The implosion of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's Oval Office meeting on Friday is still reverberating around the world. European leaders have responded to the meltdown with a show of rhetorical solidarity, though whether that will translate into meaningful action and changes in their own behavior -- like many more NATO members actually meeting their defense spending obligations, or reversing their subsidizing of Russia's war machine -- is a separate question. I'm unapologetically pro-Ukraine in this conflict because Russia is the aggressor in this illegitimate, illegal, war crimes-riddled invasion. Putin is a nasty, expansionist KGB thug with no regard for human life. His hands are drenched in the blood of hundreds of thousands of casualties in this terrible war, which has involved unspeakable atrocities and shockingly inhumane actions by the Russians. For these reasons, I'm upset with Zelensky, which may sound counter-intuitive. I agree with many of the points he's made, I'm highly sympathetic to his cause, and I understand his concerns about a potential negotiated settlement that could appear to reward Moscow for its lethal belligerence while leaving Ukraine vulnerable to another future invasion. The conflict must be settled in an acceptable manner, but the killing has to stop.
Step one of that process -- just step one -- was supposed to play out on Friday. Zelensky and the Ukrainians had avoided agreeing to a rare earth minerals pact with the United States, which the Trump administration sees as a way for US taxpayers to be compensated for the many billions of dollars furnished to Ukraine over the last three years. They argue it would also provide something of an implicit security guarantee for Kiev because American personnel and infrastructure and investment inside Ukraine would serve as a potent deterrent for another Russian attack. I don't think that's the only security guarantee the free world should provide in a finalized deal -- Ukraine shouldn't be punished for abandoning its nuclear weapons in exchange for security assurances -- but cementing deep economic ties (with on-the-ground interests) between the US and Ukraine is a good start. Zelensky's only job on Friday, after some resistance to the agreement in recent weeks, and some unfortunate public tensions bubbling up lately, was to show up at the White House and deliver a win. Arrive, smile, express gratitude (even to the point of sounding somewhat obsequious, if necessary), sign the document, and shower the president and the process with unvarnished praise.
If he felt like he needed to make clear that this is just one vitally important development, with a challenging road ahead, fine. That's true. But the priority should have been a big, upbeat, optimistic, thankful exchange with the new American president and administration. Of course, that's not what happened. Just as Zelensky inexplicably showed up with Democrats in the most important swing state in October (even if he had no intent of giving the appearance of campaigning, this was a profoundly foolish decision), he inexplicably seemed to pick and escalate disagreements with President Trump and Vice President Vance. In the Oval Office. In front of the media and rolling cameras. As I said on my radio program, Vance appeared to give Zelensky an off-ramp at one point, before things really spiraled. Rather than taking the chance to pivot to positivity and gratitude, the Ukrainian scolded Vance for raising his voice, which was a factor in setting Trump off, too. I hated the whole heated exchange on all sides, but what a disastrous approach by Zelensky, who utterly failed to read the room, understand his role, and know his place:
My initial thoughts on today’s Oval Office confrontation: https://t.co/zOz36yW7AT
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) February 28, 2025
Thinking along the same lines, Scott Jennings also nails it, drawing unexpected agreement from a left-leaning CNN panelist:
This summary is excellent and correct. The Ukrainians have gotten the worst advice ever. https://t.co/W04m9LjQD4
— Ben Domenech (@bdomenech) March 1, 2025
I hope this situation is salvageable, for many reasons. Zelensky's interview with Bret Baier shortly after the blowup was very interesting. While I once again agreed with the vast majority of what Zelensky said, I'm not sure he advanced the ball on a needed reconciliation. Vocal and passionate Ukraine supporters like Sen. Lindsey Graham and Marc Thiessen seem to agree:
WATCH: Fox’s @BretBaier says he gave Zelenskyy multiple chances to apologize to Trump: “I tried three times to make sure he was understanding exactly what I was saying. @MarcThiessen said it was like watching a man drowning who was not taking the life preserver. He did not… pic.twitter.com/G46FILXhI4
— TV News Now (@TVNewsNow) March 1, 2025
My initial reaction to the Trump/Zelensky spat was based on the short clip. I've had a chance to watch the entire 53-minute press conference with Zelensky and Trump. It's painful but I take back what I said earlier. Zelensky decided to attack Vance unnecessarily. He totally messed this up. Yes, Vance played to the gallery afterwards but he was also correct: litigating this stuff in front of the media was really dumb. Really poor from Zelensky - I hope he can see sense, apologise and get a deal for his country. This was not smart.
To get this process back on track, if that's what Zelensky truly wants, he should apologize for airing any disagreement publicly, profusely thank Trump for arming his country during his first term and his leadership in this process, and enthusiastically sign the minerals deal, crediting Trump and hailing it as a win-win. This would require more humility, which Zelensky sometimes struggled with, even when dealing with President Biden. In case you missed it, I'll leave you with Secretary of State Marco Rubio's lengthy CNN interview just after the meeting fell apart. Fair questions, worthwhile context and responses. Worthy of your time. Some of the ingredients for the public explosion of frustration had clearly been brewing for some time. Zelensky surely knew this and should have approached things quite differently:
It’s 19 mins. I highly suggest everyone watch this ⬇️@SecRubio: “who else on this planet has any chance of getting the combatants to the table? The answer is: no one… if there’s a chance of peace, Trump is the only one with a chance to deliver on it.”
— Markwayne Mullin (@SenMullin) March 1, 2025
pic.twitter.com/t3CMnhj5Bw
Join the conversation as a VIP Member