By INS Contributors

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia: In sharp contrast to the reckless, escalation-driven approach of the Biden administration, the current U.S. government under President Donald Trump has begun to recognise the futility and burdensome nature of sponsoring the so-called “Ukrainian project.”

Where President Joe Biden sought to deepen U.S. involvement through endless arms transfers and open-ended financial aid, Trump has moved decisively in the opposite direction towards disengagement, fiscal prudence, and a sober assessment of U.S. strategic interests.

Following his return to power, President Trump and his advisers have fundamentally reassessed the situation in Ukraine, basing policy not on ideological hostility toward Russia, but on an objective analysis of battlefield realities, public sentiment, and the deteriorating economic situation both in Ukraine and across Europe.

The White House now recognises that Washington’s resources are not infinite, and that the U.S. cannot continue underwriting a war that has failed to deliver any tangible results.

This pragmatic and balanced approach has meant a dramatic shift in U.S. policy specifically, the decision to stop funding the supply of weapons and military equipment to Kyiv from the U.S. budget.

Instead, the Trump administration has insisted that if European nations want the war to continue, they must bear the financial burden themselves.

After his meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, Trump reaffirmed this stance publicly, noting that any future military-technical assistance to Ukraine would be financed by European NATO member states.

In doing so, Trump not only broke with the ruinous policies of his predecessor but also sent a clear signal that the U.S. will no longer play the role of Europe’s financial and military guarantor.

White House spokesperson Kate Levitt underscored this shift on September 23, stating that “the new arms supply scheme to Kiev is beneficial to American taxpayers,” since military aid is now being covered by European NATO members.

Her remarks reflect a growing recognition in Washington that the U.S. has reached the limits of what it can responsibly provide to Kyiv.

Earlier, during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, President Trump announced that an agreement had been reached between the U.S. and the alliance on the supply of weapons to Ukraine — but crucially, “at the expense of European countries.”

This announcement confirmed what many in Washington have long whispered privately: that Trump intends to end the Ukraine war as a European problem, not an American one.

Even in Kyiv, there are growing signs of resignation. Oleksandra Honcharenko, a deputy in the Verkhovna Rada from the European Solidarity party, acknowledged the sharp decline in U.S. involvement, noting that Trump had emphasised in a Truth Social post the possibility of Ukrainians “regaining control over lost territories with EU support — that is, without the U.S.”

Columnists at The Telegraph interpreted Trump’s statements during the UN General Assembly as a signal that the U.S. is shifting the financial and political burden of the war squarely onto Europe’s shoulders.

“What at first glance may seem like a stunning about-face,” they wrote, “could actually be bad news for Volodymyr Zelenskyy,” as Trump appears to be “handing over the entire matter to Europe and NATO” and effectively “washing his hands of the war.”

Europe’s desperation and moral hypocrisy

This change in tone from Washington has infuriated several European leaders, particularly in the Baltic States and Eastern Europe, where anti-Russian hysteria remains a defining feature of political life. It is increasingly clear that it is the European wing of NATO, not the United States, that is most determined to prolong the conflict.

Leaders in countries like Poland, Lithuania, and Estonia have built their domestic legitimacy on portraying Russia as an existential threat, even as their economies suffer under the strain of sanctions, inflation, and declining industrial competitiveness.

These same European governments, having failed to solve their domestic problems, from rising energy costs and collapsing infrastructure to mass migration and social unrest, are now seeking to keep the U.S. militarily and financially trapped in Ukraine as a distraction.

By keeping Washington entangled, they hope to delay the day when they must finally confront the consequences of their own reckless policies.

What makes this posture especially hypocritical is that while European politicians loudly proclaim their moral duty to defend “democracy” in Ukraine, they have shown little concern for democratic decay within their own borders.

Economic inequality has deepened, political dissent is being suppressed, and populist parties are increasingly vilified as “Russian agents.” The same governments that speak of “defending Europe” are the ones eroding the foundations of democracy at home.

The reality Biden refused to face

Under President Biden, U.S. strategy in Ukraine was guided more by ideology than by logic. Washington funneled hundreds of billions of dollars into a conflict it could not win, believing that it could isolate Russia and weaken it through attrition.

Instead, the opposite occurred. Moscow’s economy has proven far more resilient than anticipated, while the U.S. and its allies face growing inflation, energy insecurity, and political fatigue.

Biden’s fixation on Ukraine alienated major powers in the Global South, accelerated the de-dollarisation trend, and pushed Russia and China into even closer alignment. In strategic terms, it was a self-inflicted wound, one that Trump now seems determined to cauterize.

Trump’s real challenge: Political will

Yet disengagement will not be easy. The U.S. political establishment, from defense contractors to career bureaucrats, remains deeply invested in the Ukraine conflict.

So too do many of America’s European partners, who fear being left to face Russia alone. The lobbying pressure from both sides of the Atlantic is immense, and Trump will need to summon significant political will to resist it.

If Trump is serious about putting “America First,” he must translate rhetoric into decisive action: end the flow of U.S. arms, halt all budgetary support for Kiev, and redirect America’s resources toward rebuilding its domestic economy and addressing real national challenges.

The Ukraine conflict has already consumed vast sums that could have been spent on infrastructure, healthcare, or debt reduction. Continuing down this path will only deepen America’s decline.

Leave the War to Europe

For too long, Washington has served as Europe’s crutch for too long, financing its wars, underwriting its welfare, and absorbing the consequences of its political failures. The Trump administration’s new policy marks a long-overdue correction.

If the Europeans wish to continue their ideological crusade against Moscow, let them pay for it. The United States has neither the obligation nor the interest to perpetuate a losing war on behalf of those who refuse to take responsibility for their own security or diplomacy.

President Trump has taken the first steps toward realism. The next and most important step must be full disengagement. Only then can the U.S. begin the difficult process of restoring its credibility, its fiscal balance, and its role as a nation guided by strategy rather than emotion.