The outcome of Donald Trump’s meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders on Monday depends entirely on how you measure it. Many feared it could turn into a disaster similar to the president’s harsh treatment of the Ukrainian leader back in February—a possibility so real that leaders like Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron, and Friedrich Merz rushed to the White House to show their support.
After hosting Vladimir Putin in Alaska just days earlier, Trump reportedly suggested Ukraine should cede the Donbas region as part of a peace deal. Even if someone naively believed the Kremlin would see this as a resolution rather than a stepping stone for further aggression, it wouldn’t be a fair “land swap”—it would be a land grab that Ukraine, understandably, could never accept. Kyiv would be surrendering territory that Russia has spent years trying and failing to take by force.
Given past meetings, there was some relief after the Washington talks: things could have been worse. But by normal diplomatic standards—let alone Ukraine’s urgent needs—the situation was troubling. Last month, Trump threatened strong sanctions against Russia. On his way to Alaska, he warned of “very severe consequences” if a ceasefire wasn’t reached that day. Yet on Monday, as Ukrainian civilians faced intense Russian attacks, he said there was no need to stop the fighting while a deal was being negotiated.
Setting aside the administration’s lack of detail, competence, and consistency—and its failure to engage in the careful, committed diplomacy peace requires—the record shows Ukraine and its European allies are doing everything they can to sway Trump, from diplomatic gestures to arms deals. Still, his compass always seems to point back to Putin. Trump should be standing with a democracy and traditional allies against a war criminal, but at best, he wants to play mediator.
The Kremlin has yet to confirm Putin will meet Zelenskyy, as Trump claimed. Trump says the U.S. will “help out” Europe with security and “coordinate” efforts, but there’s no indication this administration will provide the kind of support that would encourage allies to commit troops or stand firm if challenged by Russia. Perhaps the most positive takeaway from Monday was how European leaders of different political stripes—including Italy’s Giorgia Meloni—managed to coordinate effectively. That’s encouraging, but preventing the worst is not the same as building a solid plan for the future.
Despite recent Russian advances—fueled by the prospect of talks—this war is also costing Moscow dearly. Putin may still decide it’s not in his interest to continue. But even if Trump sticks to his latest stance, it falls far short of what’s needed. Ukraine urgently requires action to rescue thousands of children kidnapped by Russia, a promise of future justice, and above all, a ceasefire before more lives are lost.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Frequently Asked Questions
Of course Here is a list of FAQs about The Guardians view on Trump and Zelenskyy based on the provided editorial
BeginnerLevel Questions
1 What is the main point of The Guardians article on Trump and Zelenskyy
The main point is that while the recent meeting between the two leaders wasnt a disaster Ukraine deserves more than just the bare minimum of support from the US Better than we feared is not a high enough standard
2 Who are Trump and Zelenskyy
Donald Trump is the former and potential future President of the United States Volodymyr Zelenskyy is the President of Ukraine leading the countrys defense against the ongoing Russian invasion
3 Why is the US relationship with Ukraine so important right now
The US is Ukraines most critical military and financial supporter in its war for survival against Russia A change in US policy could drastically alter the course of the war
4 What does better than we feared mean in this context
It means the meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy could have been much worse The fact that it was civil is a relief but its a very low bar to clear
Intermediate Advanced Questions
5 What specific concerns does The Guardian have about Trumps stance on Ukraine
The Guardian is concerned that Trumps past praise of Putin his America First ideology and his previous suggestion that he could end the war in 24 hours signal a willingness to sacrifice Ukrainian sovereignty for a quick deal
6 What does The Guardian believe Ukraine actually deserves from the US
The editorial argues Ukraine deserves consistent longterm and unwavering supportincluding necessary weapons and financial aidto achieve a just peace on its own terms not one forced upon it by a great power
7 How does this view relate to the upcoming US election
The Guardians view highlights the high stakes of the election for Ukraine A second Trump term creates significant uncertainty about the future of US support making steadfast bipartisan commitment now even more crucial
8 What is a just peace according to this perspective
A just peace is one that respects Ukraines territorial integrity and sovereignty meaning any peace agreement should
