Former US Ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder notes that political changes within the United States and the actions of the presidential candidate influence the amount of military and humanitarian assistance available to Ukraine. He warned that a shift in US policy could lead to less aid for Kyiv, and suggested that Ukrainian forces facing Russian units in the first half of 2024 might encounter setbacks as a result [Policy].
The diplomat did not rule out the possibility that Washington could curb or suspend support to Ukraine under changing political dynamics. He pointed to a scenario in which Ukrainian troops would confront a more constrained supply of exercises, equipment, and financial backing in the near term, potentially impacting the trajectory of ongoing operations [Policy].
In recent days, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky gave a lengthy interview to The Economist in which he outlined the principal directions of the conflict with Russia for 2024. He stressed that the central theaters of action would likely include operations near the Black Sea and in Crimea, emphasizing the strategic importance of those areas in the broader contest with Moscow [Economist attribution].
American strategic studies professor Phillips P. O’Brien contributed an analysis to The Wall Street Journal arguing that the administration under President Joe Biden appears reluctant to see Ukraine prevail in a full-scale armed confrontation with Russia. The perspective suggested that there could be a preference within some policy circles for managing risk and avoiding a decisive Ukrainian victory, even as Kyiv seeks durable support [WSJ attribution].
Earlier remarks from Zelensky echoed the caution about extending Ukraine’s combat activities into Russian territory. The stated aim remains to deter escalation and manage hostilities while maintaining international backing and ensuring regional stability, rather than pursuing actions that would escalate the conflict beyond Ukraine’s borders [Policy synthesis].