The midterms could decide Trump’s fate – and Ukraine’s

America goes to the polls on Tuesday in an election which looks set to transform the make-up of US government and set the stage for Donald Trump’s final two years in office. But the US is not the only country which will be reshaped by the midterm elections. Ukraine’s fate may be partly in the hands of American voters, with the election results likely to play a significant role in determining the US’s approach to the Russian invasion. Current polling suggests the Republicans are likely to be badly punished by voters over the soaring cost of living for US voters, largely as a result of Trump’s war with Iran. The data modelling site Race to the White House gives the Democrats a 94 per cent chance of taking the House of Representatives and a 76 per cent chance of winning the Senate. If control of the US government slips through Trump’s fingers, he may seek out a political win by forcing a peace deal in Ukraine – at any cost. Shorts The future of Ukraine Dr Patrick Gill-Tiney, a security studies lecturer at King’s College London, said that Trump looks set to become a “lame-duck president”, but “retains substantial influence over foreign policy, which may encourage him to focus more on that area”. With Trump’s growing collaboration with Moscow, willingness to entertain the Kremlin’s maximalist demands for peace and recent hostility to Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Zelensky, “that would almost certainly be bad for Ukraine”, Dr Gill-Tiney said. A senior Ukrainian source told The i Paper that a bad election result “could make Trump more impatient” and that “a Ukraine deal is among very few wins he can deliver on his own.” “The problem is Putin won’t give him a real compromise, so the pressure lands on our side,” they said. “I’d say the next couple of months through to the G20 in December are the most dangerous for us.” But Professor Scott Lucas, Professor of International Politics at University College Dublin, said a damaging midterms result for Trump could benefit Ukraine. He suggested that many Republicans were “angered” by the President’s U-turn over sanctions on Russia, where the US Government had backed a bipartisan bill to increase sanctions on Russia, before Trump instead brokered a deal to buy fuel from Moscow. “If the Trumpists suffer a heavy defeat, it’s significant for Ukraine,” Professor Lucas said. “After the elections, I think the pressure is on for Trump to fulfil the sanctions… and to pull back and reverse what he’s done that undercuts the sanctions, including that purchase of Russian diesel fuel.” The Democrats have threatened to punish companies which buy Russian fuel. Should they take back one or both chambers of Congress in Tuesday’s elections, they would gain significant investigative and oversight powers. Russian fuel sales have been instrumental in funding the invasion of Ukraine, and a return to heavy US sanctions would help choke off Vladimir Putin’s war economy. Earlier this year, there were reports of fuel shortages across the country due to the sanctions forcing Moscow to introduce an export ban which has been extended into next year. “Also, I think it changes the mood,” Professor Lucas added. “I would hope some Republicans come out much more fervently and say: ‘No, this is wrong. The defence of Ukraine has to be our priority.’” Trump meets with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky on the sidelines of the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York in September: (Photo: Brendan Smialowski/ AFP via Getty Images) Air defence In positive news for Zelensky, the US confirmed on Saturday morning that it would sell 500 Patriot missile systems to Ukraine, which are essential for defending cities from Russian attacks. Natia Seskuria, a senior fellow in Russia and Eurasia studies at defence thinktank RUSI said that Ukraine’s “most pressing need this winter is air defence, particularly the interceptors required to counter Russian ballistic missile attacks.” “The shortage of Patriot interceptors leaves critical infrastructure and civilian areas more exposed, while further Russian attacks could intensify pressure on Ukraine during the coldest months of winter,” she said. But there’s a catch; the systems will take several years to produce and they will be entirely funded by Europe and Canada, not by America. There is currently a global shortage of interceptor missiles after countries burnt through their stockpiles during US and Israel’s war with Iran, so today’s announcement will not provide any immediate respite for Ukraine. European allies can finance purchases of US equipment, Seskuria said, but “funding alone cannot resolve global interceptor shortages, compounded by demand from the Middle East”. And with turbulence in the US’s approach to Ukraine, there is no guarantee that the deliveries will come through. Trump walks with Russian President Vladimir Putin as they arrive at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in August 2025 in Anchorage, Alaska. The two leaders met for peace talks aimed at ending the war in Ukraine. (Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images) Dr Marina Miron, of the war studies department at King’s College London said that even if the US agrees to Patriot sales, “they can always say, ‘oh, sorry, but you are going to the back of the list’.” “It’s quite shaky,” she added. And if Washington delays or halts the transfers, Dr Jaroslava Barbieri of Chatham House’s Russia and Eurasia Programme said that Europe cannot fully bridge the gap, with shortages in its own supply and production capacity. The G20 summit British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband this week forced the cancellation of a diplomatic group photograph at the G20 summit, after he and his European counterparts refused to be pictured with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. Speaking directly to Lavrov, Miliband said: “We all know you are the aggressor. We all know you started this war four and a half years ago with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine”, and pointed to the recent killings of civilians in the Ukrainian city of Dnipro. But Europe this week also displayed rare divisions in its approach to Russia, after Norway and Finland held trilateral talks with Putin aimed at ending the war in Ukraine. While the call was prepared with Ukraine and the US, several European countries criticised Norway and Finland for acting without the backing of their allies. Dr Barbieri said that the talks “underscore growing European anxiety over being sidelined by bilateral US-Russia discussions” amid “uncertainty over the reliability of the US as a partner given Washington’s favourable treatment of Moscow.” The ensuing public spat threatens to play into Russian hands and weaken Europe’s negotiating position, Dr Gill-Tiney suggested. Dr Gill-Tiney said that “public criticism by other leaders undoubtedly reflects poorly on European states’ ability to negotiate with each other.” “If they cannot do that, it seems doubtful that they can successfully negotiate with Russia,” he added. However, Dr Miron suggested it was a positive sign that Russia entertained the talks. “The interesting thing is that Putin agreed to talk to them,” she said. “He didn’t say, ‘well, you broke off all diplomacy with us, so I’m not even going to pick up the phone.’ And allegedly, that call lasted longer than planned.” But after the Midterms, Ukrainian peace talks might have another player at the table: the American electorate.