Donald Trump said he would end the war against Ukraine. Whether that is still possible remains to be seen.

The lame-duck Biden administration’s position toward embattled Ukraine is now cynically clear: provide that country with as much authorized military hardware as possible, so that it finds itself in a better strategic position to negotiate with Russia, should President-Elect Donald Trump persuade Vladimir Putin to give serious negotiations a go.

Where, you rightly ask, is the cynicism, since Russia was the original aggressor and has now even enlisted North Korean soldiers to help it fight this war?

The answer is contained in a single menacing word: escalation.

In its alleged effort to help foster peace through strength, Biden is openly advancing strategies that will only roil Russia and make it less likely to listen to any Trump de-escalation entreaties. And Biden, who detests both Putin and Trump, knows this all too well.

In recent days, Biden has authorized the launch of American Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missiles into Russia, marking the first time in recent history that U.S.-made equipment has been exploded in Mother Russia, a nation still perceived by its unrepentant leader as his homeland in Cold War terms. Further, Biden has signed off on the dispatch of land mines along the Ukrainian-Russian border, an action so controversial that human rights groups are already deeply agitated, rightly so.

The stated means of accomplishing this goal are duplicitous, intended as much to impede Trump as save Ukraine.

Again, the expressed goal is a “better” peace.

The stated means of accomplishing this goal are duplicitous, intended as much to impede Trump as save Ukraine.

In more cold-blooded terms, had Trump not won the November election, and done so decisively, Biden would have been in no hurry with missiles and land mines. He would instead have watched the action from afar, as he has been for three years, providing moral support and limited military additions. Had Kiev pushed to launch ATACMS, Biden would have responded as he has in the past year: with an admonishment about taking things too far, thus stirring Russian ire. In fact, Ukrainian military leaders had over the last year become frustrated at the slow pace of American and NATO assistance. Even the North Korean move did not, until the election, drive Washington to issue threats about missiles and mines.

No, it wasn’t Koreans who accelerated Biden’s pace but his old nemesis Trump, who immediately after his triumph had aides speak openly of reaching a peace deal.

Not on my watch, said Biden to a White House wall, not if I can help it.

Why Biden’s passion on the subject? Because he had deep commercial dealings with the country before his election and had come to befriend many in its power structure. Ukraine was his baby, and now, three years into an invasion of Russia’s doing, no one would sully his legacy of support, however dubious some deemed it, with no American boots on the ground.

So, if you wish to believe that Biden turned to ATACMS and mines because of North Korea or to protect hallowed Ukrainian land, believe away. It’s a convenient fiction for those who think democracy belongs by rights to Democrats alone.

In reality, an election result shuffled the Biden deck. Cynicism, pure and simple, has paired with opportunism, making Biden’s final episode in the White House look, at least on its surface, stalwart and mighty.