Ukraine risks becoming to Trump what Afghanistan was to Biden
On the face of it, the US involvement in Ukraine bears little similarity to the 20-year Afghanistan war, not least because there are no American boots on the ground in Europe.
Yet there are similarities for President Donald Trump: resolving the conflict is proving no easy task, and he risks getting shackled with responsibility — and potentially blame — the longer it goes on.
That's a feeling that has gained more credence as Trump wrestles with how to respond to President Vladimir Putin as he's stepped up deadly strikes against Ukraine. Trump has been foiled in his pledge to make peace quickly, forcing him to decide whether to get more involved or keep his distance.Getting sucked into the conflict more deeply would provoke the ire of Trump's Make America Great Again base. But allowing Russia to make steady gains, while holding off on additional aid, might make him look weak and draw accusations that he didn't do enough to stop Putin.'Trump's been in charge of US policy for almost six months and the war continues, and now it's on Trump,' said John Herbst, a former US ambassador to Ukraine, who's now with the Atlantic Council. 'He understands that he could get nailed big time if Putin wins on his watch.'
The Afghanistan comparison may seem far-fetched given the fundamentally different nature of the two conflicts. At its high point, the US had 100,000 troops in Afghanistan and nearly 2,500 American military personnel died over the course of the 20-year war. Ultimately the US was unable to stop the Taliban and President Joe Biden got blamed for a US withdrawal — one that Trump laid the groundwork for in his first term.The US has no troops on the ground in Ukraine, limiting itself to the flow of weapons and materiel. The conflict is in its fourth year and few analysts predict a massive collapse of the Ukrainian government or say Russia would be able to take over the whole country.Even so, Trump has strenuously sought to distance himself from it, repeatedly saying the war never would have happened on his watch and suggesting he's not responsible for the outcome. 'It wasn't my war — it was Biden's war,' he said at a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte earlier this month. 'It's not my war. I'm trying to get you out of it.'The Afghanistan comparison has slowly filtered into the conversation. Months before Trump won reelection in November, Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen, a senior fellow at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, warned Republicans about the dangers of blocking more aid to Ukraine.'For Republicans, a time for choosing has arrived: Unless you want to be blamed for the fall of Kyiv the way Biden is blamed for the fall of Kabul, send military aid to Ukraine,' he wrote.Almost a year later, this past February, Council on Foreign Relations President Michael Froman made the point just as sharply, warning that a hasty deal would be a 'grave error' that would also undercut Trump's desire to be seen as a peacemaker. 'If you thought the optics of the Taliban parading American Humvees through Kabul looked bad, imagine the Russians driving a convoy of Abrams tanks through Kharkiv,' Froman wrote.Read More: Ukraine Proposes Russia Meeting, Kremlin Hedges on Putin-TrumpLast week, Trump announced a plan to get billions of dollars of US weapons to Kyiv, reversing an earlier pause in supplies, and gave Putin 50 days to agree to a ceasefire or face new sanctions — something allies have been urging for months.'President Trump wants to stop the killing, which is why he is selling American-made weapons to NATO members and threatening Putin with biting tariffs and sanctions if he does not agree to a ceasefire,' White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said. The challenge for Trump is that some of his most die-hard MAGA supporters, including ally Steve Bannon, argue exactly the opposite — that deeper US involvement will be Trump's undoing. 'If President Trump sells them offensive weapons that can strike deep inside of Russia, I don't see how you avoid it becoming Trump's war,' Bannon said in an interview. 'The media, the Ukrainians, the Russians and the Neocons would all say it's Trump's war.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
5 minutes ago
- India.com
Donald Trump closes 'biggest ever' trade deal with European Union; to impose tariff of..., sell weapons to...
