Zelensky’s Washington trip a ‘complete failure’ – Moscow

by RT [3-1-2025 published].

Russia has repeatedly highlighted the Ukrainian leader’s “inadequacy” and inability to negotiate, according to the Foreign Ministry’s spokeswoman.

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s recent visit to Washington was a “complete political and diplomatic failure” for Kiev, according to Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova.

Her comments follow a tense meeting between Zelensky, US President Donald Trump, and Vice President J.D. Vance at the White House on Friday, which ended abruptly without a planned minerals agreement being signed. During a heated exchange in the Oval Office, Zelensky resisted Trump’s demand to negotiate peace with Moscow, leading Trump to accuse him of ingratitude, “gambling with World War III,” and an unwillingness to end the conflict.

On Saturday, Zakharova criticized Zelensky’s “outrageously boorish behavior” in Washington, stating that his actions confirmed “he is the most dangerous threat to the world community as an irresponsible warmonger.” She emphasized that Moscow has repeatedly highlighted Zelensky’s “inadequacy,” corruption, and inability to negotiate.

“Everyone should realize how unambiguous such outbursts from the terrorist leader sound,” she said in a statement on Telegram. According to the diplomat, “in the current increasingly deteriorating political conditions for the Kiev regime, [Zelensky] is unable to show a sense of responsibility and is therefore obsessed with continuing the war, rejecting peace, which for him would be like death.”

Zakharova described Trump’s reprimand of Zelensky at the White House as a “sobering dressing-down” unprecedented in international politics and diplomacy. She asserted that this incident also highlights the “political weakness and profound moral degradation” of European leaders who continue to back Zelensky, whom she characterized as “insane” and disconnected from reality.

Following the spat, EU nations, including France, Germany and Poland rushed to defend the Ukrainian leader and expressed their support for Kiev.

The failed meeting has raised concerns about future US support for Ukraine. Zelensky’s visit was initially intended to finalize a deal granting the US access to Ukraine’s minerals, including rare-earths. The collapse of the talks has left the agreement in limbo.

A dose of reality for the West’s spoiled brat: What now for the humiliated Zelensky?

by Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koc University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history  of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory [3-1-2025 published].

Thoroughly thrashed by Trump and Vance, the Ukrainian leader faces a bleak future.

“A grandiose failure” – take it from the best Ukrainian news site. That’s how Strana.ua has summed up the visit of Vladimir Zelensky, past-best-by-date leader in embattled Kiev, to Washington.

And no one who watched the no-holds-barred shouting match between Zelensky, on one side, and US President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance, on the other, can disagree. Indeed, no one is even trying to disagree: Independent of political bias, there is unanimity in Western mainstream media that this was a historic catastrophe for Zelensky and his version of Ukraine.

“A disaster” and “bitter chaos” (The Economist); a “meltdown” that “could not have gone worse” (Financial Times); a “historic escalation” (Spiegel); a “disaster for Ukraine” and a “spectacular confrontation” (Le Monde); an “upbraiding” and “debacle” for Zelensky (New York Times) and so on and so forth… You get the gist.

And please don’t blame me for how boring a review of Western mainstream media is; it’s not my fault that the vaunted press of the self-appointed “free world” and “garden” of “values” offers less diversity of views than the Soviet media circa 1986.

The basic idea is very basic indeed: “This was awful because poor Zelensky got bullied.” Some especially eager information war cadres are already fingering J.D. Vance as the one to blame. The Economist, for instance, simply “knows” that the US vice president set up the Ukrainian leader. But then, the same Economist also helped spread the moronic lie that Russia blew up its own Nord Stream pipelines.

Intriguingly, Ukraine’s Strana.ua, already mentioned above, sees things very differently. Its take is that “Zelensky himself provoked the scandal by his rudeness” toward both Vance and Trump. The latter, these Ukrainian observers who know their own vain and erratic leader all too well think, were still holding back, staying “quite calm and respectful” toward Zelensky.

For what it’s worth, my personal impression is that Zelensky did provoke the fight; that Vance and Trump treated him harshly and humiliatingly in return; and that Kiev’s prima-donna-in-chief deserved every last bit of it – and then some. Yes, after more than half a decade of Western leaders and mainstream media first building an insane personality cult around him and then babying and coddling him, it was a relief to see him talked to in earnest. And yes, it was glorious.

Because Trump is right: Yes, Zelensky has been recklessly toying with World War III. And no, his regime has not been “alone.” On the contrary, without massive Western support that it should never have received it would long have ceased to exist. Vance also has a point: Ukraine is running out of soldiers, and Ukrainian men are hunted like animals to be shipped off to a hopeless meatgrinder war.

