{"id":1034556,"date":"2024-10-31T10:28:00","date_gmt":"2024-10-31T08:28:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/uatv.ua\/?p=1034556"},"modified":"2024-10-30T07:35:41","modified_gmt":"2024-10-30T05:35:41","slug":"south-korea-will-help-ukraine-after-dprk-involvement-kurt-volker","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/uatv.ua\/en\/south-korea-will-help-ukraine-after-dprk-involvement-kurt-volker\/","title":{"rendered":"South Korea Will Help Ukraine After DPRK Involvement: Kurt Volker"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

What if Trump wins – is it that bad for Ukraine? North Korean troops are in Ukraine – will the Pentagon lift the long-range weapons restrictions? Maybe South Korea can help Ukraine in fighting off the dictatorship alliance of North Korea and Russia?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These questions were answered by\u00a0Kurt Volker<\/strong>, US Special Representative for Ukraine (2017-2019), Executive Director of The McCain Institute for International Leadership (2012-2019) and US Ambassador to NATO (2008-2009), who\u00a0Henry Keen interviewed\u00a0for\u00a0UATV English<\/a>\u00a0channel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 If Donald Trump wins, do you believe this is bad for Ukraine? Some say it would be a disaster for Ukraine, that everything would collapse. Do you agree?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Well, let me put it this way. What\u2019s bad for Ukraine is a lack of decisive support from the West. We’ve seen strong support over the last two and a half years, but it hasn\u2019t been enough, fast enough, or strong enough, and often it comes with restrictions. This has allowed Putin to continue the war much longer than anyone wanted. That\u2019s already bad for Ukraine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

We need to break that pattern, no matter who the U.S. president is, whether it\u2019s Harris or Trump. The West has to show much greater strength toward Putin, to make him understand he won\u2019t succeed in defeating Ukraine.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Do you think either candidate will act in a way that benefits Ukraine?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 It’s hard to say what either candidate would do. If elected, Vice President Harris would likely continue Biden\u2019s approach, which has been good but not enough. Trump has said he wants to end the war quickly, but the only way to do that is if Putin stops attacking, which means we\u2019d have to convince him to stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was an op-ed by Mike Pompeo and David Urban in The Wall Street Journal<\/em> recently. They outlined a \u201cTrump plan\u201d for Ukraine, suggesting an ultimatum: either Putin stops the war, or the U.S. supplies Ukraine with all the necessary weapons until he does. But again, we don\u2019t know what Trump would actually do. In the short term, we need to ramp up support to convince Putin that this has to end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Could either candidate change things for Ukraine, though?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 I do think it would matter. Instead of this piecemeal approach, we need a major commitment. I would suggest a massive loan to Ukraine\u2014something like a $500 billion Lend-Lease package. That could allow Ukraine to purchase U.S. defense items, which would send a strong message to Putin. He would understand that he can\u2019t outspend this level of support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Trump would likely increase U.S. oil and gas production and exports, which would lower global energy prices, reduce U.S. energy costs, and cut funds for Putin\u2019s war. This could also limit funds for Iran’s proxy wars, so that\u2019s a likely and valuable step.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 That sounds like a good plan and beneficial for America, too, like the Lend-Lease Act for Britain in World War II.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Yes, it\u2019s similar. In World War II, we helped Britain with Lend-Lease before we entered the war ourselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Moving to another issue: North Korean troops reportedly fighting in Ukraine\u2014this is not yet confirmed by the Pentagon, though. Do you think it will be, and might it lead to lifting restrictions on long-range weapons?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Let’s address North Korea first. Russia has reportedly brought in North Korean troops. We don\u2019t know the exact numbers, but estimates suggest around 10,000 to 12,000 troops. Russia loses that many soldiers roughly every two weeks, so it\u2019s not a significant addition, especially since these North Korean troops might be quite disoriented. They\u2019re unlikely to significantly aid Russia’s war efforts, but they are an escalation since this involves more countries in the conflict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I don\u2019t understand why the Biden administration and European leaders aren\u2019t calling this out more loudly. It’s an unacceptable escalation that widens the war.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for long-range weapons, those restrictions should have been lifted long ago. Ukraine should be allowed to target military sites, even if they\u2019re in Russia. However, since we\u2019re close to the U.S. presidential election, the Biden administration may avoid any major announcements on Ukraine. After the election, I\u2019m hopeful we\u2019ll see changes and potentially some approvals for long-range weapons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Perhaps Ukraine could ask South Korea for support?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 South Korea might be open to helping, though I wouldn\u2019t ask for troops. But experts in intelligence, communications, and North Korean tactics could be very useful for Ukraine in dealing with the North Korean forces on the ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n