Facebook
X
LinkdIn
Copy Link
Will the real Volodymyr Zelensky please stand up? On Sunday, Ukraine’s president defiantly stated that “the final deal about ending the war is very, very far… nobody’s even started all those steps yet.” But just three days later, Zelensky’s office issued a statement saying more or less the opposite. “None of us wants an endless war,” read his official communiqué. “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer… we are ready to work fast to end the war.”
So is Kyiv’s plan a quick ceasefire or a fight till victory? Zelensky’s mixed messages have left his allies confused and provided his enemies with political ammunition.
In the aftermath of Zelensky’s comments about the end of the war being “very far” away, Donald Trump immediately shot back on Truth Social that “this is the worst statement that could have been made by Zelensky, and America will not put up with it for much longer!” Senator Lindsey Graham — once a staunch supporter of Ukraine — told reporters that Zelensky “either needs to resign and send somebody over that we can do business with, or he needs to change.”
Initially, in the wake of his disastrous Friday meeting at the Oval Office, it seemed that Zelensky might stick to his guns — literally. Some of the Europeans among British prime minister Keir Starmer’s assembled “coalition of the willing” appeared ready to take the US’s place and supply the arms and cash needed to continue fighting. NATO secretary-general Mark Rutte stuck with the old playbook, announcing that European countries were “stepping up” to make sure Ukraine has what it needs to “stay in the fight as long as it has to continue.”
Then came the ultimate mind-focusing moment: on Monday night, Trump announced a suspension of US military aid to Kyiv, including equipment already authorized by Congress. An imminent military disaster in a matter of weeks loomed. But soon after, Vice President J.D. Vance appeared, playing the good cop. “Our European friends [are] really doing a disservice to the Ukrainians,” Vance told Fox News’s Sean Hannity. “They say, ‘You’re a freedom fighter. You need to keep fighting forever.’ Well, fighting forever with what? With whose money? With whose ammunition? And with whose lives?” But crucially, Vance also held out an olive branch to Zelensky, saying that Washington might resume arms and military equipment shipments, as long as “they’re willing to talk peace.”
Zelensky’s response was not long in coming. “Nobody wants peace more than Ukrainians,” wrote Zelensky in his lengthy statement on Wednesday. “My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts.”
An ugly instance of a great power bullying a dependent ally? Indeed. But effective. Trump seems to have achieved the change of tone he demanded from Ukraine in short order.
In an apparent nod to Vance’s (untrue) accusation in the Oval Office that he had not expressed gratitude for US aid, Zelensky went out of his way to emphasize that “we do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence… we remember the moment when things changed when President Trump provided Ukraine with Javelins… we are grateful for this.”
Though Zelensky didn’t actually apologize for the White House meltdown — indeed, it’s hard to see what he should have apologized for other than a rather tactless bluntness — he did call the incident “regrettable” and said that “it is time to make things right… we would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive.”
Finally, Zelensky assured the US that Ukraine was ready to sign the agreement on minerals and security abandoned in the White House on Sunday at “any time and in any convenient format.” Reports from the White House suggest that may happen in days.
If European tweets promising to stand by Ukraine were ballistic missiles, the Kremlin would by now be in ruins
What prompted Zelensky’s abrupt about-face from defiance one day to abject subjection the next? First and foremost, pragmatism. Zelensky told the Guardian on February 11 — well before the White House debacle — that “there are voices which say that Europe could offer security guarantees without the Americans, and I always say no… security guarantees without America are not real security guarantees.”
Second, according to two senior sources in Kyiv who used to work at senior levels in the Zelensky administration, there has been serious talk since the weekend of forcing him to resign. “A president who has lost the trust of [Washington] is not a president who can lead us to peace,” says one former minister, who requested anonymity when speaking of his former boss. “When you have senior people in the US saying they cannot work with [Zelensky], this is a serious problem for our country.”
Third, of course, the prospect of fighting Russia without American weapons. If European tweets promising to stand by Ukraine were ballistic missiles, the Kremlin would by now be in ruins. But as it is, until Europe walks with a stick as big as its words, Zelensky relies on hard US steel, electronics and high explosives.
Whether Zelensky’s letter will be enough for the White House to let him off the hook and work with him towards peace remains to be seen. Zelensky proposed a series of confidence-building measures such as “release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same.”
It’s far from clear who will carry that message to Putin, or who from the Ukrainian side will sit down at the table with Kremlin officials to thrash out a deal. Both Putin and Zelensky have made it abundantly clear that their first and only meeting in Paris in December 2019 will never be repeated. The two men despise each other personally, and wish their enemy deposed, killed or jailed.
That puts the ball firmly back in Trump’s court as he prepares for reportedly imminent talks with Putin in Riyadh. Except now it looks like he may have one thing he previously lacked — Zelensky’s agreement to back a ceasefire. The process of browbeating Ukraine into submission may have been ugly. But the result could be the first real step towards an end to the bloodshed.
