Ukraine must not lose

Grégory Rayko — You're a regular visitor to the Ukraine, where you meet many of the country's leading military figures. How did your Ukrainian interlocutors react to Donald Trump's victory in the American presidential election.

Xavier Tytelman — First things first: back in August, most of the Ukrainians I’m in contact with were already telling me that they were pretty sure Trump would win, and that it wouldn't necessarily be a disaster for their country. They liked what he was saying because even then he was proclaiming that he would impose a ceasefire, and that he would take a hard line with any side that did not respect its terms.

G. R. — How would you analyze his statements on the Ukrainian issue since his victory?

X. T. — He’s been blowing hot and cold. On the one hand, he has implied that the Ukrainians were completely at fault in the affair, and that they more or less deserved to be attacked by Russia.  On the other, he has said that American military support for Ukraine would continue, that it was Moscow which was refusing peace, that Putin was destroying his country and that he, Trump, would not hesitate to implement a certain number of measures to accelerate Russia's economic collapse. We saw this just recently with his announcements concerning OPEC: Trump urged Saudi Arabia to reduce the price of oil in order to reduce Russian revenues. And then there's the question of frozen Russian assets...

G. R. — Meaning?

X. T. — Of the Russian assets frozen in the United States, only the portion corresponding to the yearly profits this money generates has been seized so far. The profits are made available to the Ukrainians, who use the money to buy equipment abroad. The last U.S. loan granted to Ukraine in this context amounted to around $12 billion, a form of advance on future dividends. Recently, Volodymyr Zelensky suggested seizing not just the profits, but the entire sum, which amounts to around $300 billion. The Ukrainian president proposed a deal to the Americans: take the $300 billion, lend it to us and we'll spend it on US-made military equipment. In Ukraine, this idea has raised high hopes. For the deal to go through, Trump would have to brush aside international law, which forbids the seizure of frozen assets; but he is quite capable of doing this, because he knows that the money would represent a tremendous boost for the American military industry.

G. R. — If this deal were to go through, if the Ukrainians were to get such a large sum of money to buy equipment from the United States, to what extent would it change the balance of forces?

X. T. — It would be a game changer in terms of military balance, that's for sure. It would be greater than the $265 billion worth of military equipment needed for a clear victory by Ukraine over Russia, as defined by members of the Swedish Ministry of Finance's …