In his speech declaring victory in the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 6, Donald Trump made no mention of Ukraine yet alluded to just how consequential his second term in office will likely be for the country ravaged by Russia’s invasion.

. . .

How does Trump plan to stop Russia’s war against Ukraine?

That’s the million-dollar question that is undoubtedly being discussed in capitals worldwide, not least in Kyiv and Moscow.

MBFC
Archive

    • wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Never mattered to the Democrats either. No matter who has been in power America’s geopolitical ambitions are all that mattered. To Trump, he is the only thing that matters.

      • IcePee@lemmy.beru.co
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Trump’s vision is so myopic that he can’t see beyond his own nose. Same for is ability to care. If the US reneges on promises made as detailed in the Budapest Memorandum what chance will they have in other such promises. Countries are watching. This is doubly ironic as Trump keeps talking about nuclear war.

      • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        While this is true, with the US, their geopolitical ambitions have sometimes aligned with positive developments (Germany, Japan, the Baltic nations and Poland in relatively more recent times). The same cannot be said for say Russia or China.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          5 hours ago

          The same cannot be said for say Russia or China.

          How so? Russia doesn’t really have global ambitions anymore, but China is invested in seeing a larger global middle class and a weaker Western neocolonial hold over Africa. This can and has lead to positive developments.

            • wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              4 hours ago

              China’s engagment in Africa is just as neocolonial as Western engagement if not more

              How so?

              China is building infrastructure, creating jobs and giving African nations the tools they need to develop thus creating wealth. What does China get out of it? Markets - a place to sell the products the make. That is quite a bit different from the western policy of enriching despots, plundering mineral wealth and leaving the countries to fester and rot.

              • Krzd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 hours ago

                What. You do realize that China has made multiple extortionist contacts with African nations in exchange for infrastructure, while they get mining rights and no supervision to continue their slavery? Depending on the source they have like twice as much mining capacity compared to all Western nations combined.

            • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Huh? Okay you’ll need to provide some evidence if you’re saying it’s anything as neocolonial as what France is doing to these countries.