Ihor Hryniv, politician, policy analyst, public opinion poll expert and head of the Janus Institute for Strategic Studies and Forecasts is closely following the current global trends related to the change in United States policy following Donald Trump’s return to the White House. Ukrinform had a conversation with Mr. Hryniv ahead of Donald Trump’s first 100 days in office, which the US president himself hailed as Golden Age of US history. We talked about Ukraine peace negotiations, Donald Trump as a phenomenon, who are the political actors wishing to “make America great again”, about democracy, authoritarianism and much more.
THE COUNTRY THAT FELL VICTIM TO AGGRESSION CANNOT BE PUNISHED TWICE
– Mr. Ihor, what do you think of the US-mediated negotiations on a ceasefire or truce? What concessions can Ukraine make to achieve this goal?
– The very fact that the question was raised of Ukraine having to make concessions makes these negotiations one-sided. Talking about concessions from one side to the conflict without demanding concessions from the other side is perhaps inappropriate in the context of what the term “negotiations” means, but looks more like blackmail or pressure.
With the question put that way, the negotiations will end up in nothing.
Tere can only be talk of reciprocal concessions. But there should be an understanding that this is not a conflict that arose around a disputable issue of some kind, but an all-out aggression, an attempt by Russia to seize Ukrainian territories.
I have not yet heard of any concessions that Russia is ready to make.
It’s an obviously inappropriate approach where Ukraine is to blame for the breakdown of negotiations because it isn’t ready to make concessions. As a saying has it, it takes two to tango.
A more appropriate question would be about the concessions Ukraine is not ready to make.
In the first place, peace must be fair. In other words, there will be no side that wins and the other side that loses. Both sides must win something and lose something. There must be a certain symmetry.
Ukraine will never recognize borders other than those defined by the bilateral Russian-Ukrainian agreement (Agreement on the border between Russia and Ukraine signed in January 2003, – ed.).
That said, Ukraine, to achieve a ceasefire, is ready to recognize that the de facto occupied territories will remain under the control of the Russian Federation for a certain while. And if there are security guarantees in place that deter Russia from attacking other territories, we can for a certain time refrain from resolving this issue militarily but instead will be resolving it through diplomacy.
We can recognize the line along which the conflict will be frozen, recognize temporary control over certain territories by the other side. However, Ukraine cannot recognize Russia’s ownership of Ukrainian territories de jure.
This position is not held by Ukraine alone, but also by the European Union member states and Turkey. China has voiced a similar position.
Russia and the USA are the only two to have raised the question of Ukraine having to cede some of its territories.
Peace cannot be achieved by means of violence by one of the parties. And the party that is the victim to the conflict cannot be punished twice.
Punishing the country that has suffered is a nonsense – this must not be done just to please the ambitions of a man who is simply seeking the earliest possible end to the conflict.
– Representatives of the US administration have repeatedly stated that Washington will withdraw from the negotiations if no progress is achieved and will also leave Ukraine without its help. Is Europe in a position to replace the US assistance if that scenario comes true?
– The very wording “will leave Ukraine without its help” sounds like a blackmail. But the Americans know perfectly well that blackmailers are hard to negotiate with.
The United States of America is in its right when it declares being ready to withdraw from the negotiations and halt aid deliveries. But there can be no punishment imposed on Ukraine for rejecting certain conditions imposed on it by Washington. Here, American politicians and diplomats need to be careful with their words.
Ukraine was able to hold tough even at the time where almost no aid was provided, excepting American Javelins and German helmets. And it withstood the aggression from an adversary that has the largest army in Europe and one of the largest in the world.
Europe has demonstrated solidarity with Ukraine. I think that most European countries will maintain this solidarity. Moreover, they have already clearly and distinctly stressed that they are not just ready, but understand: come what may, they will have to increase aid.
Let us recall the way the United States entered into World War II. The United States had maintained neutrality towards Nazi Germany for a very long time. And only after having realized that Berlin and its allies had certain interests in the regions where the United States had interests too, and, as it emerged recently, was going to finance Mexico to open a second front to capture the southern American states, did America enter into the war.
