- Статьи
- World
- Drive in the protocol: how Zelensky's failure in the United States will affect the Ukrainian conflict
Zelensky's failed negotiations with Trump forced Europe, for the first time, to think directly about resolving the conflict in Ukraine. Following the London meeting on March 2, Britain and France even declared their readiness to present a peace plan. At the same time, most of the European allies once again insisted on continuing to support Kiev — the UK announced the allocation of £ 1.6 billion for the purchase of air defense and £ 2.2 billion in loans. Although the same British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte advised Zelensky to establish a dialogue with Trump. There is no consensus in the European camp: the leaders of Hungary and Slovakia have already made it clear that it will be difficult to reach a consensus on defense policy at the EU summit on March 6. What were the consequences of Zelensky's diplomatic failure in the Oval Office and how it will affect the negotiations between Russia and the United States on Ukraine — in the Izvestia article.
The failure of the rare earth metals deal
"We are grateful to the United States for all the support, I am grateful to the president To Trump and Congress for their bipartisan support, especially in these three years," this message appeared on Vladimir Zelensky's page on the social network X a few hours after the Ukrainian leader scandalously left the White House without concluding an agreement on rare earth metals on February 28.
The personal meeting between the Ukrainian and American leaders took place for the first time after Trump's inauguration and followed a successful round of negotiations between the Russian Federation and USA in Saudi Arabia. After that, it became obvious that there were many contradictions between the new Washington administration and Kiev. Moreover, the fiasco in the White House has stunned Europe, which has recently been trying to keep up with the American locomotive and win a place at the negotiating table. Ukraine.
From left to right: President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, President of the United States Donald Trump and Vice President of the United States Jay Dee Vance at the White House in Washington, DC, USA, February 28, 2025
For about 10 minutes of the protocol part, which took place in the presence of the press, Donald Trump and US Vice President Jay Dee Vance rather harshly countered the words Zelensky, accusing him of not being grateful enough to Washington for supporting Ukraine. Trump eventually accused Zelensky of "flirting" with World War III. In response, the Ukrainian leader, also bypassing protocol, argued with his American colleagues, interrupting them every now and then and claiming that Ukraine was not ready to freeze the conflict. In this regard, Zelensky's statement on social media looks like an ironic comment on the American administration.
It was expected that after the public part, the parties would discuss the details of the deal, which would give the United States the right to develop deposits of rare earth metals on the territory of Ukraine. As a result, the Kiev delegation waited for an hour, and the country's ambassador to the United States, Oksana Makarova, according to some media reports, tearfully begged the Americans to return to negotiations. However, this did not happen. American media claim that Trump kicked Zelensky out of the White House, while Ukrainian media claim that he left on his own in anger. At least, the footage shows that no one was escorting Zelensky to his car. Sources close to the White House describe such a curious detail: Trump allegedly even ate a lunch prepared for Zelensky.
Immediately after the failed negotiations, it became known that the White House administration had reduced the USAID presence in Ukraine from 64 to eight employees — the agency played a key role in maintaining the country's economic stability. In addition, Trump ordered to study the cessation of arms supplies to Kiev.
At the same time, Zelensky probably has the opportunity to roll back. The State Department called on the Ukrainian leader to publicly apologize, and Trump said he would be ready to receive him again when he was "ready for peace." Later, Assistant to the President of the United States for National Security Mike Waltz expressed doubt about Zelensky's desire to negotiate a peaceful settlement in good faith, and also noted that the United States needs a Ukrainian leader with whom to do business.
Later, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Latnick spoke about the outcome of the negotiations on Fox News. According to him, Washington is not currently considering the resumption of the broken agreement with Ukraine on mineral resources. In addition, he noted that the United States is not going to give Kiev money until Zelensky arrives in peace, and also will not give security guarantees while the conflict continues.
After the unsuccessful meeting, Zelensky called French leader Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. He was supported by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Head of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schof, and head of EU diplomacy Kaya Kallas. At the same time, Starmer and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte carefully advised Zelensky to establish a dialogue with Trump. This once again underlines that Europe is not ready to assume all obligations and is relying on the United States.
It is noteworthy that just the night before the talks between Donald Trump and Vladimir Zelensky, the Ukrainian Armed Forces tried to attack the Turkish Stream compressor station with three UAVs in order to stop gas supplies to Europe. Hungary immediately condemned it. During a telephone conversation with Sergey Lavrov, the country's Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said that the failure of the Turkish Stream gas pipeline would pose a "serious threat" to energy security.
Great Britain and France called for the creation of their own peace plan
Against the background of the failed negotiations in the Oval Office, the London security summit, scheduled for March 2, became particularly important. After similar meetings in Paris on February 17 and 19, European leaders gathered again in an attempt to strengthen their own and Ukrainian defense capabilities in case Trump suddenly makes a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin and withdraws support for Ukraine.
Vladimir Zelensky flew to London immediately from Washington: after talks with Trump, he had to cancel a number of planned events. Macron, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, Polish Prime Minister Tusk and his Czech counterpart Petr Fiala, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, Italian Prime Minister Giorgio Meloni, and other leaders arrived in the British capital to discuss support for Kiev and the future of European security. The outgoing Chancellor Olaf Scholz was also present, but his voice no longer carries the same weight. Interestingly, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan was at the meeting. Of course, the leaders of the EU and NATO were also invited: the head of the European Commission, von der Leyen, the President of the European Council, Antonio Costa, and the Secretary General of the alliance, Rutte.
