mr.deepakhack August 19, 2025

SB. Zelenskyy’s ‘awkward’ response to Trump’s claim he could end the war ‘almost immediately’

As the war in Ukraine enters its third year, the possibility of negotiations and lasting peace remains one of the most urgent questions in international affairs. On August 18, 2024, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and former U.S. President Donald Trump both made headlines ahead of their scheduled meeting in Washington.

The contrasting perspectives highlight the sharp divide in approaches to peace talks, with implications for U.S. foreign policy, NATO, and the future of European security.

Zelenskyy’s Measured Reply

Zelenskyy, who arrived in Washington the same day, responded in a public message. He acknowledged the upcoming talks with Trump and emphasized that Ukraine seeks a durable peace rather than temporary pauses in fighting.

“Peace must be lasting,” Zelenskyy said, referencing the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 and the 2014 annexation of Crimea. He argued that past agreements, which provided only vague assurances, had left Ukraine vulnerable to renewed aggression【Kyiv Independent†source】.

Zelenskyy’s remarks reinforced his government’s position: that only legally binding security guarantees—such as NATO membership or equivalent defense commitments—can prevent Russia from launching future attacks.

Historical Context: The Budapest Memorandum

In 1994, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine held the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal. Under the Budapest Memorandum, it agreed to surrender its nuclear weapons in exchange for assurances of sovereignty and security from Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom, with France and China later offering similar statements of support【UN Treaty Collection†source】.

However, when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and launched a full-scale invasion in 2022, these assurances proved unenforceable. Ukrainian officials have since described the decision to disarm as a mistake, acknowledging that the guarantees lacked concrete enforcement mechanisms【BBC News†source】.

This history explains why Zelenskyy has repeatedly called for NATO membership and written defense treaties rather than verbal assurances.

The State of the Battlefield

Despite the grueling nature of the war, Ukrainian forces continue to report progress in certain regions. On August 17, Zelenskyy highlighted advances in the Donetsk and Sumy regions, though the overall frontline remains difficult and costly for both sides【Reuters†source】.

The Ukrainian president also expressed gratitude to the United States and European allies for ongoing military and financial support. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, Washington has provided more than $70 billion in aid to Ukraine since February 2022, including advanced air defense systems, artillery, and humanitarian assistance【DoD†source】.

Public and Political Reactions

Trump’s remarks prompted wide debate in Washington and among international observers. Critics argued that suggesting Ukraine could “end the war immediately” oversimplifies the conflict and risks legitimizing Russia’s territorial gains.

Supporters of Trump countered that a pragmatic approach could save lives by stopping hostilities sooner, though they acknowledged that such concessions would be controversial in Ukraine itself.

Zelenskyy’s reply was described by analysts as “diplomatic but firm,” signaling his intent to avoid open confrontation with Trump while defending Ukraine’s position on sovereignty and security.

Why Lasting Peace Matters

Zelenskyy’s insistence on durable guarantees stems from Ukraine’s historical experience. Temporary ceasefires, such as the Minsk agreements of 2014 and 2015, failed to prevent escalation. Instead, Russia used the pauses to regroup militarily, leading to the larger invasion in 2022【OSCE†source】.

By highlighting Crimea and the Donbas, Zelenskyy underscored that incomplete settlements can create conditions for future wars. International law experts note that territorial concessions under military pressure could set dangerous precedents for other conflicts worldwide【International Crisis Group†source】.

Looking Ahead: Washington Meeting

The August 18 meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump is expected to be closely watched, not only for its diplomatic tone but also for what it signals about U.S. politics. With the 2024 U.S. presidential election season intensifying, Trump’s views on Ukraine are under global scrutiny.

For Ukraine, the goal remains securing binding defense commitments and ensuring that any future peace is backed by strong international enforcement mechanisms. For Trump, the focus appears to be presenting himself as a dealmaker capable of brokering rapid solutions, even if they diverge from NATO’s stance.

Conclusion

The exchange between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy ahead of their Washington meeting illustrates the sharp divide in approaches to ending the war in Ukraine.

Trump argued that Ukraine could end the war immediately by making concessions.
Zelenskyy responded that only a lasting, enforceable peace—one that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty—can bring true security.

As the conflict grinds on, the world remains focused on whether diplomatic negotiations can eventually align with military realities. For now, Ukraine’s leadership insists that the lessons of past broken promises make one thing clear: peace must not only come quickly, it must also endure.