The flare-up between Trump-Vance and Zelensky

The 10 minutes of belligerence shown by US Vice President James D Vance and President Donald Trump on the one side, and the mistimed argumentativeness of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the Oval Office, the President of the United States (POTUS) seat, on Friday had all the elements of a reality TV show.

It has rightly gone viral round the globe, and evoked responses from politicians in the United States, leaders in Europe, and the media, including the social media and the netizens. Yes, the talks between Trump and Zelensky had broken down, but it is unlikely that the US-Ukraine relations are at an end.

Editorials in The New York Times and The Washington Post have shown restraint. The arguments from these liberal newspapers was that Trump and Vance should not have berated Zelensky the way they did, and they did not fully endorse Zelensky while conceding that his arguments about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unreliability had merit.

So, the 10 minutes of what might in retrospect may seem as inconsequential, should not close the different viewpoints and opinions about the war in Ukraine. President Trump’s approach to the ceasefire might seem a little too hasty and even one-sided. But he and Vance have a point that there is no alternative to diplomacy in ending the war in Ukraine.

As a victim of the war, and there cannot be any fudging of truth here that Russia is the aggressor in this war, Ukraine has every reason to be suspicious of any commitments of peace that Putin would make. The Ukrainian apprehensions are justified. So, one has to look beyond the fiery 10 minutes in the Oval Office and in media glare.

It is certain that Trump would end military aid to Ukraine. This could have consequences for the military resistance and resilience of the Ukrainian military. It is the pressure on the battle-front that would push Zelensky to come round to the Trump mediation with Russia.

The speculation is that Zelensky will not be able to deal with the Trump White House and there is need for another leader to take his place. The US pressure on Ukraine’s political leadership cannot be ruled out. What seems to have happened is that Trump was in a tearing hurry to conclude the rare minerals agreement with Zelensky and also push Ukraine towards a ceasefire. Zelensky might have resisted handing full control of the mineral resources to the US in lieu of a ceasefire with Russia.

The attempted arm-twisting of Zelensky by Team Trump seems to have failed. Zelensky must have been quite conscious of the fact that he could not be seen as the Ukrainian leader who mortgaged the mineral wealth of the country to the US. The mineral resources are the main bargaining chip that Zelensky holds.

President Trump has to understand that Zelensky cannot be reduced to the status of an American puppet because that would cost him not only the popularity in Ukraine but it would also put an end to his political career. So, the belligerence on the part of Vance and Trump towards Zelensky was bad diplomacy and it was also a bad business tactic.

Trump must leave the door open to the possibility that while Ukraine is ready to sign a bilateral agreement on rare minerals with the US, it would expect the American military aid to continue to flow so that Ukraine will continue to fight the war with Russia until Moscow feels the pinch to end the war.

The Trump assumption that Ukraine is in no position to fight Russia is wrong. Ukraine has been fighting all on its own. If the Ukrainians did not fight, then the American and European military aid to Ukraine would be of no avail.