President Donald Trump shakes hands with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Turnberry, Scotland, on July Delhi: A big and historic trade agreement has been announced by the US President Donald Trump between the USA and the European Union (EU). Trump has described this agreement as the 'biggest trade agreement ever', which will prove beneficial for both sides. What did Trump say about tariff on EU? Trump said on this occasion that under this agreement, the markets of all countries will be opened, and 15 percent tariffs will be imposed on the European Union in all areas. Along with this, the EU will also increase the purchase of military equipment from America. In the energy sector too, the European Union will buy energy worth about $ 150 billion from America, which will strengthen the economic cooperation of both sides. What does the deal require EU to do? Apart from this, the European Union will invest $ 600 billion in America, which will also strengthen the US economy. Under this deal, the existing duty system already applicable on steel and aluminium will continue. A new announcement will be made under section 232 within the next two weeks regarding the chips or semiconductor sector, which will be a big initiative for this industry. How did EU president describe the deal? European Union President Ursula von der Leyen described the agreement as bringing stability and said that it will establish better trade relations between the two sides. Also, she said that new policies related to the chips sector will come out soon. This trade agreement is considered an important step to reshape economic relations at the global level and promote trade cooperation. Both sides hope that this will take economic growth and stability to new heights. This deal will not only strengthen US-Europe relations but will also open the door to new opportunities in global trade.
Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
Harvard Nemesis Wants Trump's College Crusade to Reach Every Campus
Christopher Rufo, the conservative activist who has been influential in the White House's efforts to reshape higher education, now wants to expand the campaign well beyond the elite schools that have borne the brunt of the pressure. Rufo says the Education Department is considering a proposal that would ensure all US universities that receive federal funding — the vast majority — adopt many of the same conditions that Columbia University agreed to in a deal this week. He sees the plan, which he first outlined with the Manhattan Institute this month, as a way to swiftly broaden President Donald Trump's higher-education agenda. 'I know for a fact that it circulated through the White House and through the Department of Education,' Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, said in an interview in Gig Harbor, Washington, where he lives and works. The Trump administration has used federal funding as leverage to press schools to align with its priorities, from battling campus antisemitism to reassessing diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. This week, the White House finalized a $221 million agreement with Columbia that imposes new conditions tied to these issues, the first such deal with an Ivy League school. Harvard, a primary target, is fighting the administration's efforts in court even as it negotiates a possible settlement. Talks are underway with Cornell University, Northwestern and Brown to reinstate previously frozen funds, while institutions such as Duke and Johns Hopkins are facing mounting pressure as grant suspensions threaten to disrupt research programs and international student pipelines. Under Rufo's proposal, schools would be subject to demands including purging their institutions of diversity initiatives or other programs focused on specific minority groups; harsh and swift disciplinary measures for student protesters; the publicization of demographic data in admissions decisions; and hiring conservative faculty. The terms would be baked into universities' contracts with federal agencies for research funding — and, if taken a step further, could be incorporated into the powerful accreditation system that determines colleges' eligibility to receive federal financial aid. 'Columbia has its unique issues, Harvard has its own unique issues. But after you go through the list of the next six or seven universities, there has to be a point where there's a general, blanket policy,' said Rufo, 40. 'The particular negotiations, in that sense, are just the opening bid.' Secretary of Education Linda McMahon appeared to endorse the proposal last week when she congratulated Rufo in a post on X and called the plan 'a compelling roadmap to restore integrity and rigor to the American academy.' When reached for comment, an Education Department spokesperson referred Bloomberg to McMahon's post and said there was no mention of implementation plans. But Rufo said he is optimistic that the statement will turn into policy sometime in the next few months. 'This set of principles is a fairly reasonable compromise,' Rufo said. 'I think the president should just impose it as a condition.' The efforts are already spreading piecemeal to an increasingly broad swath of higher education. On Wednesday, the Education Department announced civil rights investigations into scholarship programs at five colleges, including the University of Michigan, the University of Miami and the University of Nebraska Omaha. A series of federal investigations at George Mason University, a regional public college in Virginia, seem aimed at forcing out president Gregory Washington over his past support for DEI initiatives — a move that successfully led to University of Virginia president Jim Ryan's resignation last month. But while they've been indirectly affected by the chaos, most of the country's patchwork of 4,000 colleges and universities have escaped direct federal threats. Robert Kelchen, a professor of educational leadership and policy at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, said the administration is clearly laying the groundwork for a more wide-ranging attack on higher education. 