No power is eternal. The USA may change its policies tomorrow. What’s more, I am confident that the United States is a civilized, free country. It can exert pressure (not blackmail) in order to help build certain structures. But where the pressure does not work, then, obviously, everything should get back on track, that is, back to continuing negotiations on the conditions on which further assistance would be provided to Ukraine.
I do believe that assistance will be coming not only from Europe, but from America as well.
– Do you see any signs indicating an end to the war is approaching? And do you even believe in the possibility of a truce being achieved?
– The nature of warfare has changed completely; it has ceased to be trench warfare like it was during World War I.
It has mostly turned into “hole” warfare, where soldiers from both armies dug themselves into holes, from where operations are conducted with the help of quadcopters, drones and everything else. The front line has almost frozen. Any major operations, offensives, counteroffensives, etc. have been put on a pause button as none of the opposing sides seem to have enough capability for this. Meanwhile, Russia and Ukraine both retain the potential for continuing armed confrontation.
However, exhaustion will set in, sooner or later, when neither side will see promise in continuing military operations. The depletion of economies and resources for warfighting will reach high levels.
We are ready for a truce and really pinned our hopes on the leadership role of the United States – that they will put pressure not only on Ukraine, but also on Russia. But this truce has not yet been achieved for only one reason. So far, there are no signs indicating that Russia is ready to go for it.
Once Trump realizes that his perception of Russia does not coincide with reality, that Putin is leading him by the nose, and this cognitive dissonance becomes too obvious, he will have two options to choose from. One is to ramp up pressure on Russia, like he promised during the election campaign, by toughening sanctions against the Russian Federation or by building up military assistance to Ukraine. We are not talking about budgetary or any other type of assistance, but specifically about military assistance – in order to get warfighting capabilities of both sides balanced out so that Russia ceases to be interested in this war. That is, it is not about making Ukraine strong enough to win back the lost territories or defeat the Russian army. It is about making Russia no longer interested in continuing the war.
The other option is to selfishly declare: I wash my hands of it. Like, I tried, but nothing worked for me, and, after all, I have no horse in this race, the United States of America is no longer engaged in helping free nations and facilitating democracy across the world, but is only concerned about its own economy and its own affairs within the country.
After all, this is going to be a new America, and the attitude towards it in the world will likewise be new.
Photo
TRUMP IS SEARCHING FOR NEW CASES TO BECOME A GREAT PRESIDENT
– How would you explain this phenomenon of Trump – a president who, in fact, has kept virtually none of the promise he made when campaigning for the presidency?
– You can fail many times to keep your promises if you make new promises.
Trump is currently following the path of generating further promises and new cases.
Abraham Linkoln said in one of his most famous statements: You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
The resource of promises is inevitably exhaustible.
Trump is looking for new cases that could make not only America great, but also make Trump a great president, so that he would remain in history as a great leader of a great power – these are the categories in which this extraordinary personality thinks. But so far, these cases have all been little grateful for him, gave him little use.
Today, everything is based on Trump’s personal will, and the team around him is acting just like a kind of resonator. While during his first term in office Trump was surrounded by people who softened to a degree his violent initiatives, his current team is shaking even more the amplitude of these quite unpredictable, sharp fluctuations.
Dictatorship has never led to good, neither has it ever been a long-lasting phenomenon. This is especially obvious in the world of artificial intelligence, social networks, and modern technologies.
If a certain crisis arises, then seeking a solution to it using authoritarian mechanisms is apparently not an adequate strategy in the current epoch.
Though the world is indeed facing serious challenges.
There is also a separate Chinese box, the keys to which will sooner or later be picked up primarily by Europe, not only by Russia. Xi Jinping has not yet entered this game. Turkey has not yet entered this game seriously either.
THE MORE THE USA WILL TRY TO WEAKEN EUROPE, THE MORE CHINA WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF EUROPE
— To what extent is China supportive of Russia?
