Zelensky’s Masterclass in Poor Diplomacy

For all the high talk about good diplomacy throughout yesterday’s meeting between Zelensky, Trump, and Vance, it was the one thing most notably absent. Beginning in the formulaic manner of these meetings before the press, the discussion was soon derailed and the talks exploded. An excruciating watch.

The Vice President, JD Vance, accused Zelensky of being ungrateful and disrespectful to both the American people and to Trump, while Zelensky pushed back on the viability of any deal with Putin, attempting to litigate the question in front of the cameras.

From the clips circulating on mainstream news channels, observers might be forgiven for thinking the whole disagreement was triggered by an uncharacteristic outburst from JD Vance – I was appalled on first viewing – but the context of the full meeting shows the tremendous misjudgment of Zelensky. Misjudgment which may cost his country dearly.

The fifty-minute clip linked above shows that for the first 40 minutes, the discussions were cordial. There was the usual talk about the need for Europe to “step-up”. The discussions between the British Prime Minister and Trump, in which Marco Rubio reasserted America’s commitment to the ideal of free speech, were also recapped. Zelensky looked tense, and uncomfortable, but this is to be expected of a man bearing the weight of his country’s sorrows.

There were signs of the coming clash when Zelensky interjected in order to talk directly to the press about the potential negotiations. He reminded Trump that the conflict is in fact between the Ukraine and Russia, and that his country would also be present at any negotiating table. Zelensky also launched a defence of European states saying:

“Europe is very important for us. I want to speak about it with the President. We really defend Europe for today. All Europe really recognises that we are the defending line, and they have real life and our people are dying. That is why they helped us.”

Trump becomes visibly irritated after Zelensky raises the prospect of American deaths if Russia goes further and threatens the Baltics and Poland, thus necessitating US intervention on the ground. Trump replies that “I don’t want to talk about our deaths, I want to talk about making a deal”. Zelensky also interjects while Trump is speaking about the destruction of towns and cities in the Ukraine to explain to him, and to the press, that they “have very good cities” and that throughout the country life goes on as usual with children continuing to go to school, receiving their education. It is an obvious attempt to push back on the narrative that the Ukraine has been destroyed, which Zelensky sees as successful Russian propaganda. But paired with the demand “you have to come and look”, it comes across as a rebuke. It is tough watching a man navigate delicately between impressing upon his oval office audience the gravity of the threat and good chance for success of the Ukrainians on the ground, all while attempting to maintain the morale of those watching back home.

Zelensky also had to sit through a bizarre tangent in which Trump seemed to suggest a bond forged between him and Putin over the Russia-gate scandal which plagued Trump repeatedly throughout his first term in office: “He had to suffer through the Russia Hoax… it was all Biden; it was nothing to do with him”. It is hard to imagine that Trump seriously believes that Putin much cared about the constant hounding of the American press on this issue, having rarely received favourable reviews in the past. It is a reminder, however, of the clearly tremendous psychological impact which the hoax and subsequent persecution had on President Trump, and it should not be underestimated the degree to which his politics has been shaped by the experience.

At the heart of the matter, however, there was fundamentally a disagreement between a man confident in his ability to “make a deal” with any party over anything, and a man who doubts that Putin could ever be held to his word. Zelensky’s comments throughout the meeting demonstrated a resistance to come to the negotiating table. When Trump spoke about the suffering “on both sides”, Zelensky was visibly perturbed. At one point when Trump was imploring the press to think about the parents of those who have been “needlessly” killed “whether they are in Russia or Ukraine”, the Ukrainian President interrupted him to assert that the Russians were the invaders. It was apparent throughout the meeting that Zelensky struggled to tolerate language which suggested the competing interests of “two sides” and that negotiations might have an element of moral neutrality from the USA’s perspective.

Zelensky has probably never been in a room with an ally in which Russia was treated as anything other than the obvious aggressor and Putin as the by-word for evil. Trump explained to the room:

“If I didn’t align myself with Putin, you’d never have a deal…. You see the hatred [Zelensky]’s got for Putin. It’s very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate. You’ve got tremendous hatred. I understand that and the other side isn’t exactly in love with him either”

Trump clarified that “it’s not a question of alignment. I’m aligned with the world. I’m aligned with Europe”. When Vance admonished the previous administration as being all talk and no action compared to Trump’s tactic of offering “the path in diplomacy”, Zelensky stepped in to take Vance to task and litigate the question of whether any diplomacy with Russia could ever be successful, thus undermining the basis of the very agreement the Ukrainian and US Presidents were set to sign.

It was a brutal miscalculation which appeared to make no sense. In an attempt to push the Vice President for mere words condemning Putin, and to clarify that he is a bad-faith actor, Zelensky instead unleashed the righteous indignation of JD Vance which was soon joined by the President who seemed resentful of Zelensky’s tactic of emotional blackmail. At one point, Vance reminded Zelensky that he had campaigned for Biden in October – another example of the leader’s poor judgement – and that he should be grateful that Trump is “going to end the destruction of” his country. The discussion culminated in both Trump and Vance airing the weaknesses of the Ukrainian position and the arrogance of its leadership in a display which strikes any observer as entirely counterproductive going into negotiations with their enemy. Here, both Vance and Trump became self-indulgent and unstatesmanlike with a display more fitting for a debate against a domestic political opponent than with a world leader and an ally. But Zelensky knows Trump and, frankly, the fate of his country rests on Zelensky understanding how best to massage the egos of his allies. It seems unlikely that it was Zelensky’s intention to undermine his negotiating position to such a degree that a deal would be taken off the table. But in his arrogance, and lack of prudence, he has certainly allowed this to happen.