The tense Oval Office meeting on Feb. 28 involving President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky continues to reverberate. A U.S. “pause” in Ukrainian aid followed on Monday, with Trump saying Zelensky needed to show he was ready for peace.
That, apparently, Zelensky has done. At his Tuesday night speech to a Joint Session of Congress, Trump quoted from a letter he’d received from Zelensky earlier that day, that, “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer” and that Ukraine would sign the minerals deal “at any time that is convenient for you.”
Russians had jubilantly praised what Dmitry Medvedev, a top Putin ally, called Trump’s “proper slap down” of the “insolent pig,” while European leaders lined up behind Zelensky, suggesting they’d help fill the gap. That prompted another round of ill will when Vance referred dismissively to security guarantees from “some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years” — a comment he later said wasn’t specific to any nation, after France and Britain angrily noted they’d both sent troops to U.S. conflict zones for years, including Afghanistan.
So where do we go from here? Our Editorial Board Roundtable offers some thoughts.
Leila Atassi, manager public interest and advocacy:
The U.S. retreats from its leadership role, and the world is watching. Europe scrambles to fill the gap, while Russia celebrates. Meanwhile, Trump rewrites history, painting Ukraine as the villain, while shaking it down for mineral rights like a schoolyard bully demanding lunch money. If he can twist this narrative to justify abandoning an ally, what’s stopping him from reshaping all of America’s global relationships to serve his own agenda?
Ted Diadiun, columnist:
The president’s bombastic faceoff with Zelensky was Trump at his bullying worst. It’s hard to see how humiliating the courageous Ukrainian leader and forcing him into crawling acquiescence strengthened the chance of a just and reasonable peace for Ukraine and its allies. Trump’s negotiating style, effective as it may have been in private business, became an embarrassing misuse of power when put on public display.
Thomas Suddes, editorial writer:
Mr. Trump regularly says stupefying things; no surprise there. But Mr. Vance must know, given his intelligence and education, that few nations in modern times have suffered as much from invaders, Russian and German, as has Ukraine, whose many Catholics – a church to which Vance belongs – were unspeakably persecuted during the Soviet era. Read up, Mr. Vice President, before you mouth off, and stop toadying; you’ll be president soon enough.
Eric Foster, columnist:
I’m old enough to remember a time when we thought bullies were bad people. Times have changed. Trump is a bully. Always has been. His bullying antics hampered his own wife’s anti-bullying campaign during his first term. Still, it’s shocking to see a president bully an international ally on national television using the talking points of an international nemesis. Let us pray the shoe is never on the other foot.
Victor Ruiz, editorial board member:
America wanted a bully, and now we have one. The thing about bullies is that, sooner or later, people get fed up and fight back. I just hope Americans reach that point before the rest of the world does. If not, then the consequences could be devastating.
Mary Cay Doherty, editorial board member:
Public posturing may not mirror what happens behind closed doors in these negotiations. The bloody stalemate must end. Putin is untrustworthy, but, short of an upfront military defense commitment, we cannot “guarantee” Ukraine’s security. President Trump seeks a deal that offers Ukraine as much security as possible. And he must deter Russian aggression without pushing Russia into a deeper alliance with China, Iran, and North Korea. The needle is narrow.
Elizabeth Sullivan, opinion director:
President Trump’s bullying harangues are old news, even if shocking in the context of meeting with an ally during a high-stakes war. It was, however, JD Vance’s smoothly executed provocateur role that was most revealing about this chameleon in GOP clothing. In a dangerous pas de trois (de quatre, counting Putin), Vance is the one to watch - closely.
Have something to say about this topic?
* Send a letter to the editor, which will be considered for print publication.
* Email general questions about our editorial board or comments or corrections on this Editorial Board Roundtable to Elizabeth Sullivan, director of opinion, at esullivan@cleveland.com