– I wouldn’t interpret this as being supportive of Russia, but more of being anti-American. China simply doesn’t let America become strong.
The more the United States tries to weaken Europe, the more China will be supportive of the latter. And for good reason people from Trump’s inner circle refer to the war in Ukraine as a proxy war, as Russia and Ukraine are both parties to a more global conflict being waged at a far higher level.
There is not only an American-Chinese confrontation, but also a clearly visible American-European confrontation. It was not Europe who initiated it.
– Trump is obviously admiring Putin – he himself has admitted this on numerous occasions. What do you think is appealing in Putin for Trump?
– Putin is admiring Trump too, praying for him, ordered a portrait of him…
These are just people who know each other’s weaknesses and manipulate this. One says: Oh, my God, how cool you are, how brilliant you are. And the other is echoing: Oh my God, you are so genius… But in actuality, they kick each other, figuratively speaking, try to trip each other up at every opportune time.
They are both narcissistic, and for them the form is more important than the content – this feature is somewhat oriental. Both Putin and Trump fetishize the form of relationships rather than their content. That is, they think that when you praise your opposite number, you have manipulated him in this way, won him over to your side.
– And what basically makes Trump act the way he does? What is his main motive?
– It is not just the Nobel Prize. Trump has formed for himself an image of great presidents who are the pillars of America, to which he should belong. He understands that no one but him himself will erect a monument to himself.
– A monument to himself? No one but him himself?
– No one but him himself. That is why he is trying to build the reality in which he is a great president. For this, the Labors of Hercules are needed.
Here he sets himself the tasks which, he supposes, would make him a hero. For the time being, he is doing well with heroism, but not too well with the results.
A MAN WHO HAS BEEN IN POWER CANNOT RETURN TO AN ADEQUATE PERCEPTION OF OWN SELF
– Why does he neglect the professionalism of his team members, preferring personal devotion instead? After all, incompetent sycophants will not help him perform feats. Doesn’t he understand this?
– I think Trump understands everything too well. But he is convinced in his own strength, genius, and today I have the impression that he does not keep sycophants around him, but it is just that those people around him understand that if they are not like that, he will simply throw them out.
In other words, he makes these people like that. And they realize that he does not need others.
He is exploiting them, but he is not going to share his glory with them. Like, it is not “Musk and me”, but only “me”. Though Musk is a cool guy, because he helped me a lot. He is just an assistant in accomplishing my great deeds.
This obviously happens with leaders. A person who was in power at one time and then left office, can never return to an adequate perception of own self. That person is already great and is trying to become even greater, failing to understanding that there is a certain curve: today you are at the top, and tomorrow you have gone down again, and now you have to climb up. They think that they are always at the top, and they want to climb even higher, even when they are actually falling, the world is turning upside down for them, but in their own eyes they are still moving upwards.
They do not need someone around them to tell the truth: “But the King is naked!”.
It is unlikely that Trump is currently ready to tolerate someone advising him to be more adequate and be guided by realistic expectations. This would be the last advice this person would give Trump.
– Today, the American society is very much divided on Trump and his policies. There are people who admire him, and there are those who categorically do not accept him. Do you think a civil conflict is possible in the United States?
– I would not speak in terms of whether a conflict is possible. The mission of any president, especially one who wants to become great, is to ensure the country remains united, not divided.
But the first thing Trump did, certainly not as a great president, was to divide the country in a way no one could expect. It is difficult to assess how deep this crack is and whether it will lead to tectonic ruptures in the United States itself, whether it will lie territorially or mentally.
But a hero cannot win people over unless he loves them.
I don’t think Trump has convinced American society, at least a significant part of it, that everything he is doing is for the good of America, not for the good of his loved one.
And these people will grow in numbers, in my opinion. If he fails to understand this in due time, old-fashioned American democracy will intervene: the King is dead, long live the new King!
Photo
TRUMP’S INTERESTS AND THOSE OF THE MAGA MOVEMENT WILL GO SEPARATE WAYS, SOONER OR LATER
– Was it fair to consider America the leader of the democratic world at all, given the current sentiments there, which some experts call pro-fascist?
