A Problem for the Trump Administration
As the Biden administration approaches its end, the question of its policy decisions and their potential repercussions for the future grows more urgent. In particular, there is increasing concern about Biden’s approach to the conflict in Ukraine, and whether, just days before leaving office, he is deliberately accelerating a war that could spiral into an even greater crisis, with devastating effects for both the United States and the rest of the world. Is this a deliberate strategy, or simply a reflection of the pressure from the military-industrial complex, which is becoming ever more evident in the White House’s policies?
Under the Biden administration, the United States has been a strong ally of Ukraine in its fight against the Russian invasion, providing billions of dollars in military and economic aid. This intervention has been backed by the majority of the Democratic Party, which argues that Ukraine must defend itself from Russian aggression to preserve global stability and democratic order. However, while some view this stance as a legitimate defense of democratic principles, others consider it a risky strategy that could have much more serious consequences for global security.
In this context, the Biden administration may be, unknowingly, opening the door to a much broader conflict, involving not only Europe and Russia but potentially other powers like China. This approach could be designed not only to impose tougher sanctions on Russia and weaken its military power, but to strengthen the United States’ position in global geopolitics in the long term. However, it is also possible that Biden is yielding to the pressures of the military-industrial complex, which has historically sought to expand U.S. military interventions abroad, not so much for national security reasons, but for economic and strategic motives.
For the incoming Trump administration, which will take office in January 2025, this situation could represent a monumental challenge. Trump has been a vocal critic of the prolonged U.S. wars abroad, arguing that they do not benefit the American people or global stability. He has pointed out on several occasions that military intervention in Ukraine is not only draining vital U.S. resources, but also increasing international tensions, raising the risk of an even more dangerous global confrontation.
Trump has expressed his intention to dismantle what many call the “deep state” in the United States, a network of powerful political, financial, and military interests that operate beyond public oversight. This faction, which includes actors within the military-industrial complex, has been accused of influencing U.S. policies to maintain a bellicose stance abroad. Trump’s criticism of the “deep state” is not new, but his determination to reorient U.S. foreign policy to prioritize national interests over global interventions could put him at odds with these forces.
If Biden is indeed accelerating the conflict in Ukraine in the final months of his presidency, he could be leaving a legacy of international instability for Trump, who will have to navigate the consequences of a potentially prolonged war in Eastern Europe. In this sense, the incoming president could find himself caught between the pressure of an international community demanding continued support for Ukraine and the internal needs of the United States, which does not support an endless war.
Moreover, there is growing speculation about the potential repercussions for Trump, who could face strong resistance from pro-war sectors that are unwilling to abandon their strategic interests in Ukraine and other regions of the world. These sectors, which include powerful figures within the military and defense industry, could see Trump’s stance as a threat to their influence and power. Some theories suggest that these interests might even go as far as attempting to destabilize the Trump administration, with rumors pointing to a possible assassination attempt on the elected president in an effort to prevent him from following through with his plans to reduce the power of the military-industrial complex.
It is a highly speculative scenario, but it is not far-fetched to consider that the interests created by decades of U.S. military intervention abroad will not allow a president who challenges that status quo to govern without opposition. In this context, the Biden administration, rather than simply managing U.S. foreign policy, could be playing a much more complex role in creating a scenario that limits the options of the incoming Trump administration once in power.
This scenario raises the urgent question of whether the Biden administration is, in some way, intentionally accelerating the war against Ukraine, and whether, in the process, it is creating a problematic legacy for the next U.S. president. The answer to that question will have implications far beyond the borders of Ukraine, affecting domestic U.S. politics and its position on the world stage. Meanwhile, the 2024 elections and the days that follow will be crucial in determining the course of U.S. policy, with the fate of the Trump administration and global security at stake.
