Ultimately, the meeting will not take place. After Joe Biden, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, currently visiting the United States, was hoping to meet with Donald Trump. He also intended to present his “victory plan”, a series of measures that would allow, according to kyiv, to end the Russo-Ukrainian war. But the meeting fell through. The cause was a Interview with the Ukrainian President in the New Yorkeron September 22, which raised the ire of the Republican Party and, first and foremost, of its leader.
Asked about Donald Trump’s ambiguity about a Ukrainian victory and his ability to “settle the conflict in twenty-four hours,” Zelensky replied: “Trump doesn’t really know how to end the war, even if he thinks he does. In this kind of war, the closer you look, the less you understand. I’ve seen many leaders who were convinced they knew how to end it tomorrow, and when they delved into it, they realized it wasn’t that simple.”
But it was his running mate, JD Vance, who was the one who got the brunt of the criticism. “He’s too radical,” Zelensky criticized, before blasting his plan to bring peace to Ukraine – essentially, kyiv should give up the territories they invaded (Crimea, Donbass) to the Russians and retreat behind a demilitarized zone to avoid being attacked again…
Ukrainian President’s response: “I do not take Vance’s words seriously, because if that were the case, America would be heading towards a global conflict. […] This would imply that whoever takes control of a territory – not the rightful owner, but the one who arrived a month or a week ago, with a machine gun in his hand – is the one in charge. We would end up in a world where force prevails. And it would be a completely different world, a global confrontation.”
Immediate response
The response was swift. “So a foreign leader who has received billions of dollars from American taxpayers comes to our country and has the nerve to attack Republican presidential candidates? And he does it right after a pro-Ukrainian fanatic tried to assassinate my father? Shameful!” published on Xin the process, one of Donald Trump’s sons.
“Support for ending Russia’s war against Ukraine continues to be bipartisan, but our relationship is needlessly tested and needlessly tarnished when candidates at the top of the Republican presidential ticket are targeted in the media by officials in your administration,” House Speaker Mike Johnson told Zelensky, in only slightly more polite terms.
Beyond these reactions, a question arises: should a president really say that? Forty days before the American election, and in a hysterical political climate, attacking the potential next vice-president has all the makings of a diplomatic blunder. Even if he is, clearly, an enemy of the Ukrainian cause. Because JD Vance risks antagonizing the subject of Ukraine even more and making it an even more divisive campaign theme.
“Election interference”
Especially since another incident marred the Ukrainian president’s trip. Barely arrived on American soil, he visited an arms factory in Pennsylvania, accompanied by Democratic officials… But without Republicans. “Electoral interference” intended to “help the Democrats”, Mike Johnson criticized in his letter, urging President Zelensky to “fire his ambassador”, guilty of this protocol error.
These are the tensions that Trumpists could remember after November 5 if they win power – and even if they don’t. The support of Congress will indeed be essential to vote on future military aid to Ukraine. “This is a monumental mistake,” commented John Cornyn, Republican senator from Texas. “Ukraine needs all the friends it can get.” His counterpart from Texas, John Thune, also a Republican, had the final word, in an interview with Washington Examiner : “I think it would be better if he stayed away from American politics. It’s not his place to argue that here, in the middle of an American election.”
.