In a move that has sent ripples through the global geopolitical landscape, the recent Riyadh talks between Moscow and Washington have sparked widespread controversy. The exclusion of Ukraine from discussions about its own future and the acidic rhetoric from US President Donald Trump against Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky have left many questioning the motivations behind this dramatic shift in US policy. Trump’s criticisms of Zelensky, his insistence on holding elections in wartime Ukraine, and his apparent alignment with Russian interests suggest a deeply troubling strategy that prioritizes great-power politics over Ukraine’s sovereignty and democratic aspirations.
The Riyadh talks, aimed at restoring US-Russia diplomatic relations, forming a negotiation team, and addressing territorial and security guarantees, conspicuously omitted Ukraine. This exclusion was not an oversight; it was a deliberate signal that Washington and Moscow are ready to dictate Ukraine’s future without its input. Historically, major peace negotiations involving Ukraine, such as the Minsk agreements, have included Ukrainian representatives. However, Trump’s direct engagement with Putin suggests he believes an agreement can be reached between Washington and Moscow alone, sidelining Kyiv entirely.
Obviously, this approach has alarmed European allies, who fear that Trump could strike a deal that prioritizes American and Russian interests while disregarding Ukraine’s sovereignty. Trump’s sudden hostility toward Zelensky is striking. He has publicly criticized the Ukrainian leader, suggesting that Kyiv had ample opportunity to reach a settlement before the war began.
“You should have never started it. You could have made a deal,”
Trump declared, effectively shifting blame for the war onto Ukraine itself. This narrative aligns closely with Russian talking points, which argue that Ukraine’s refusal to negotiate led to the full-scale invasion in February 2022. By positioning Zelensky as a liability rather than an asset, Trump is laying the groundwork for a drastic policy shift – one that prioritizes a rapid end to the war over Ukraine’s long-term security. His insistence on holding elections in Ukraine, echoing Moscow’s demands, further underscores this shift. For Trump, Zelensky is no longer the courageous wartime leader standing against Russian aggression; instead, he is an impediment to Trump’s envisioned deal with Putin.
Trump’s push for elections in Ukraine is not about democracy; it is about control. With martial law still in effect, Zelensky has postponed elections, arguing that wartime conditions make a free and fair vote impossible. However, Trump’s framing of this as an issue of legitimacy, citing Zelensky’s supposed low approval ratings, provides a pretext to push for a change in leadership. The goal is to install a leadership more amenable to negotiations with Russia. Potential candidates, such as Oleksiy Arestovych or Dmytro Razumkov, may be more receptive to territorial concessions, offering Trump an easier path to fulfilling his promise of ending the war swiftly. However, any elections held under current conditions would be vulnerable to external manipulation, with Russia exploiting its control over occupied territories to influence the outcome. Trump’s vision for Ukraine extends beyond geopolitics. Recent US demands for a $500 billion “payback” from Ukraine reveal the economic stakes at play. The proposed agreement would grant America significant control over Ukraine’s natural resources, including critical minerals, oil, gas, ports, and infrastructure. Effectively, it would turn Ukraine’s economy into an American-dominated enterprise, ensuring Kyiv remains financially dependent on Washington long after the war ends.
While Zelensky initially proposed a resource-sharing arrangement in 2023 to secure continued US military aid, Trump’s demands go far beyond mere investment. The terms resemble post-war reparations imposed on defeated nations, a staggering burden for a country already devastated by war. This has caused panic in Kyiv, with Ukrainian officials viewing it as an existential threat.
Trump’s pivot away from Zelensky is causing alarm in European capitals. If the US unilaterally negotiates a peace deal with Russia, it could undermine NATO’s unity and leave European nations scrambling to secure their own interests. French President Emmanuel Macron has floated the idea of European peacekeepers in Ukraine, an idea Trump has endorsed but Moscow has categorically rejected. Meanwhile, British and German officials warn that Trump’s approach risks legitimizing Russian aggression and setting a dangerous precedent for future conflicts.
For Russia, Trump’s new strategy is a gift. If the US is willing to push for Zelensky’s removal and accept a deal on Moscow’s terms, it could lead to a de facto Russian victory. The Kremlin has long sought to secure Ukraine’s neutrality, prevent its NATO membership, and establish dominance over its eastern territories. If Trump delivers on these demands, Putin will achieve his strategic objectives without further military escalation. Trump’s sudden hostility toward Zelensky is not a random shift—it is part of a calculated strategy to reshape Ukraine’s future, finalize a deal with Russia, and secure American economic dominance over Kyiv. By excluding Ukraine from the Riyadh talks and pushing for new elections, Trump is signalling that Zelensky’s time may be up.
For Ukraine, this represents a perilous moment. If Trump succeeds, the country could find itself forced into an unfavourable peace settlement, stripped of its sovereignty in key economic sectors, and governed by a leadership handpicked to accommodate American and Russian interests. For Europe, the implications are equally dire—if Washington abandons its commitment to Ukraine’s full sovereignty, NATO’s credibility will be irreparably damaged. The world is now watching as Trump manoeuvres to reshape the geopolitical chessboard. Whether he succeeds will determine not only Ukraine’s fate but the future of transatlantic relations and the balance of power in Eurasia. One thing is certain: Volodymyr Zelensky is no longer America’s indispensable wartime leader in Trump’s eyes. And that may be the most significant shift in US foreign policy since the war began.
Dear reader,
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. We remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.
