Bob Beck's Foreign Policy Blog

The late February dustup in the oval office between team Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky was certainly entertaining political drama.  Strip away the vituperative rancor, however, and the exchange also offered a fascinating exhibition of some of the key elements that influence a nation’s ability to successfully operate in the international arena. 

Let’s start with demographics.  Early in the argument Vice President Vance correctly drew attention to Ukraine’s struggles in finding enough men to adequately pursue its war aims. Kjiv unquestionably faces a monumental challenge on the battlefield in view of its relative demographic weakness compared to Moscow. According to current figures from the CIA factbook, Ukraine’s population is only thirty five million with a mere twelve million of potentially fighting age men, fifteen to sixty four years old.  Per the same source, Russia enjoys a nearly fourfold advantage with one hundred and forty million citizens and forty five million fighting age males. Regardless of a nation’s technical prowess and strategic acumen, the number of troops available to fight is of paramount importance. 

While mentioned only once in passing during the not-so-diplomatic donnybrook, geography plays a fundamental role in defining what a nation can and can not achieve outside its own borders.  Before he was shouted down by President Trump, Ukraine’s Zelensky rightly pointed out that the United States is protected by two great oceans.  In fact, it is generally agreed in the foreign policy community that America reaps the benefits of the most advantageous geographic position of any of the major powers in the world today.  In addition to maritime defense in depth to both the east and west, we are bordered by stable and, until recently, friendly neighbors to our immediate north and south. 

As a comparison, Ukraine is located in the geopolitical interstitial space between two historically expansionist nation states, Germany and Russia.  Furthermore, there are no substantive natural barriers — mountains, deserts, or seas — separating the Ukrainian heartland from the aforementioned powers to the east and west.  As a result, Ukraine has repeatedly suffered what it must in relations with Moscow and Berlin.  

A further determining factor in international relations that was on display in the oval office on 28 February is leadership. From the outset of the Russia/Ukraine war, President Zelensky has been widely admired throughout much of Europe and in pre-Trump 2.0 America as a courageous leader, drawing inspirational comparisons to Winston Churchill during World War II.  The fact that Kyiv has held out as long as it has despite its geographic and demographic weaknesses is at least partially due to Zelensky’s undaunted defense of Ukraine’s freedom and territorial integrity. 

At the fateful meeting President Trump’s version of strong leadership, in this instance publicly bludgeoning an erstwhile American ally, sent a perspicuous message to the rest of the world that Washington, and Washington alone, was calling the shots. While Trump 2.0’s leadership qualities may invigorate the MAGA base, the jury is unquestionably still out as to whether those traits will serve America well on the international chessboard. 

Lest we forget, the purpose of Zelensky’s visit to the White House was to sign an agreement providing the United States access to supposedly ample Ukrainian reserves of natural resources and rare earth minerals — needed for the technologically-advanced economy of the future. Peeling the onion back on some of Trump’s most controversial rantings in the foreign policy realm since his inauguration, one finds gaining access to natural resources and rare earth minerals to be of paramount importance.

Consider the president’s interest in Greenland. Although national defense reasons are mentioned, America already has a strategic military base on the island. The more likely driver is obtaining Greenland’s suspected treasure trove of resources, including iron ore, lead, zinc, and uranium.

Ditto for the administration’s fascination with making Canada America’s 51st state, which, by the way, would make that state larger than the other fifty states combined.  Nevertheless, our neighbors to the north sit on vast reservoirs of oil, natural gas, and other critical resources.  Securing access to that energy bonanza would be a seminal accomplishment for America’s “Driller in Chief.” 

Not to be outdone by Kyiv, Tsar Vladimir (I want to be) the great recently enticed President Trump with promises of cooperation in aluminum production and rare minerals mining in Russia.  As a quid pro quo in this scenario, Washington will be expected to side with the Kremlin on the prerequisites for a substantive ceasefire in Ukraine. 

How the old/new occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue plays these negotiations with Putin and Zelensky will offer an illuminating window into what truly drives Washington’s foreign policy.

Note: This article was published by both the Monadnock Ledger-Transcript and the Brattleboro Reformer on 27 March.