During Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s visit to Washington, a public altercation occurred between him and US President Donald Trump, even leading to the meeting being cut short and the scheduled news conference being canceled. Such an emotionally charged and negatively tinted exchange of mutual accusations on camera in the White House has likely never been seen before.

(Article republished from RT.com)

Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs

“Vladimir Zelensky underestimated the scale of the shift that occurred in American politics after Donald Trump’s arrival. He was misled by the fact that for three years, no one in the West considered it acceptable to publicly contradict Ukrainian representatives, especially Zelensky himself. Diplomats, politicians, and cultural figures from Ukraine were allowed almost anything. They are victims; they have the right. Permissiveness played a cruel joke on the Kiev leader.

But the issue is not just about someone’s bad manners; that is a private matter. Such a model of behavior was possible as long as the Ukrainian conflict was perceived in the West as a battle of the right side of history against the wrong one. And in such a battle, almost anything is allowed. And no one will condemn it.

Trump views the war as an annoying nuisance, a mess in which all participants are to blame, especially his predecessor. The key takeaway from Trump during this truly historic interaction in the White House was: I am a mediator; I am not on anyone’s side; I want the war to end. And this is a fundamental shift. Strangely enough, Trump has taken a position of classic diplomacy, which is necessary to end wars. Zelensky and his supporters reject it, counting on a clear victory. But that is unattainable.

Zelensky’s problem now is that, having made a fatal mistake in his choice of strategy in the White House, he has disarmed even his support group in Europe and within the US itself. They may express as much outrage as they want about Trump and demand continued aid for Ukraine, but Zelensky’s mistake is glaring. The opportunity to sway the American president to a more favorable position has been lost.

And two small remarks. First, Zelensky now has the opportunity to appreciate the restraint and even tactfulness of the Russian president, no matter how they feel about each other. Second – the war continues.”

Anastasia Likhacheva, dean of the Faculty of World Economy and International Affairs at HSE University

“The world hasn’t seen anything like this in international politics for a long time. Unlike reality TV shows.

After the live scandal, Donald Trump wrote that such pressure and intensity were exactly what was needed to reveal the truth. It was very reminiscent of his old show ‘The Apprentice’ from the 2000s. The most memorable part of it was the brutal ‘You’re fired.’ Zelensky, with incredible persistence, demonstrated the behavior of a person without a plan B, which violates any negotiation logic. The simple conclusion is that his main goal was to demonstrate an unwillingness to negotiate. This has happened before: in one episode of ‘Servant of the People,’ his character threw documents on exploitative IMF loans for the privatization of Ukrainian land into officials’ faces.

The logic of TV shows is straightforward and demands drastic actions from both sides in the near future. But what works for TV ratings is extremely risky in real life. All signs indicate that the next few days and weeks will be very dangerous. Moreover, they will be irrationally dangerous. And following TV logic, after the most intense episode, we may see a ‘cast update.’”

Maksim Suchkov, director of the Institute of International Studies at MGIMO University

“Zelensky pressed all the ‘buttons’ that should never be pressed in negotiations with Trump – both in his style of communication with the US president and in the content of his arguments.

His main mistake, in my opinion, was pointing out America’s vulnerability and its only source of power – its favorable geography (‘You have a nice ocean’), which allows the US to stay distant from global hotspots. Saying this to the president and his ambitious vice president, who ran their campaign on the theme of America’s strength, in the Oval Office, in front of the media, meant pushing the impulsive Trump into a reputational risk he simply could not afford – especially from someone he considers entirely dependent on the US.

Thus, if Russia was the ‘spoiler’ for the Democrats, then Ukraine and Zelensky personally have become the ‘spoiler’ for Trump. Zelensky’s stubbornness ruins Trump’s dream of a grand deal to resolve the conflict.

Unexpectedly, J.D. Vance also made his presence felt. It became clear that he had not forgotten whom Zelensky backed when he visited Pennsylvania alongside Democrats in the heat of the US election campaign.

