James Campbell: Anthony Albanese, Peter Dutton watch on in dismay at Donald Trump’s Ukraine ravings

While it’s easy to mock those who predicted smoother sailing for Donald Trump 2.0, to be fair few could’ve predicted his explosive comments on Ukraine this week.

If you want to appreciate the craziness Donald Trump is unleashing in some conservatives you should get yourself an Instagram account and check out the comments under Peter Dutton’s post last Tuesday about Russia’s “barbaric” invasion of Ukraine.

In what, at the time anyhow, must have seemed reasonably uncontroversial sentiments, the Opposition Leader said “Australia stands proudly with President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people” and that “peace and stability will prevail across Europe if the free world stands together and continues to pressure Putin” who “must not be given an inch and certainly rewarded for his murderous deeds”.

Deliberately or accidentally, Dutton’s lines were an echo of Ronald Reagan’s proud boast to the Republican national convention that under his administration “not one inch of ground has fallen to the communists”.

Either way they did not go down well with some people who, from the look of their social media accounts, would probably consider themselves to be reliably conservative.

A typical example was: “Wise up, Peter … What’s Putin done to Australia? Ukraine has cost us the taxpayer a fortune” and “Peter please … don’t ruin ur chance of being elected … follow the lead of Trump.”

There was also a smattering of comments of the “Zelenksy isn’t even President” variety such as “he’s blocked the election, religious parties, opposition parties” and “he’s just got his hands out for more money”.

Peter Dutton’s seemingly uncontroversial social posts didn’t go down well with everyone. Picture: Brenton Edwards

The opinions of his detractors were not uniform, some blaming the UN for breaking treaties with Russia while others saying no, it was NATO.

No doubt a decent chunk of Dutton’s correspondents were Russian bots. But not all of them.

Clearly there are a bunch of right-wing people who have basically swallowed Russia’s talking points on the conflict.

To whose number, sadly, can now be added the President of the United States.

In the lead-up to his return to office, those of us worried Donald Trump’s return would be bad news for Ukraine were reassured it was all fine.

Typical was the British historian Niall Ferguson, who conceded that while “the conventional wisdom in Europe” was Vladimir Zelensky’s government would be among “the biggest losers” if he were re-elected and “the news that JD Vance had been picked to be Trump’s running mate seemed disastrous”, there was, in reality, no need to worry.

Speaking a few days before the election he reassured his audience at the Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney “it would be a mistake to assume” Trump’s choice of Vance “represented a victory for the isolationists much less the Putin apologists like Tucker Carlson”.

Mick Ryan, of the Lowy Institute, was even more upbeat suggesting “should Trump not be able to achieve a quick solution in the Ukraine war, he could well turn on Putin and increase US support to Ukraine”.

These points of view have not aged well.

But while it’s easy to mock, to be fair not many predicted that Trump would throw American policy into reverse so violently.

But reading Trump’s ravings about Ukraine – that it began the war, that Zelensky is “dictator without elections”, that his approval rating is 4 per cent, that America has spent $US350bn and that half that money is missing – it was hard not to agree with the journalist Andrew Sullivan’s observation that his position is now simply Russia’s.

“There doesn’t seem to be a sliver of daylight between the Kremlin and the White House’s” and “a vast chasm between Washington and Europe’s liberal democracies”.

Few could’ve predicted Donald Trump would throw US policy on the conflict into such violent reverse. Picture: AFP

Nor is that all.

For decades Russia’s main grievance against the Americans has been that they broke the promise of George Bush Sr’s secretary of state James Baker – that the boundaries of NATO would move “not one inch eastwards”.

Now according to a report in the respected German newspaper Bild, Putin may be on the verge of achieving his ambition of reversing this humiliation.

According to the report, the Europeans are worried the Americans are getting ready to accede to his pre-invasion ultimatum for a roll-back in deployments of NATO troops and weapons in central and eastern Europe.

“According to our information, it’s about Putin’s 2021 demands, i.e. a withdrawal of US troops from all NATO states that joined the alliance after 1990,” an unnamed eastern European security official told the paper.

It also reported the Italians were already preparing for the US withdrawal from the NATO-led peacekeeping mission in Kosovo.

It seems that when Trump told a Western leader he would “encourage them (the Russians) to do whatever the hell they want” if the country did not increase defence spending, he meant what he said.

So while one can share the disgust felt by Europe’s leaders about what is about to unfold, they cannot say they were not warned.

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky has been left between a rock and a hard place. Picture: AFP

Nor is there anything spontaneous about the price for protection Zelensky has been forced to agree to that will see half of all economic value of Ukraine’s “mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure” given to the US.

To be governed under New York law, this proposal, delivered in Kyiv by the US Treasury Secretary, and according to reports now agreed to, will also give the US first refusal on all future licences granted as well as 50 per cent of all revenue from licences granted to third parties should the Americans decide to pass.

And like a star who expects their cut to come from gross ticket sales rather than net profits, the Americans have demanded they be given dibs on all revenue generated.

These demands, it has been observed, are much harsher than those made of Germany in 1919.

Indeed, a closer parallel would be the sort of terms offered to a vanquished maharajah by the pillaging agents of the British East India Company, or the price of Tony Soprano’s protection.

As you can imagine there is disgust and dismay in Canberra across government and opposition about what is unfolding, and with our bonsai military nor is there a Plan B.

But for the Coalition there is the extra worry that not only is there now a small but not insignificant number of Trump superfan conservatives, but in Clive Palmer and his Trumpet of Patriots, vowing to “Make Australia Great Again” there is also a political product tailor-made for them.