Ukraine Summit at Lancaster House in London, United Kingdom, March 2, 2025
At the same time, the governments of the Baltic states remained uninvited. They probably understand in Europe that not everyone is able to offer any constructive solutions - Tallinn, Riga and Vilnius remain among the most aggressive actors towards Moscow. The leaders of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were quick to express their displeasure, after which British Prime Minister Keir Starmer apologized and contacted the heads of state via video link.
Even before the start of the summit, Starmer said that Britain and France intend to develop their own ceasefire plan in Ukraine. The parties are ready to work with the involvement of one or two other countries together with Ukraine, and then present the final version to the United States.
Europe's alternative plan is likely to be ignored both in Moscow and Washington, where they will continue the only meaningful dialogue at the bilateral level to date, followed by the involvement of other players as needed, suggested Tigran Meloyan, an analyst at the HSE Center for Mediterranean Studies, in an interview with Izvestia.
— The European Security Summit in London, which serves as a prologue to the emergency summit on Ukraine in Paris, is designed to find ways to form a coalition amid uncertainty about US support. Moreover, it is possible that such a coalition will strive by all means to prolong the conflict until 2026, waiting for the weakening of the Republican positions in the US Congress. The political goal of the London and Paris summits is to demonstrate that there cannot be negotiations that affect European security without the participation of Europe itself, the expert believes.
The head of the European Commission was the first to summarize the results of the meeting in London. "Ukraine needs comprehensive security guarantees that support its economic and military positions," Ursula von der Leyen said. She also noted the urgent need to rearm Europe and assured that the European Commission would propose an appropriate plan on March 6 at the upcoming summit. After that, Rutte immediately announced an increase in the defense budgets of some European countries.
They did not forget about Ukraine either. The UK has announced the allocation of £1.6 billion, which, according to Starmer, should be enough money to buy more than 5,000 British—made air defense missiles. This money is a bonus to the £2.2 billion in loans that London promised to provide to Kiev a day earlier.
On March 6, both Ukraine and the security of Europe will be discussed again, but in full, against the background of the statements of the new American administration. Tusk said that the European Commission is preparing a defense package, the details of which will be announced at the summit. At the same time, it was clear even before the meeting that it would not be easy to reach any kind of consensus.
Thus, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said that his country would not support Ukraine financially or militarily, and also stressed that Kiev would never be able to become powerful enough to negotiate with Moscow from a position of strength. Bratislava calls for an immediate ceasefire regardless of whether a consensus on a peace agreement is reached.
Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico
Budapest also insists on direct negotiations with Russia. In a letter that Hungarian leader Viktor Orban sent to the president of the European Council on March 1, he talks about the strategic differences between his country and other EU states. According to Orban, the council should not adopt the draft conclusions on Ukraine, instead it should support the UN Security Council resolution, which does not name Russia as an aggressor.
How the scandal in the White House will affect the negotiations between Russia and the United States
In the United States, Zelensky's behavior has provoked condemnation from almost all American politicians. Against this background, the statements from the United States regarding the earlier negotiation process with Russia are particularly contrasting — its results in Washington are assessed as extremely positive.
By the way, even during the conversation with Zelensky, Trump mentioned Vladimir Putin, saying that he had gone through "damn hard times" and a "fake witch hunt" with him during his first term. Later, Secretary of State Marco Rubio noted: of course, it will not be easy to negotiate with Putin, but the United States intends to try and find out Russia's position on resolving the crisis.
Representatives of Donald Trump's team in dialogue with Russia proceed from the fact that they do not command Moscow, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. According to the minister, Russia and the United States are sitting down at the negotiating table as two serious countries in order to understand "where they have something wrong" and what Trump's predecessor has done in four years.
— It is absolutely clear that the US administration is ready to sacrifice both Ukrainian and European interests to some extent. These are tough negotiators who see pressure, arm-twisting and ultimatums as a communication tool. They are not very ready to give up their vision if it seems to them that these should be concessions from Ukraine or even from Russia," said Ivan Loshkarev, associate professor of Political Theory at MGIMO, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Candidate of Political Sciences.
Against this background, the disappointing outcome of the meeting between Trump and Zelensky at the White House should not be perceived as an obvious advantage for Russia, the expert believes. Although, for example, Finnish President Alexander Stubb has publicly stated the opposite. "It was a diplomatic setback, in which there was actually only one winner, and he wasn't even present at the negotiations," he said, referring to Vladimir Putin.
It is important to emphasize that Moscow and Washington have a fundamental difference in their approaches to resolving the Ukrainian conflict, Loshkarev says. As the conversation at the White House showed, the current US administration sees the establishment of a temporary truce as the first step. At the same time, the Russian position is that first a full-scale agreement on all issues and only then a cease-fire.
Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stressed that conditions are needed for long-term and sustainable peace, not a temporary truce. Moreover, during the talks in Riyadh, as explained by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, it was noted that Moscow does not want to agree to terms for a ceasefire in Ukraine without eliminating the root causes of the conflict.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