Finally, both are right: Zelensky displayed crude disrespect. Don’t get me wrong: In general, I am all for massively disrespecting the American empire. But once you’ve chosen to be its puppet and sold your own nation to it, you might as well cut out the grandstanding.

In short, at long last, a dose of reality for the West’s spoiled brat in Kiev.

And no more daft Churchill comparisons, please. In reality, like Stalin, Churchill was quite a monster – ask the miners or the Indians, for instance – who nonetheless played an important role in defeating Nazi Germany. But he was not a puffed-up provincial comedian.

Yet let’s not get distracted. Schadenfreude is not important. And neither are probably misguided speculations about Trump and the gang “setting traps,” staging “ambushes," or dishing out “payback.” Because even if they did, any leader worth his salt has to be able to deal with such baiting. One way or the other, this was yet another painful-to-watch display of Zelensky’s complete inadequacy.

The really interesting questions concern the consequences of this cluster-fiasco. No one knows the future. Currently, Zelensky is debasing himself even more – I know, hard to imagine, but leave it to the man who pretended to play piano with his genitals, in public – by trying to angle for mercy. Trump, as of now, seems in no mood to offer any. Not only was the Ukrainian satrap literally shown the door, but the irate American overlord also made a point of letting the media know that despite Zelensky’s begging it won’t be open again soon.

Hence, one consequence, let’s assume, is a long-term, deep falling out between Washington and the Zelensky regime that may well be irreparable. This is all the more remarkable as what led up to this turn of events was the almost-final-signing of an essentially colonial raw materials deal handing over Ukraine’s resources to America. And yet still not good enough.

The Trump administration is brutally frank about seeking material advantage; this, it seemed, was a done deal. What happened? We can only speculate, but one possibility is that Trump’s team is taking seriously the recent statements by Russia’s president Vladimir Putin.

In an important interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin – the real meaning of which has mostly escaped Western mainstream media, as is their wont – Putin explained that Moscow is open to business cooperation with the US regarding rare earth deposits everywhere in Russia. Including, as he stressed, territories recently conquered from Ukraine. You can extrapolate from here concerning other raw materials as well. Russia will, of course, not roll over Zelensky-style, but very much money can be made in fair deals, too.

Zelensky, hence, may have overestimated his negotiating position: although he is ready to sell out Ukraine’s raw materials to the US the way he has already sold its people, he has so little control that an offer of access with and through Moscow may have become attractive enough to neutralize his leverage. If that is so, then Washington has now even less interest than before in helping Kiev recover (impossible anyhow) or even keep territory.

Another possible consequence is obvious: Long before Trump, the US has had an impressive record of first using and then abandoning or even liquidating puppets, including, to name only a few, Ngo Dinh Diem of former South Vietnam, Manuel Noriega of Panama, Saddam Hussein of Iraq, and Osama Bin Laden, a badly backfiring Cold War terror puppet.

There can be no doubt that Zelensky should worry about a similar fate. Exile may be the best option available left for him in reality. He may also be cooped away in Ukraine. Or even be forced to obey the constitution and hold elections, which he is certain to lose, most likely against Valery Zaluzhny, former commander-in-chief and Zelensky’s arch-nemesis. Make no mistake: Zaluzhny is a bullheaded and narrowminded nationalist and militarist and, as of now, a Western puppet no less than Zelensky. Any scenarios involving Zelensky’s replacement remain hard to predict.

Especially because, and this brings us to a third possible consequence, Washington’s European vassals seem to be choosing the worst possible moment to finally rebel: Having helped drive the insane proxy war forward and Ukraine into an abyss with fanatic, self-destructive submissiveness to prior US rulers, it is the NATO-EU Europeans who are now trying to obstruct the search for peace. In that, they are even ready to diverge from Washington. That is the meaning, once again, behind the many messages of shlocky “solidarity” they are now demonstratively addressing to the Zelensky regime.

It is as perverse as you can imagine, but it is real: the hill that NATO-EU Europe has chosen to die on is to be even more warmongering and destructive than the US. Say what you will about these European “elites,” but they still manage to surprise: whenever you think they have done their very worst, they upstage themselves.

The war may well continue, even without the US. It would be insane. But the “elites” of NATO-EU Europe and Kiev are just that, of course, insane. We may even end up in a world where a Russian-US détente will unfold (as we should hope), while the Ukraine War becomes a fight between Russia and the US’ abandoned European vassals.