'I think they're trying to move in that direction, especially on things like DEI,' he said. 'It's clear the administration is using every lever they can think of.' Rufo isn't a White House adviser or a federal employee, but he has strong influence among conservative education reformers, including many currently working for the Trump administration. He rose to prominence crusading against DEI programs and played an instrumental role in Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' education agenda in 2023. His profile rose higher still after he spearheaded a public campaign to oust former Harvard president Claudine Gay over plagiarism allegations — one of the initial seismic reverberations of the campaign to change higher education. One of Rufo's main proposals is tied to accreditors, historically powerful but until recently largely uncontroversial entities that focus on ensuring educational quality and financial health. They also are responsible for determining if institutions are eligible for federal student aid. Rufo said the White House should 'turn the screws' on accreditors and then use them as a proxy for reform. 'We want to say that every accreditor needs to have these minimum principles and enforce them at universities,' he said. Trump has called accreditation his 'secret weapon,' and in April he issued an executive order calling for reform. He threatened to strip federal recognition from accreditors 'engaging in unlawful discrimination in violation of federal law.' For Rufo, the stakes of that order are clear: Accreditors must enforce the conservative view of antidiscrimination law, including by ensuring colleges aren't engaging in DEI initiatives. Almost every accreditor has already eliminated language in their standards around diversity and inclusion, but Rufo said they should go a step further and adopt some version of the standards laid out in his proposal. 'The goal is to extend all of this basically to federal financial aid,' Kelchen said. 'The administration so far has not gone after that, maybe because it could be seen as political overreach. But they can work through the accreditors to do that.' If that happens, Rufo said it would 'shift the whole university sector on a new course.' 'That's my goal: To change the culture of the institutions as a whole,' he said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hindustan Times
9 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Indian envoy to UK responds to criticism over purchase of Russian oil: 'Can't switch off its economy'
Over the past month, India, along with China and Brazil, has been at the centre of criticism from the West, mainly the US, for its purchase of Russian oil.(PTI) As the war in Ukraine rages on, several Western countries, led by the United States, have called out India and other nations for their purchase of Russian oil and other trade practices. In response to this criticism, Indian high commissioner to the UK said a country 'can't just switch off its economy'. Speaking to UK-based Times Radio last week, the Indian envoy Vikram K Doraiswami stated that while the West is criticising India for buying Russian oil, many European countries "continue to buy rare earth mineral from the same countries it does not want India to buy from." "Europe continues to buy rare earths from the same country they don't want India to buy oil from. You don't think that's a little odd?" he asked the journalist. The envoy further explained that India and Russia's "energy relationship" only started after New Delhi was displaced from other sources. "So we've been displaced out of the energy market largely, and the costs have gone up. We are the third-largest consumer of energy in the world. We import over 80% of our product. What would you have us do? Switch off our economy," said Doraiswami. "We also see around us relationships that other countries maintain for their own convenience with countries that are a source of difficulty for us. Do we ask you to come up with a little test of loyalty?" he said, adding that many Western nations did not sell India weapons, but would sell them to neighbouring countries, which would then use the same weapons to attack India. India slammed for close ties with Russia Over the past month, India, along with China and Brazil, has been at the centre of criticism from the West, mainly the US, for its purchase of Russian oil. US president Donald Trump has warned India and other BRICS nations of additional tariffs if the countries did not stop its trade with Russia. A similar warning was echoed by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who warned of 100 percent tariffs against India, China and Brazil if they did not pressure Russia to arrive at a ceasefire deal with Ukraine in 50 days. US senator and Trump aide Lindsey Graham has also been a vocal critic of India's ties with Russia and warned New Delhi, China and others of 'stern tariffs' from Trump. 'Trump is going to impose tariffs on people that buy Russian oil: China, India, and Brazil. Those three countries buy about 80 per cent of cheap Russian oil, and that's what keeps (Vladimir) Putin's war machine going. So, President Trump is going to put a 100 per cent tariff on all those countries, punishing them for helping Putin,' Graham told FOX News.
