With
a
brittle
ceasefire
in
the
Middle
East,
President
Donald
Trump
secured
the
headlines
he
wanted,
and
he
has
now
set
his
sights
on
Ukraine.
Meeting
with
Ukrainian
President
Volodymyr
Zelensky
in
the
White
House
on
October
17
to
discuss
the
possibility
of
further
cooperation
between
the
United
States
and
Ukraine,
Trump
had
previously
indicated
a
potential
willingness
to
send
Ukraine
Tomahawk
missiles
to
allow
for
strikes
deep
within
Russia’s
home
territory.
Ultimately,
the
U.S.
president
declined
to
supply
Tomahawks
to
Ukraine,
at
least
for
now.
Trump
has
seemingly
switched
loyalties
several
times
during
the
course
of
this
war,
and
just
prior
to
his
meeting
with
Zelensky
took
a
phone
call,
and
arranged
a
future
in-person
meeting,
with
Russia’s
leader
Vladimir
Putin.
Since
Trump
took
office
in
January,
Putin
has
masterfully
evaded
further
U.S.
sanctions
and
placed
in
doubt
America’s
previously
unwavering
support
for
Ukraine
through
a
determined
campaign
of
personal
flattery
and
dangling
hypothetical
business
deals
in
front
of
the
American
president.
U.S.
support
has
been
key
to
the
Ukrainian
war
effort.
Still,
Trump
is
the
definition
of
an
unreliable
ally.
In
just
the
latest
example
of
this,
it
took
less
than
a
month
for
Trump
to
go
from
saying
Kyiv
can
“win
all
of
Ukraine
back
in
its
original
form”
and
get
back
“the
original
borders
from
where
this
war
started,”
to
saying,
“Let
[Ukraine]
be
cut
the
way
it
is.
It’s
cut
up
right
now.
I
think
78%
of
the
land
is
already
taken
by
Russia.
You
leave
it
the
way
it
is
right
now.”
Unfortunately,
such
contradictory
nonsense
matters
when
the
79-year-old
dotard
uttering
it
is
the
president
of
the
United
States.
But
peace
will
not
be
had
based
on
territorial
concessions
to
Russia.
As
long
as
Putin
is
in
charge,
a
Russia
in
possession
of
seized
territory
will
always
be
the
proverbial
mouse
given
a
cookie.
If
Trump
wanted
a
real,
lasting
peace
in
Ukraine,
he’d
be
better
served
to
let
the
disastrous
economics
of
how
Russia
is
conducting
this
war
run
their
course.
While
Russia’s
economy
has
proven
surprisingly
resilient
to
international
sanctions,
Moscow
has
reported
a
budget
deficit
of
$51
billion
for
the
first
eight
months
of
this
year,
and
its
own
central
bank
has
issued
warnings
over
depleted
production,
labor,
and
financial
reserves.
With
Russia’s
economy
now
almost
wholly
reliant
on
discounted
long-term
energy
sales
to
India
and
China,
the
Kremlin
is
proposing
significant
defense
budget
cuts.
Russia’s
misuse
of
its
military
resources
was
on
full
display
during
its
recent
bombardment
of
Lviv.
Five
people
were
killed
—
four
of
these
innocent
victims
were
a
whole
family
whose
house
was
flattened
—
with
terrorism
being
the
only
apparent
purpose
of
the
attack.
Yet,
the
people
of
Lviv
were
not
at
all
terrorized.
The
bombing
took
place
early
in
the
morning
on
a
Sunday.
By
that
afternoon,
there
were
more
people
sitting
out
convivially
on
the
sidewalk
patios
of
Lviv’s
numerous
cafes
and
bars
than
there
had
been
the
previous
day.
That
night,
an
impromptu
street
dance
sprang
up
in
a
historic
Old
Town
square.
Nobody
was
cowed.
Russia
spent
at
least
$200
million
to
accomplish
nothing
beyond
murdering
five
noncombatants.
According
to
the
governor
of
the
Lviv
region,
Maksym
Kozytskyi,
the
Russians
struck
Lviv
with
140
Shahed
kamikaze
drones
and
about
two
dozen
cruise
missiles.
Earlier
versions
of
the
Shahed
drones
imported
by
Russia
were
significantly
more
expensive,
but
now
that
Russia
is
increasingly
producing
them
domestically,
costs
have
fallen
to
an
estimated
$70,000
per
unit.
That’s
still
almost
$10
million
worth
of
drones
alone.
Ten
million
dollars
spent
on
drones
is
a
pittance
compared
to
the
cost
of
the
cruise
missiles.
Although
Ukrainian
authorities
did
not
delineate
the
exact
number
of
each
type
of
missile
that
was
fired
into
Lviv,
we
do
know
some
of
them
were
Kalibr
cruise
missiles
launched
from
the
Black
Sea
(cost:
$6.5
million
apiece),
at
least
one
was
a
Kh-101
cruise
missile
($13
million)
and
some
were
Kinzhal
air-launched
ballistic
missiles
(with
a
whopping
sticker
price
of
$15
million
per
unit).
Even
if
you
assume
that
the
majority
of
the
missiles
were
of
the
cheapest
variety,
Russia
was
well
past
$200
million
spent
on
military
hardware
alone
in
this
bombing,
to
say
nothing
of
all
the
other
costs
like
fuel
and
personnel.
Russia
is
indeed
occupying
some
Ukrainian
territory
(though
nowhere
near
78%
of
it
—
possibly
Trump
was
thinking
only
of
the
Donbas
region
with
that
figure).
The
tactics
Russia
now
must
resort
to
are
unlikely
to
win
it
any
more
large
territorial
gains.
Literally
burning
$200
million
worth
of
weaponry
over
the
skies
of
Lviv
to
demoralize
no
one
bleeds
Russia’s
struggling
wartime
economy,
and
these
are
the
types
of
attacks
Russia
now
routinely
launches.
Trump
cannot
secure
a
real
peace
in
Ukraine
by
offering
Ukrainian
land
to
Russia.
What
he
could
do
to
end
the
war
is
hasten
the
economic
ruin
that
Russia
has
brought
upon
itself
with
this
invasion.
Russia
cannot
sustain
the
level
of
waste
it
is
engaging
in
indefinitely.
When
the
Russian
economy
finally
breaks,
it
will
be
forced
to
withdraw
its
forces,
for
good.
Jonathan
Wolf
is
a
civil
litigator
and
author
of Your
Debt-Free
JD (affiliate
link).
He
has
taught
legal
writing,
written
for
a
wide
variety
of
publications,
and
made
it
both
his
business
and
his
pleasure
to
be
financially
and
scientifically
literate.
Any
views
he
expresses
are
probably
pure
gold,
but
are
nonetheless
solely
his
own
and
should
not
be
attributed
to
any
organization
with
which
he
is
affiliated.
He
wouldn’t
want
to
share
the
credit
anyway.
He
can
be
reached
at [email protected].