– These sentiments are based on a particular set of beliefs.
There is a certain number of people, let’s call them the “MAGA party”, that is, they are not Trump’s entourage, but a slightly broader group ideologically (MAGA, Make America Great Again – the far-right and the largest faction of the United States Republican Party, the most ardent supporters of Trump and his policies, – ed.). We also know those people who are behind this. We saw them at Trump’s inauguration ceremony. They do not believe in liberal or European democracy, but uphold mechanisms that can be called fascist – authoritarian methods of governance, the right of elected leaders to decide the fate of people, of countries, of nations, the establishment of a universal order, and so on.
But you can’t become stronger by making others weaker. Then it’s just creates a short-term imbalance that invariably ends up not only in fascism, but even in revanchism.
– And who gave birth to whom – Trump to MAGA or MAGA to Trump? The chicken and the egg or the egg and the chicken – which came first?
– I think they have existed in parallel, in other words, there were grounds for the emergence of both MAGA and Trump. A certain synergy took place where MAGA situationally uses Trump, and Trump situationally goes along with MAGA’s ideas.
But in the end, it’s inevitable their strategies, key interests, it seems, will collide just to go apart.
If we really accept the idea that the key motivation for Trump is “me, Trump, and my place in history and the world,” then this is definitely not what meets the interests of MAGA.
Therefore, MAGA is a longer-term and more complex process.
This movement will continue to exist one way or another. And not only in America.
This ghost of MAGA – a kind of national egoism – is already roaming over Europe. Just as the ghost of communism used to roam.
This ghost does not believe in democracy at all, but believes that society should be governed not through limited democratic mechanisms, but through elected elites.
This reminds me a little of the history of how economic governance was changing. The shareholder economy, which was built on private property, where businesses were managed by owners, was eventually replaced by a new era – an era of managers. Economic processes began to be managed by people who have better education, knowledge and can earn money better. In fact, they often earn more revenues from the business they manage than its owners themselves. But where there is no understanding of the interests of everyone who is related to this business – not only the owners, but also contractors, consumers – then the concentration of power alone will not achieve long-term success.
The same is true for society. The elite seems to have decided that they have more experience and more rights to govern the country. Therefore, they ignore the right of society to govern. They want to take power into their own hands, using their skills, experience, and resources, because they believe that people are making wrong choices. After all, they think that the number of stupid people is much greater, and they do not want the stupid to elect the government to which the smart ones will have to bow. This is how they treat their people and society – contemptuously.
We have been through this already. Ivan Franko, in his work “What is Progress?”, analyzed the advantages of a socialist government, and predicted the emergence of a class of managers who would want to usurp power under the pretext that they are doing it on behalf of the people and with the support of the people.
They need Trump as a smokescreen for democracy, because he was elected by the majority, and he legitimizes their power – through conditional direct democracy. That is why MAGA needs Trump, and Trump needs MAGA.
A VIRTUAL ALLIANCE WITH TRUMP WILL NOT BRING SUCCESS TO POLITICIANS IN EUROPE
– What do you think awaits Europe, over which this “ghost” is roaming? Can far-right populists in the Old World become disillusioned with Trump because of his failures?
– Well, this is already happening, albeit to a limited extent yet. In France, for example, we can see this on the example of Marine Le Pen’s party, which has now strained relations with Trump.
Indeed, someone may try to follow his path or use it further, like, for example, Orbán in Hungary, who says “Trump and me”.
It’s like in the old joke. A cowboy walks into a bar and inquires: “Who’s against me?” Big John gets up and says: “Well, me”. – “And who’s against John and me?”
I don’t think that a virtual alliance with Trump will bring success to certain politicians in Europe. On the contrary, consolidation is taking place in Europe – more than ever, partly thanks to Trump.
Interviewed by Volodymyr Ilchenko, New York – Kyiv
Photo via NV, Ihor Hryniv’s Facebook
Source: Ihor Hryniv, policy analyst, member of Verkhovna Rada in five parliamentary convocations
