Konstantin Kristin who is much more knowledgable about events in Ukraine has posted this on his substack. I repeat it here to see if has any effect on the uninformed hysteria being spouted.He explains far better than I could why Zelensky blew it. His ego got in the way and he failed to put it his country before his own ego which was not, as has been the norm from world leaders, been massaged.
Kristin says
"Before we address the in the Oval Office yesterday, a bunch of disclaimers are sadly necessary. Such are the times we live in.
If you are unfamiliar with my work, when Vladimir Putin’s troops invaded Ukraine in 2022, I went on one of the in Britain to express my shame for what Russia was doing and to call on our leaders to support Volodymyr Zelensky in defence of his country. In the weeks that followed, I gave interview after interview and participated in endless debates about our involvement in Ukraine. On TRIGGERnometry, we raised the best part of $100,000 in two hours for Ukrainian charities. My wife and I have sent supplies, clothing and our own money to friends, family and strangers in Ukraine to help them deal with the brutality of war and Russia’s deliberate targeting of Ukraine’s energy systems. Only last week, I described Trump’s labelling of Zelensky as a “dictator” as “absurd”. I can hardly be accused of being a Putin shill. Indeed, my feelings on the subject are so strong that when I saw a short clip of JD Vance and Donald Trump lambasting Volodymyr Zelensky in front of TV cameras last night, like most people, I assumed that this was yet another example of President Trump strong-arming Ukraine into accepting a rushed and unfavourable ceasefire with Russia. To my embarrassment, I tweeted as much.
Having complained only last week of journalists clipping my words out of context, I fell victim to the same trick myself. When I later watched the full 50-minute press conference, it became clear that President Trump had actually done his best to do a deal, and that it was President Zelensky who scuppered it through an ill-advised spat with JD Vance. This gave the Vice President justification to unleash a barrage of anti-Ukraine MAGA talking points he had clearly been waiting to deploy. As if this wasn’t enough, Zelensky then proceeded to mutter an insult under his breath, interrupt and argue with Trump himself, which led to the deal offer being withdrawn and Zelensky being sent to his room without his supper.
So, why did this happen and how can peace be salvaged? To understand why Zelensky acted the way he did, you have to consider the reality he has been operating in:
For the last 3 years, he has led his country in a heroic defence against a brutal and barbaric invasion. He saw innocent Ukrainian civilians being slaughtered, tortured and raped. He watched missiles and drones rain down on his towns and cities. He welcomed Ukrainian POWs on their return from Russian prisons and torture camps, only to discover they were emaciated, bruised and broken. He has spoken with Ukrainian parents whose childrenhave been stolen and taken to Russia.
During the same time period, he has received in every room he has entered. In Europe, across the political spectrum, Ukraine’s cause is seen as just, righteous and important for our collective safety. Foreign leaders have travelled to Kiev for photo ops with him. He has spoken in every major parliament in the world. Praise and attention have been lavished on him from every direction. At every turn, he has been told “we stand with Ukraine”, “Slava Ukraine” and so on.
This is one of the reasons his negotiating position appears somewhat disconnected from reality. During the press conference he argued that Russia must pay for the war on the basis that in history “whoever starts the war, pays”. What he appears to be missing is that this isn’t remotely true: in history, whoever wins makes the losing side pay. While neither side has defeated the other, Ukraine can hardly claim victory.
For all these reasons, the reality vortex he entered in the Oval Office yesterday would have been a shock. The fact is that MAGA, the dominant force in the world’s leading nation, does not share the European view of President Zelensky. You may agree or disagree, but to the current occupants of the White House, their advisors and their base, President Zelensky - and forgive me for putting this bluntly- is an untrustworthy leader of a corrupt country on the other side of the world who keeps asking for more money America doesn’t have to fight a war they neither care about nor feel he can win. Most of these perceptions stem primarily from domestic American politics and the hatred MAGA has for anyone and anything President Biden touched. Most Americans don’t know where Ukraine is and have no reason to care. To them, this is just another “forever war” like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Share
In other words, President Zelensky walked into a room in which people who don’t particularly like him, don’t particularly trust him, and don’t particularly care about his “just and righteous cause” were nevertheless prepared to continue giving him money, weapons and political support in order to make this problem go away. All he had to do was look grateful. When you are attempting to convert other people’s good will into hard currency, that is the bare minimum. And for 40 minutes, Zelensky just about managed.
The rationale for the argument he then instigated with JD Vance is not without merit. As I explained in my last video, Zelensky’s primary concern has to be what are known as “security guarantees” - this is a fancy way of saying that Putin is a proven liar who can’t be trusted to stick to any agreement reached. Therefore, the only way to prevent another invasion is through a permanent presence of European or American troops in between Russia and Ukraine. He kept making this point over and over during the press conference and did so diplomatically enough.
But the way he challenged Vance directly in front of the cameras was catastrophically stupid. Sure, if you hate Trump and Vance and think they’re taking part in a Youtube debate, then Zelensky made a valid point. But this was not a debate. They’re all supposed to be on the same side. And the person who has the most to lose from them not feeling like they’re all on the same side is President Zelensky, or, more importantly, his nation. The arguments about security guarantees should have been made with tact, diplomacy, and in private.
To make things worse, he followed this unfortunate error with another, much bigger one. In Europe, Zelensky is used to winning people over to his cause by claiming that Ukraine is all that stands between them and Vladimir Putin. We can argue about whether such claims are true, but the important thing is that in Europe we are much more receptive to this message for both cultural and pragmatic reasons. We are on the same continent as Russia and NATO’s eastern border is now in contact with Russia. This point of contact would have been significantly extended had Ukraine been overrun.
These arguments don’t wash in America and what’s worse, Americans HATE people painting a negative picture of their society’s future. This is why, I believe, President Trump interrupted Zelensky when he claimed that America won’t be protected from Putin by an ocean and shut him down.
None of this is to suggest that Vance or Trump behaved perfectly. But they aren’t the ones asking for more money, weapons, and diplomatic support. Their job is to look generous and find a route to peace. Zelensky’s job is to realise that he stopped being a human being when he became President of a country reliant on foreign aid to survive. He does not have the luxury of righteousness and his country cannot afford to have him lose control of his senses as he did."