Dan Cannon is a resident of Seaford.
Ostensibly, the White House meeting Friday was to sign an economic “deal” between Ukraine and the U.S. However, looking at and listening to the “conversations” between Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and President Donald Trump/Vice President JD Vance was very painful.
According to Trump/Vance, Zelenskyy was disrespectful and ungrateful for the U.S. aid furnished to Ukraine over the past three years. In essence, Zelenskyy refused to kiss the ring/bend the knee.
Trump had invited the media to attend and ask questions. Both Trump and Vance certainly knew that there would be tough questions about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s honesty, especially in regard to Putin’s claims that Ukraine was responsible for starting the war when, in fact, it was Russia that invaded Ukraine more than three years ago.
When a reporter did ask a question about trusting Putin, Vice President Vance essentially flipped out when Zelenskyy called out Putin’s long record of breaking many agreements, as evidence of his untrustworthiness. Trump/Vance didn’t want to hear these facts.
Three years ago, when the first spearhead of the Russian blitzkrieg thundered south toward Kyiv, Zelenskyy was offered a way to leave Ukraine. Reportedly, he responded, “I need ammunition, not a ride.” Obviously, this is a clear indication of a strong-willed leader who now continues to hold off the Russians and hold together his democratic country in the face of tens of thousands of dead and wounded soldiers and civilians.
Recently, in bilateral talks with Russia, Trump negotiators agreed with Putin’s demands to keep Ukraine out of NATO, as a condition for peace/peace negotiations.
In February, when Trump’s emissary to Ukraine twice pushed a contract/“deal” guaranteeing the U.S. mining rights for important minerals (e.g., rare earths) across the table, Zelenskyy refused to sign, as it had not been agreed to and did not contain security guarantees against further Russian aggression.
Trump immediately called Zelenskyy a “dictator” and said that he soon “wouldn’t have much country left.”
Such words about a proud Ukrainian president in the midst of a war started by Russian President Putin, a functional dictator, set the stage for the acrimonious exchange(s) in the Oval Office.
There are obvious questions raised by this scenario: 1.) Was Zelenskyy ill-advised to attempt to beard the bears in their lair? 2.) Was Vance trying to show his “dad” what a good boy he is? 3.) Was Trump/Vance’s personal animosity toward Zelenskyy the real driving force behind the fracas? 4.) Did Trump/Vance plan/orchestrate the situation to elicit a mutual blowup and breakdown in U.S./Ukraine relations to further please Putin? 5.) If you believe Trump and Vance are really clever, did they plan/orchestrate the situation to elicit a mutual blowup, antagonize our longstanding European allies and drive Ukraine toward security guarantees from Europe? 6.) Others?
While there is fault to be found on both sides, it appears to me that the big, bad boys in the White House intended to show the little guy from Ukraine just who was/is in charge and who holds all the “cards.”
While these kinds of behavior have apparently worked well for Trump his entire life in business, they are wildly inappropriate in an increasingly uncertain and dangerous world.
As several thoughtful observers have noted, this is not the way we should treat old friends and allies, especially if we want to continue to have old friends and allies.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
