“The basic thing is that Ukraine needs the US to come through,” says the professor emeritus of war studies at King’s College, London, and a non-resident fellow at the Lowy Institute. “They desperately need ammunition and new air defences, and if that comes through, Ukraine can build up its strength and hold the line. If it doesn’t, Ukraine will be in trouble.”

Loading

US Republicans initially lent strong support to Ukraine when Putin launched his full-scale invasion in 2022. The glaring exception was Donald Trump. His first reaction was to declare it “genius”. As Trump has tightened his grip on the party’s presidential nomination, a growing number of Republican legislators has adopted his attitude of identifying with Putin while abandoning Ukraine.

While the US Senate last week approved a bill allocating some $US60 billion ($A92 billion) in new military support to Ukraine, Trump acolytes in the House, including Speaker Mike Johnson, refused to bring the bill to a vote. The Congress members then left Washington for a two-week recess.

Much to the frustration of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: “Please remember, everyone, that dictators do not go on vacation,” he told a key international security conference in Munich on the weekend.

In the meantime, Ukrainian troops have been forced to ration ammunition, and on Sunday, Russia’s forces achieved their first battlefield breakthrough since May last year, capturing the eastern city of Avdiivka.

European leaders are stepping up their contributions to Ukraine. This week marks the second anniversary of Putin’s invasion. In the past few days, the EU announced that its member states would begin joint purchases of ammunition to send to Kyiv. And Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen announced to the Munich conference: “We, Denmark, have decided to donate our entire artillery to Ukraine.”

But, ultimately, NATO is “dependent” on America, said its secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg. Former German foreign affairs minister Sigmar Gabriel said: “There is an elephant in the room in Munich, and his name is Donald. He must be laughing so much he can’t sleep.”

Joe Biden publicly blamed Putin for the death of Navalny, blamed the US Congressional Republicans for the failure to arm Ukraine, and phoned Zelensky after news of the fall of Avdiivka. “I’m going to fight to get them the ammunition they need,” Biden told reporters after the call.

Trump’s reactions? By Monday afternoon Australian time, Trump had made no comment on the death of Navalny and no comprehensible comment on the fall of Avdiika.

Loading

And if the Trump forces succeed in frustrating the aid for Kyiv? “If we can’t sustain the effort, it will be catastrophic for Ukraine, certainly,” says Freedman, and “catastrophic for the West. It raises lots of questions about the durability of the alliances.”

US politics turns out to be the pivotal factor in battlefield success for Ukraine. Or failure, says Freedman, who has written a new essay for the Lowy Institute titled “Modern Warfare: Lessons from Ukraine”.

“If the US support comes through, Ukraine may be in a position to turn things around by next year.” The next few months could be Kyiv’s last chance to win serious new commitments from Washington. Because, soon enough, Trump could be US president once more.

If Trump were to win, says Freedman, “I wouldn’t make any assumptions, but if I were Ukraine, I’d be nervous. It would be just a chaotic period in the US government.”

Loading

Freedman argues that the invasion was a colossal misjudgment by Putin: “The prize of a subjugated Ukraine was just too sweet to be abandoned out of prudence,” he writes in his Lowy essay. “He is left dealing with a catastrophe, for Russia as well as Ukraine, of his making.”

Could the prize of a subjugated Taiwan prove similarly irresistible for Xi Jinping to abandon out of prudence? “If I were Xi” observing the Ukraine adventure, says Freedman, “I would take it as a warning that these bold moves don’t always work out as planned.” Unless, of course, Russia wins.