How Ukraine achieved a "thaw" in relations with Trump and what it could change

Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to the United States will soon come to an end. In New York, he met with Donald Trump. There were statements about a ceasefire, Patriot missiles, pressure on Putin and more.

The details of the meeting with Trump suggest that the thaw in relations between Ukraine and the United States is continuing.

Meetings with European leaders. also took place. The backdrop for them was less than ideal: during these days, the EU Council was making a decision to lift sanctions on two of Putin’s oligarchs, and despite all its efforts, Ukraine was unable to stop the process.

Read more about the talks with the Americans in the article by Sergiy Sydorenko, European Pravda's editor: Strikes on Russia without US protests: what Trump and Zelenskyy agreed on in New York. 

Even before the visit, there was concern in Ukraine that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy might face a new round of intense US pressure on Kyiv. Donald Trump himself provided grounds for such speculation.

Over the previous couple of weeks, representatives of the US administration, and later the president personally, had begun advancing the argument that Ukraine was supposedly responsible for rising fuel prices in the US market. There were also statements that the crisis would be resolved as soon as Kyiv stopped striking Russian energy facilities.

Yes, this makes little sense and lacks logic. But in American politics, absurd arguments can sometimes become sufficiently popular, so it was not surprising that the White House tried to seize on even this straw.

Fortunately for Ukraine, Trump’s attempt failed.

Blaming Ukraine did not "play well" with voters, so by the time the Ukrainian president’s visit to the White House began, the administration had once again changed its strategy.

This was very noticeable during the Trump-Zelenskyy meeting.

There were no tough demands. No accusations. And when journalists themselves asked Trump about the issue of "strikes on Russian diesel", the US president did not even hint at imposing restrictions on Ukraine’s Defence Forces.

After the meeting, Zelenskyy publicly confirmed that Trump had made no such demands during the closed-door portion either.

The White House is now not trying to force Ukraine to stop striking Russian oil refineries. Instead, it wants to achieve a temporary, interim ceasefire by both sides. In exchange for halting strikes on Russian refineries, the Kremlin would have to refrain from attacking Ukraine’s energy facilities.

This is entirely consistent with Kyiv’s wishes and proposals. Moreover, this is precisely the scenario Kyiv had wanted to propose to Trump.

The Kremlin rejected the ceasefire.

Does this allow us to call Ukraine’s negotiations in the United States a success? If we judge by the results, clearly not.

But if we assess the trajectory of Washington’s attitude towards Ukraine, these talks were undoubtedly a positive development for the country. The Kremlin publicly took responsibility for the fact that the mutual strikes are continuing. And Ukraine avoided a potential reputational trap.

Another element of the negotiations was Ukraine’s clear willingness to hold meetings at the highest level. Zelenskyy specifically emphasised that he was ready for talks with Putin, and that Trump’s assistance in organising them was "the most important thing the United States can do".

The talks also showed that the issue of the "sanctions from hell" has stalled. Kyiv also failed to make the desired progress regarding the Patriot license.

In summary, the visit did not actually produce the kind of results that could be put on paper in the form of formal agreements. However, it did make it possible to overcome some of the difficulties that had emerged in relations recently.

At this point, it is fair to say that relations with the United States have moved onto a relatively stable and positive track.