Despite the nuclear blackmail by the Russian leadership, partner states continued providing comprehensive assistance to Ukraine. Therefore, over the past month, Russia has continued its threats, but the emphasis is now placed on conventional means and hybrid methods of influence. The leadership of the aggressor state understands that the North Atlantic Alliance is trying to avoid a direct clash by all means and therefore does not refrain from provocations against NATO member states. After the invasion of Ukraine, Russian missiles already fell on the territory of Romania and Poland. Belarusian helicopters violated Polish airspace, and a US MQ-9 Reaper drone was damaged by a Russian fighter jet, causing the American drone to crash into the Black Sea. In addition, Russian spies are regularly detained in NATO member states, with the most recent cases occurring in Poland and the United Kingdom.

In the Russian-Ukrainian war, the Russian Federation is trying to achieve its goals not only in relation to Ukraine. The aggressor country is fighting for regional dominance. Eastern European countries are well aware of this, as they provide the largest share of weapons to Ukraine among NATO countries in terms of percentage of GDP. The leaders in this dimension are the Baltic states and Poland (1.26% - Estonia; 1.09% - Latvia; 0.95% - Lithuania, 0.68% - Poland).[1] At the same time, the United States' assistance is limited to 0.33% of the country's GDP. In absolute terms, this is the largest contribution from a single country. However, if the United States really wanted Ukraine to win, the aid would be many times higher.

Ukraine, contrary to the canons of military science, is conducting an unprecedented offensive operation, without a significant numerical advantage and, most importantly, without an air superiority. The United States and the North Atlantic Alliance have always conducted offensive operations after gaining air dominance, but Joe Biden administration is delaying the transfer of the necessary advanced weapons as much as possible, and therefore the current Ukrainian counter-offensive is taking place in the face of Russia's complete air superiority. At the same time, the United States is not transferring medium-range missiles, which could partially compensate for the lack of powerful aviation and contribute to the rapid destruction of Russian defense. Unlike the United Kingdom and France, which provided Storm Shadow and SCALP missiles, the United States has not yet transferred ATACAMs missiles for HIMMARS systems.

Against this background, non-optimistic processes are taking place within the United States in the context of the upcoming elections. Russia's war against Ukraine has become one of the main topics of the American election campaign. Support for Ukraine is being used by various candidates to promote narratives that are popular among voters.

A CNN poll released earlier this month showed that 55 percent of Americans said the country should not provide additional funding to Ukraine, including 71 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of independents.[2] At the same time, 38% of Democrats share this opinion. In the Republican presidential debate, candidates who support Ukraine are not favorites. The main contender among Republicans is Donald Trump, who promised to end Russia's war against Ukraine within 24 hours after his election. In the context of Russian aggression, the most likely scenario for ending the war within 24 hours is forcing Ukraine to peace by legalizing Russia's occupation of Ukrainian territories. Therefore, Donald Trump's presidency could pose a threat to Ukraine.

The second favorite, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, called the Russian invasion a "territorial dispute." According to Reuters, DeSantis' campaign is backed by The Heritage Foundation, a think tank.[3] In recent months, The Heritage Foundation, once a respected organization, has been actively spreading narratives that are typical for American isolationists and play into the hands of the Russian Federation. In particular, the organization has been spreading manipulative comparisons of assistance to affected American citizens in Hawaii and Ukraine. Videos were published of Ukrainians walking through the streets of Kyiv and the burning island of Maui.  Narratives were also spread about the Joe Biden administration's prioritization of international policy issues over domestic problems.

Similar anti-Ukrainian signals are currently being spread by the third most supported candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy. According to Politico, after the debate, he overtook Ron De Santis in terms of support.[4] Businessman Ramaswamy openly states that he intends to stop supporting Ukraine, officially reject its NATO bid, and give Russia the occupied territories to prevent the alliance between Russia and China. During the debate, Donald Trump's Vice President Mike Pence, former South Carolina Governor and former U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Nikki Haley, and former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie pointed out the absurdity of Ramaswamy's position. However, the popularity of more conservative candidates is currently low.