What will not change is the outcome: Ukraine and the West – in whatever rump shape – will lose. And the longer the war, the worse for both of them. Let’s hope that something will give. Ukrainians, another Maidan perhaps to finally stop the bloody clown who promised you peace and then betrayed you? Europeans, how much longer are you going to tolerate leaders obsessed with getting to World War III?

US State Department slashes USAID assistance to Ukraine – NBC

by RT [3-1-2025 published].

The agency’s energy aid program has been cut and its diplomatic presence downsized to an essential minimum, the network has reported.

The US State Department has terminated a US Agency for International Development (USAID) initiative for a large-scale effort to restore Ukraine’s energy grid, which has been severely damaged by Russian strikes, NBC News reported on Friday, citing sources.

USAID, Washington’s primary agency for funding political projects abroad, found itself in the crosshairs of President Donald Trump shortly after taking office, accusing it of corruption and inefficiency. He imposed a 90-day funding freeze on the agency and transferred oversight of its programs to the direct control of the State Department.

As part of the crackdown, the State Department not only stopped a USAID program that invested hundreds of millions of dollars in Ukraine’s power grid, but also sharply reduced the agency’s footprint in Ukraine, the network said.

Before the reported cuts, 64 American government employees and contractors were on the ground supporting the agency’s mission; now only eight are expected to remain, with the Trump administration placing the remaining USAID personnel on administrative leave and ordering all but “critical” staff to return to the US, NBC reported.

”It significantly undercuts this administration’s abilities to negotiate on the ceasefire, and it’d signal to Russia that we don’t care about Ukraine or our past investments,” a USAID official working on the Ukraine mission told the outlet, adding that the decision would significantly undermine the country’s economic resilience.

In 2024 alone, USAID allocated $825 million to support Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

The move comes as Russia continues to carry out drone and missile strikes on Ukraine’s defense-linked energy infrastructure to undermine the country’s military effort, resulting in recurring rolling blackouts. Moscow insists that it never targets civilians.

The timing of the reported USAID pullout coincides with a meeting between Trump and Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky in the White House, in which the US president accused Zelensky of being ungrateful for the substantial aid provided to Kiev, and of being unwilling to negotiate an end to the conflict with Russia. As a result of the heated exchange between the two sides, an agreement granting the US rights to Ukraine’s natural resources as compensation for past aid was not signed.

The damage can’t be undone – ex-Indian top diplomat on Zelensky-Trump spat

by RT [3-1-2025 published].

Former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal called the talks in Washington a “complete disaster”

Former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal has called Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s meeting with US President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance at the White House on Friday a “disaster.” He suggested the public spat that resulted in Trump accusing Zelensky of being ungrateful and unwilling to pursue a negotiated peace further deepened the negative perceptions of the Ukrainian leader in Washington.

Speaking in an interview with RT, Sibal highlighted Trump’s longstanding skepticism toward Zelensky, stating, “Even before Trump got elected, he was saying that Zelensky is a ‘super-truth’ man. Each time he comes to the United States, he goes back with a few billion.”

Commenting on how Ukrainians might perceive the failed talks, Sibal suggested that, under martial law, “People can’t express themselves freely.” He added, “Support will be mobilized locally by the government to uphold Zelensky’s brave stand in standing up to President Trump and proving the dignity of Ukraine. But the damage is very severe. I don’t think it can be undone because all that has happened comes on top of already strong negative feelings that Trump and his team have for Zelensky.”

Referring to the viral videos emerging from the Oval Office meeting on Friday, Sibal noted that Ukraine’s ambassador appeared “evidently very shocked” that the conversation went “so negative and unpleasant.” He added that the diplomat had likely worked hard to explain Kiev’s position, but “all this work obviously went in vain.”

Sibal also raised concerns about Europe’s stance on Ukraine, suggesting that the “Europeans are playing a losing game.” He explained that “Germany is facing a severe economic downturn. The UK is in a mess. France is deeply troubled economically. They’re not in a position to keep providing this kind of largesse to Ukraine,” arguing that the EU is struggling to sustain its level of military aid without firm security guarantees from the US.

According to Sibal, Trump has been openly critical of NATO’s role in the conflict. “Trump is the only president who has openly said that he understands why the expansion of NATO is a threat to European security,” he said.

Ukraine, he added, is primarily significant in the broader geopolitical effort to weaken Russia. “Beyond that, the narrative that ‘if Putin wins in Ukraine, he will attack Europe’ is just a tool to keep public opinion mobilized behind the political class in Europe,” he added.