The Donald Factor: What "surprises" can we expect from Trump in 2025 for Ukraine and the world?

The full-scale war unleashed by Putin's Russia against Ukraine and the Middle Eastern crisis elevated the confrontation to a new level in 2024, prompting alarmist scenarios of a major war that some experts and politicians referred to as a third world war. Certainly, uncertainty was heightened by the American elections – one of the most unpredictable in recent history of the United States. The presidential race in the U.S. in 2024, let us remind you, unfolded very dramatically. Initially, the final showdown for the White House was set to feature the former and sitting presidents – Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Joe Biden.

However, the campaign did not go well for Mr. Biden, who was 81 at the time, and during the only debate between these candidates on June 27, the Democrat faltered under stress. The situation became truly catastrophic for him when, on July 13, an assassination attempt was made on Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania. Images of the bloodied ex-president raising his fist and shouting, "Fight!" circulated around the world. Following this, most experts concluded that the shooter targeting Donald Trump had effectively buried Joe Biden's last chances for re-election. Consequently, a week later, Mr. Biden exited the race, and Vice President Kamala Harris became the Democratic presidential candidate. The newly invigorated campaigner quickly gained popularity, and Trump's previous advantage vanished. The Republican lost the only debate with Ms. Harris, which took place on September 10.

However, as the election day approached on November 5, the momentum that Kamala Harris had gained from her sudden entry into the race began to wane, and by the final battle, the candidates were deemed to have equal chances of winning, according to sociologists. Nevertheless, as the voting results showed, experts had overestimated Kamala Harris's popularity, as she lost to her opponent in all seven swing states. Ultimately, Donald Trump secured a confident victory – and after four years, he returned to the Oval Office, once again promising to "make America great."

The American elections of 2024 posed a common question for all countries around the world – both partners and allies of the U.S., as well as their opponents: what consequences will the arrival of a new administration in the White House have for various nations and international organizations?

Without waiting for his inauguration, which is set for January 20, 2025, Trump launched a significant international activity, which, among other things, concerns territorial claims against other countries – Panama, Canada, and Denmark. Let us recall that some time ago, the leading Republican began demanding that Panama return the canal between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, proposing that Canada join the United States, and asking Denmark to sell Greenland to Americans. This, quite predictably, provoked negative reactions from all three countries, with Denmark stating it would increase defense spending for its island.

Meanwhile, the old-new leader of the U.S. continues to ramp up his rhetoric. On Thursday, December 26, he posted a special message on social media dedicated to his territorial claims. In particular, Trump, wishing a Merry Christmas to the "wonderful soldiers of China, who lovingly but illegally exploit the Panama Canal," reminded that the U.S. invested billions of dollars into it. Additionally, Mr. Trump congratulated "the Governor of Canada," Justin Trudeau, on Christmas, remarking that "taxes are too high, but if Canada became our 51st state, their taxes would be reduced by more than 60%." Almost in the same breath, the American president added that Canada would be safer as part of the U.S. "The same applies to the people of Greenland, who are necessary for the United States for national security purposes and who want the U.S. to be there, and we will be there!" concluded Donald Trump.

The territorial ambitions of the future occupant of the Oval Office were initially perceived as outrageous trolling, but in recent days, influential Western media are evaluating the situation in a more realistic light. For instance, the New York Times recently wrote: "The statements of the elected president – and the hidden threats behind them – are yet another reminder that his version of 'America First' is not an isolationist credo. His aggressive interpretation of this phrase resembles the expansionism or colonialism of President Theodore Roosevelt, who cemented control over the Philippines after the Spanish-American War. It reflects the instincts of a developer who suddenly gained control of the world's largest army to back his negotiation strategy. Trump has repeatedly indicated that he does not always consider the borders of other countries sacred. When Russia began its conflict in Ukraine, his first reaction was not to condemn the blatant land grab, but to remark that President Vladimir Putin's move was 'genius.'

Even now, when Trump is seeking to negotiate a ceasefire, he has never stated that Ukraine's borders should be restored, which is a key demand of the U.S. and NATO. He only promised a 'deal' to end the fighting.

For our country, this trend is indeed alarming, as the inviolable foundation of Ukraine's position in its war against Putin's Russia is the principle of inviolability of borders, territorial integrity, and sovereignty. It is evident that if the U.S. under Trump begins to violate these principles, making constant interventions and annexations of territories a common rule rather than a criminal exception, then the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation will turn into one of the 'ordinary episodes.' Moreover, this would allow the aggressor country, with its shoulders squared, to declare that if the U.S., guided by its own understanding of national interests, wants to seize Canada or Greenland, then why can't Moscow do the same by annexing Crimea, Donbass, and certain regions of Ukraine? Overall, the 'territorial' trend set by Trump appears to be quite dangerous for us.

"The election of Donald Trump signifies a transition to a binary political system. That is, either a one or a zero, without any analog nuances. Either a compliant junior partner or an undesirable burden. Either a conduit for U.S. policy or someone who can only be defended for money. And if the senior partner suddenly needs Greenland or the Panama Canal, then they should be gladly and gratefully surrendered. At least, that is how the 47th president of the United States sees it. Trump does not rule out the possibility that he could end the war in Ukraine. But not in a day, of course. Voices from Trump's circle express sober opinions that in the most optimistic scenario, a cessation of hostilities might be possible in the fall of 2025. And the pessimistic scenario is one that is best not to even think about, as it would entail years of war at varying levels of intensity," notes political scientist Alexander Kochetkov.

The optimistic scenario, according to the expert, is possible if Putin tries to position himself on the same level as Trump during negotiations, which would personally offend him.

"However, in that case, a very interesting option may open up: American high-tech startups led by Elon Musk could create something akin to a consortium with the intent of siphoning off a significant portion of the Pentagon's budget of $850 billion. And of course, they would test such cutting-edge weapons powered by artificial intelligence in Ukraine. This would help compensate for the inadequacy of our mobilization resources, leading to serious problems for the army of the 'non-empire.' But if, in this situation, China supports Russia with its ultra-modern military developments, then the frontline part of Ukraine would turn into a territory uninhabitable for biological organisms larger than a rat. However, there are more pleasant trends as well. For instance, events in Syria could become a precursor to Russia's collapse in the medium term. The driving force behind such a collapse would be the Muslim population of the Russian Federation, and Turkey could produce the process, as it did in Syria. Two resurgent empires cannot coexist in the same geopolitical space. And Erdogan's Turkey is building its empire much more effectively than Putin's Russia. Therefore, Ukraine's main task is not to disappear in the maelstrom of global changes currently raging across the world," summarizes Alexander Kochetkov.