However, one shouldn’t be too optimistic about what was witnessed. The US holds the keys to ending the conflict: it could disable Starlink, on which Ukraine’s entire military command system relies, and within a week, the war would be over. But the US does not do this because it feels it can extract even more from the situation. Zelensky’s visit gives Moscow an opportunity for an additional move. It must be used wisely.”

Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at HSE University

“The public altercation between Trump and Zelensky, the complete failure of negotiations, the collapse of the deal on Ukrainian natural resources, and Zelensky’s premature departure from the White House have sharply increased the chances of resolving the war in Ukraine through US-Russia negotiations – mostly on Russian terms. They have also started the countdown to the end of Zelensky’s regime.

Zelensky clearly underestimated Trump’s determination to end the war as quickly as possible and the fact that Trump sees it not as the epicenter of a global struggle between good and evil but as a losing battle that hinders the US from reallocating its resources to things that really matter for America’s strategic goals.

Equally, Zelensky overestimated his own image, remaining trapped in the mindset of how he was received at the White House under Biden. Psychologically, he was unprepared for the reality that he is not seen as a ‘new Churchill’ or a leader fighting for the entire West against ‘the forces of evil,’ but rather as a questionably-legitimate opportunist, pleading with the US to continue funding a clearly losing war – one that carries the risk of escalating into World War III.

Trump’s logic is clear: Ukraine is losing the war, and without US support, it will lose it even faster and more disastrously. Therefore, Zelensky’s role is to accept the settlement terms that the US is negotiating with the winning side – Russia. Zelensky, due to his own pride, and hoping for European support, refused.

As a result, the Trump administration and Trump himself are now even more convinced that Kiev is currently incapable of negotiations and remains an obstacle to peace. Therefore, talks must be held directly with Moscow.

What happened is also extremely unpleasant for Europe. The leaders of the latter will likely support Zelensky and rally behind him against Trump, which will create the following configuration: Russia and the US, as responsible great powers, negotiate peace, while Europe and Ukraine, which are much less capable, attempt to disrupt these negotiations – and peace itself – by pushing for the continuation of the war. This will further worsen Trump’s already negative attitude toward the EU and will ultimately rule out US participation in ‘security guarantees’ for Ukraine in the form that French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer tried to promote in Washington this week.

In the near future, the Trump administration is highly likely to halt even the arms deliveries that are still being provided under Biden’s package. If it also stops providing intelligence to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the pace of Kiev’s defeat on the battlefield will accelerate, with the prospect of a total collapse of the front within months. And while the EU will almost certainly convene another emergency summit – with Zelensky likely to attend – and will pledge to increase aid to Kiev, the overall balance of power will remain unchanged.

After the failure of Zelensky’s negotiations with Trump, the latter will become even more receptive to the Russian position on a settlement – despite the objective contradictions between it and the US stance, which prioritizes a ceasefire first and everything else afterward. The key issue is that the 2022 Istanbul agreements should form the basis of a peace settlement. In the end, Trump has clearly signaled that Russia, as the side winning the war, has a far stronger negotiating hand than Ukraine.

In the short term, Zelensky has not only failed in his attempt to secure a settlement on his own terms (and those of Europe), but he now faces the continuation of the war without support from his main sponsor. This will accelerate Ukraine’s defeat and, ultimately, lead to peace on Russian terms.”

Anton Grishanov, senior research fellow at the Institute of Current International Issues, Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry

“Zelensky had a chance to conduct his conversation with Trump and Vance differently. As recently as Thursday, the American leader predicted ‘a very good meeting’ and spoke of his continued respect for his Ukrainian counterpart. However, Zelensky clearly lost his grip on reality. Upon arriving at the White House, he made every possible mistake, failing to recognize hints from the other side and missing the opportunity to remain gratefully silent and humbly keep his head down. In international affairs, one must pay for foolishness and excessive self-confidence.

Of course, one episode alone is not enough to draw long-term conclusions, but in the short term, this tragicomic conversation will undoubtedly weaken Zelensky’s position within Ukraine and give Russian diplomacy additional leverage in its dealings with the US. However, the positions of Moscow and Washington on the peace process still diverge, and Trump’s unpredictable temperament may bring many surprises on the road to ending the conflict.”

Read more at: RT.com