Senate can vote on confirmation. Miran met Tuesday with Sen. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), a member of the panel, and had a call last week with Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott (R-S.C.). Miran is scheduled to have additional meetings with senators in the coming days, with invitations for one-on-ones extended to Republican members of the Banking panel. 'The White House has been aggressively pushing Dr. Miran's nomination to the Federal Reserve Board, setting the stage for his quick confirmation when the Senate returns in September,' said a White House official Tuesday. 'With the President's strong backing, there's clear momentum to get this done.' Underscoring how big of a priority it has become for the Trump administration to seat Miran quickly, Banks said in a statement he returned to Washington Tuesday to meet with him, instead of waiting until after the Senate's current weekslong break. 'It's so important that he is confirmed before the Federal Reserve's September meeting,' said Banks. Installing Miran by this time would represent a lightning-fast confirmation process for the Senate, which is in recess until Sept. 2. Banks added that Miran has 'done a great job as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to advance President Trump's pro-working class agenda and I look forward to voting for his confirmation ASAP.' Miran, who currently serves as Trump's chief economist, was tapped to temporarily fill the vacancy created on the bank's rate-setting committee by the resignation of Gov. Adriana Kugler. If confirmed, he would hold the seat until Kugler's term expires on Jan. 31, 2026. He'll be coming up for consideration at a time when multiple Senate Republicans have publicly tried to sway Trump against firing Fed Chair Jerome Powell, warning that any perception of meddling in the agency's independence would have severe consequences for the market. Trump, who has relentlessly criticized Powell and surveyed a group of Republicans last month on whether he should remove him, has nevertheless said repeatedly that he doesn't intend to fire the Fed chief, whose leadership term ends in May. Still, Miran's confirmation would give Trump a close political ally at the central bank, which is designed to be insulated from short-term political pressure — and questions about Miran's links to Trump are all but guaranteed to come up as the Senate debates the nomination. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Banking Committee, vowed to have 'tough questions' for Miran 'about whether he'd serve the American people as an independent voice at the Fed or merely serve Donald Trump.' Yet as long as Republicans on the panel stick together, they would be able to advance Miran's nomination over opposition from Democrats. Republicans can lose three of their own members on the floor and still let Vice President JD Vance break a tie. Miran is likely preparing for the line of inquiry. Though he haspreviously called for overhauling the structure of the Federal Reserve, he told CNBC in an interview earlier this month that "I've always been clear that the independence of the Fed is of paramount importance.' Victoria Guida contributed to this report.


The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump compliments Sean Hannity, Ainsley Earhardt relationship live on-air
President Trump gave a shout-out on Tuesday to Fox News hosts Sean Hannity and Ainsley Earhardt, pointing out their romantic relationship, during an interview on the channel's morning show, 'Fox and Friends.' Speaking about what the president characterized as a safer Washington, D.C., since his efforts to crack down on crime in the district earlier this month, Trump suggested Hannity and Earhardt would now be more comfortable going out to dinner when they visit the nation's capital. 'There's a guy named Sean Hannity. He might take a very lovely young lady that he knows very, very well to dinner in Washington and they don't have to … she's sitting right next to you by the way … I don't want to get him in trouble, so I better explain exactly,' Trump said. 'That's the greatest relationship. Those are two great people.' Trump said of Hannity and Earhardt, 'When they go out, I don't want to see them get mugged.' 'They can hold hands, they can walk down the street, they're both superstars,' the president joked. Hannity and Earhardt, two of Fox's longest-serving hosts, announced their engagement last year. A prime-time anchor and personal friend of the president, Hannity was granted the first exclusive interview Trump gave after his high-stakes meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska last week.