The electoral mood in the United States may continue to have a negative impact on the level of assistance to Ukraine. Joe Biden is likely to continue the policy of limited assistance to Ukraine, hoping for some success of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, which can be presented as a correct tactic for the American voters. An increase in aid is unlikely, as such a move could be used against the US President, in a way The Heritage Foundation is currently doing.

In addition, the U.S. strategy in Ukraine is currently focused on preventing Russia from achieving victory. At the same time, the US is limiting military support to prevent Russia from using nuclear weapons. Thus, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will continue to liberate the territories with a limited amount of means provided by partners.

Russia is waging a war of attrition, hoping that war fatigue and the change of governments will allow the aggressor to secure the occupied territory. At the same time, the Russians realize that the United States does not want the war to drag on. In this situation, the United States is putting itself in a difficult position, because Russia will raise the stakes in the war at a favorable moment to force the United States to make concessions regarding Ukraine. At this stage, Vladimir Putin could agree to negotiate. The Kremlin has repeatedly signaled that negotiations are possible if Ukraine gives up the Crimean Peninsula and four occupied regions. If Ukraine were forced to a peace, as in 1938, it would not stop the aggressor state's expansion completely and would only give Russia a foothold for future aggression and time to recover and attack at a favorable time. At present, however, this view is shared mostly by those countries neighboring Russia.

By supporting Ukraine, Eastern European NATO countries and the United States avoid the need to send their own soldiers to the battlefield. After all, after Ukraine, it will be the turn of the Eastern European NATO states. Ukraine currently has the strength to make further progress, but the country needs further support and increased pressure on Russia.

Russia is capable of waging a war of attrition. Are Ukraine's partners ready for this scenario? And is Ukraine capable of defeating Russia with the current level of assistance? According to the Main Intelligence Directorate, the Kremlin plans to send another 450,000 people to the war.[5] In addition, the aggressor is quite successfully putting the economy on a war footing.  The US indecision threatens not only Ukraine's ability to resist, but also the security of its European allies. The White House is giving Russia room to raise the stakes further.

If the United States wanted to defeat Russia, Ukraine would get much more. Only such a scenario could avert a protracted war and preserve Ukraine's territorial integrity and an order based on the strength of international law. At the moment, however, Russia has not received a strong signal that continuing its aggression against Ukraine is futile, so it is betting on a protracted conflict, while the United States continues to believe in the rightness of its strategy of limited assistance. In the long run, such developments pose threats to Ukraine, as fatigue from the war abroad is growing, the issue of supporting Ukraine is gradually becoming less popular, and the aggressor state does not give up its goal of occupying Ukrainian territory and destroying its statehood.
 

Sources:
1. Total bilateral aid commitments to Ukraine as a percentage of donor gross domestic product (GDP) between 1 January 24, 2022 and May 31, 2023, by country, 25.08.2023, URL: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/
2. Ukraine, Russia turns into GOP presidential flashpoint, 26.08.2023, URL: https://thehill.com/homenews/ 2 campaign/4172029-ukraine-russia-turns-into-gop-presidential-flashpoint/ Insight:
3. Conservative think tank emerges as force behind DeSantis campaign, 18.08.2023, URL: https:// 3 www.reuters.com/world/us/conservative-think-tank-emerges-force-behind-desantis-campaign-2023-08-18/
4. DeSagging: Florida governor drops in POLITICO rankings, 26.08.23, 4 URL: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/26/desantis-drops-ramaswamy-rises-in-polls-00113076 
5. кремлівська влада планує відправить на війну ще 450 тисяч осіб, 25.08.23, URL: https://gur.gov.ua/ 5 content/kremlivska-vlada-planuie-vidpravyt-na-viinu-shche-450-tysiach-osib.html