The post-Ukraine scenario will encourage countries worldwide to pursue nuclear programs. Given the current geopolitical vulnerability of Ukraine, the post-Ukraine world order will further discourage the movement for nuclear disarmament, allowing existing nuclear powers like North Korea, India, Israel and Pakistan to continue retaining their Nukes at any cost.
The dramatic mineral deal between the US and Ukraine evokes a famous quote from American attorney and President Nixon’s political advisor, Charles Colson: “When you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow”. This is a time when Ukraine is fighting for its survival, and powerful nations, particularly the US under Donald Trump, are primarily focused on its natural resources, prioritising their own material interests stemming from the outcome of this conflict. This mineral deal is not just a deal but more of a war, politics and a global power shift. While the Trump Administration’s efforts to end the Russia-Ukraine War swiftly are seen as a welcoming step, Trump’s underlying agenda to acquire Ukrainian minerals under the guise of resolving the conflict is being criticised globally.
A famous proverb, “With great power comes great responsibility”, reminds us of another well-known quote by Abraham Lincoln: “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power”. In light of Trump’s unilateral materialistic dictation and the Ukrainian mineral deal, the recent heated exchange between President Trump and President Zelenskyyy has once again brought these quotes into the spotlight.
President Zelenskyyy’s unsuccessful meeting with Trump seems to be uniting European countries in support of Ukraine’s struggle against Russia. However, it would not be incorrect to assume that opposing Trump-led America’s interests may carry significant risks to the entire continent. Alongside French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent assurance to provide a French nuclear umbrella for Europe, the European Union’s efforts to support Ukraine against Russia might ultimately push President Trump to make a reckless decision to align more closely with Russia, potentially leading to the scenario Trump already warned Zelenskyy about in his Oval Office: “Zelenskyy is gambling with World War III.”
In the context of Trump’s failed mineral deal with Zelenskyy, President Putin has already hinted at offering access to rare earth minerals from the Russian mainland, including those in Russian-occupied Ukraine. Given President Trump’s materialistic mindset, the escalating tension between Washington and Brussels may result in pushing the US to get closer to Russian camaraderie. By portraying European groupings as anti-Trump, the Russian state media has smartly managed to convey to Washington that European policies are not just against Russian interests but also the Trump-led United States. Consequently, it is Russia, not Ukraine, that favours peace. In this context, the Russian foreign minister, in an interview with Russian State Media, accused Ukraine’s allies of manipulating the European Peacekeeping Forces to continue their actions against Russia.
In the wake of Trump’s failed meeting with Zelenskyy, which led to the strong regrouping of European countries, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth’s recent order to cease US Cyber Command and Offensive Cyber Operations against Russia has given President Putin an edge over Ukraine. This shift could also be seen as a sign of President Trump’s speculative camaraderie with President Putin in the long run.
The war between Ukraine and Russia began over Ukraine’s desire to join NATO. If the USA withdraws from NATO, it could facilitate Ukraine’s admission into the alliance. It is very important to note that membership in NATO would guarantee Ukraine’s security, as Article 5 states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all, and this is exactly what Zelenskyy is looking for. While President Zelenskyy has nothing more left to lose from the USA’s disapproval of the EU, Trump’s potential exit from NATO could lead to widespread devastation, paving the way for a new world order driven by multilateralism.
The growing divide between the US and Europe over the NATO defence budget seems to provide a significant opportunity for India to expand its trade with nations affected by Trump’s new US trade policies. Alongside the UK’s scheduled trade talks with India, the European Union’s increasing trade agreements with India may be partly a result of Trump’s threat to impose a 25% tariff on EU goods. Following EU President Ursula von der Leyen’s recent visit to India, Russian President Vladimir Putin criticised her, stating that Europe once viewed India as a third-world country. Now, that same Europe is seeking to strengthen bilateral trade and political ties with India. In this context, the emerging geopolitical dynamics in Europe also remind us of another famous quote by Harry S. Truman: “The only thing new in the world is the history you do not know. “
As a result of the dramatic showdown between Trump and Zelenskyy at the Oval Office, the Trump administration has recently announced the suspension of all military aid to Ukraine. With fears rising that Europe may no longer be certain of U.S. protection, as Trump could exit NATO at any moment, the EU Commission has proposed mobilising around $840 billion for the ‘ReArm Europe’ plan. Now, the question arises: How long will it take for Europe to produce arms and ammunition with its industrial capacity?
Many defence experts believe there is no doubt that Europe produces high-quality weapons; however, it currently lacks the industrial capacity to meet Ukraine’s armament needs in its conflict with Russia. Producing weapons on an industrial scale takes many years. As Europe’s security guarantee is presently in the hands of the US through NATO, a US exit from this organisation at this time would leave Europe vulnerable to Russia in the region. While rearming itself is a good idea for the EU, the European leaders, prioritising human lives, must decide wisely and cooperate with Donald Trump, at least for the time being.
India and the Global Tariff War.
In light of China’s recent retaliatory threats against the U.S., the growing divide between the U.S. and the Chinese manufacturing empire seems to enable India to attract foreign investment more rapidly. Trump administration’s appreciative initiative to stop the global diversion of US money, making it solely useful for its own citizens, may backfire, hitting US economic policies hard. When significantly big organisations such as the BRICS, African Union, ASEAN, SCO, etc., are rapidly moving towards switching to trade in local currencies, Trump’s insane steps, like imposing tariffs and threatening to exit important international organisations, seem to be paving the way for the smooth transition to de-dollarisation in the future.
As the largest consumer market and the fastest-growing economy in the world, India has the potential to leverage this trade conflict as an opportunity. Thus, Donald Trump’s highly centralised American policies and his global trade war, especially with China, are disrupting the supply chain worldwide, inadvertently providing India an opportunity to attract foreign investors from across the globe and shape its Vision 2047. However, the deeply ingrained bureaucratic hurdles of establishing a business in India pose the biggest challenge. While registering a company in Vietnam takes 3 to 4 months, it can take up to 5 to 6 years in India. Another major challenge is India’s significant skill gap. According to the report published by the Ministry of Skill Development, India has a 2.3% formally skilled workforce compared to 52% in the USA, 80% in Japan, and 96% in South Korea.
Although the rising conflict between the US and other countries, particularly Europe and China, is a big opportunity for India, it will be very challenging for the Indian government to capitalise on it, given that India has a highly bureaucratic and low-skilled workforce. By promoting several initiatives under the Skill India Programme, India has certainly improved over the last ten years, but this progress may not be sufficient to fully exploit this opportunity arising from Trump’s Tariff War.
The author is Doctoral Candidate, Centre for West Asian Studies(CWAS), School of International Studies(SIS), Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
