Letter of the Day | Lessons from Zelenskyy’s humiliation at the White House

THE EDITOR, Madam:

Few events, if any, in recent history have generated such swift outrage and condemnation from the international community as the recent globally televised train-wreck interaction in the Oval Office at the White House, between President Donald Trump, Vice-President JD Vance, and the battle-weary Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

What was billed as a historic, diplomatic press briefing centred around the signing of a ‘mineral deal’ as a security guarantee to repay the United States for further military support to Ukraine in its war with Russia –as a stepping stone towards hammering out a peace deal to end the conflict–quickly descended into a moment that left multiple of millions around the world questioning the dynamics in the 21st century of international politics - particularly regarding the relationship between the mega-powerful United States and war-torn Ukraine. Zelenskyy’s televised humiliation by the double force of President Trump and Vice-President Vance calls for a revision of the meaning of power and diplomacy in international relations in the modern era.

Trump and Zelenskyy’s relationship has always been complicated, if not hostile; and it is this fact that set the stage for what happened at the White House. A political outsider in the true sense of the term –and a former comedian to boot – Zelenskyy ascended the leadership of his country in 2019 promising sweeping reforms and a more transparent government than what obtained before. Simultaneously, Ukraine was heavily dependent on United States support, especially in the face of Russian aggression and the conflict in the Donbas region of the country.

OPPORTUNITY TO SOLIDIFY RELATIONSHIP

Against this background, Zelenskyy’s visit to the White House was initially seen as a critical opportunity to solidify US-Ukraine relationship, given that maintaining strong ties with the United States was considered paramount, in light of its role in providing military aid and political backing to Ukraine.

But the political climate surrounding Trump was always controversial and problematic, especially after the impeachment proceedings against him involving a phone call between himself and Zelenskyy in 2019. The conversation, in which Trump was accused of pressuring Zelenskyy to launch an investigation into former President Joe Biden’s son, naturally soured the atmosphere even before the meeting between the two men. This explains why Trump and his vice-president were more interested in using the occasion to publicly assert dominance. And days before Zelenskyy’s arrival in Washington, Trump had falsely labelled him a “dictator”, angering Ukrainians, only to later walk back the claim during his earlier meeting with the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, in the Oval Office, by saying he “can’t believe” he said that.

LESSONS

What are some of the lessons to be learnt from this moment?

To begin with, it is unquestionable that the collapse of the Trump-Zelenskyy White House meeting is a defining moment in US-Ukraine relations. It underscored the very complex and oft-unequal nature of international diplomacy, especially when smaller nations are reliant on the political support of larger powers.

In addition, Trump’s behaviour forcefully illustrates the emerging transactional approach to foreign policy in the 21st century. Indeed, he has been consistent in declaring “America First” in international dealings with other countries, placing limited emphasis on traditional global alliances and more on securing deals that benefit the United States.

Against this background, there is very little doubt that Zelenskyy’s position within Ukraine is now severely affected following the White House meeting, especially in the context of the subsequent withdrawal of US aid to Ukraine, notwithstanding his support of several European countries. This has forced him to request a return to the negotiation table in Washington, while showering praise on what he describes as the US president’s “strong leadership” and expressing gratitude for his country’s military help.

Closer to home, small island nation-states within CARICOM and the larger Global South would do well to note that the public humiliation of President Zelenskyy at the White House was not simply a personal affront to the Ukrainian leader. It was also a moment that highlighted the deep and growing unpredictable complexities of modern diplomacy and international relations in a rapidly evolving technological, climate-sensitive, and AI-driven international landscape.

It also forcibly exposed the consequential vulnerabilities of smaller nations in a world where power – defined as the ability to make definitions about oneself and follow through with action on the basis of those definitions –is increasingly distributed unevenly, and where world leaders like Donald Trump are willing to exploit the existing power imbalances for raw political gain. Respect in international politics in the modern era, is now earned through the prism of power relations rather than principle.

EVERTON PRYCE

Former Hubert H. Humphrey

Fulbright fellow