As Trump flip-flops on Ukraine, Zelensky rushes to fix ties

KYIV — One week after Volodymyr Zelensky gambled on a confrontational strategy with President Donald Trump and wound up at the center of an explosive Oval Office meeting, the Ukrainian president is scrambling to restore ties with Washington as the White House ramps up pressure for a quick end to the war with Russia.

On Friday, after Russia launched a massive missile and drone attack against Ukraine, Trump said he would consider imposing new “large-scale” sanctions and tariffs against Moscow until a ceasefire and final agreement were reached.

The rare threat against Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested Zelensky’s outreach might be working. But hours later, Trump appeared to reverse course again, apparently condoning Russian attacks and reiterating his claim that Kyiv’s position was weak.

“I actually think [Putin is] doing what anybody else would do,” Trump told reporters at the White House Friday afternoon. “He wants to get it ended.” Russia, he repeated, “has all the cards.”

Zelensky, who has led Ukraine through more than three years of all-out war with Russia, is now facing one of the most politically perilous moments of his presidency. Since the Oval Office blowup, Trump has postponed signing a mineral deal with Kyiv, paused military support to its armed forces and further limited intelligence-sharing with its government — moves that only help Russia on the battlefield.

His entourage, meanwhile, has used the opening to start conversations with Zelensky’s domestic political rivals, a move that could undermine his leadership as they raise the controversial question of holding wartime elections, which under martial law would violate the country’s constitution.

Put together, the heated argument and its aftermath have fueled widespread anger in Ukraine toward Washington, even among those who question if the cuts were premeditated by a Trump administration eager to profit off Ukraine’s minerals and distance itself from the war.

For many, Zelensky’s willingness to stand up to Trump and Vice President JD Vance demonstrated his resolve and courage as his country’s once-staunchest ally abruptly recast itself as merely a neutral mediator in the devastating war. Ukrainian trust in Zelensky shot up from 57 to 67 percent in the three weeks since tensions between Kyiv and Washington began escalating, a poll released Friday showed.

But others believe the disastrous meeting triggered retaliation from Trump and that the trip itself — scheduled amid mounting tensions between the two leaders — was a major misstep.

The visit was pushed by Zelensky’s top aide, Andriy Yermak, who “wanted to use it as a reason to meet with Trump” before Trump met Putin, a senior Ukrainian official said. But that effort is seen by many here as the catalyst for a crisis that could cost Ukraine a key partner and leave it significantly weakened at future talks.

The big test for Zelensky will be whether he can repair his relationship with the White House while maintaining support at home as he tries to appease Trump without being backed into a deal that compromises Ukrainian security and sovereignty.

President Donald Trump meets with President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House on Feb. 28. (Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post)

The ‘letter’ to Trump

On Tuesday, hours before Trump addressed Congress, Zelensky posted a long message on X, in which he reaffirmed Ukraine’s commitment to peace, described the White House meeting as “regrettable” and suggested a partial ceasefire as an initial step to peace talks.

The message, which the senior Ukrainian official said was written by Zelensky and three others over the course of three hours and not reviewed by the Americans, had “very positive” initial feedback.

“You can clearly see that he tried and tries to bridge the gap,” another Ukrainian official said.

Like others in this article, the officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk candidly about a sensitive political moment in the country.

Trump described the post as “a letter” in his address before the joint session of Congress later that night and held back from bashing Zelensky — sending waves of relief through the presidential office in Kyiv, according to several people familiar with the matter. Washington and Kyiv have since scheduled a meeting of delegations in Saudi Arabia for initial peace talks next week, suggesting relations are at least somewhat mended.

Zelensky’s cautious behavior in the days since the meeting suggests he recognized at least some basic mistakes from the Oval Office. Many have raised questions over the lack of simultaneous earpiece translation in the meeting, noting that such an arrangement could have slowed down the conversation and given Zelensky more space to manage the tensions.

In a meeting with British journalists in London several days after the uproar, he opted to speak only in Ukrainian — a clear signal that he recognized his remarks might be slower, safer and more deliberate in his native language.

In the week since the blowup, Zelensky does not appear to have made the situation worse, “which is a big achievement,” said one former Ukrainian official. “The major requirement for any politician these days is not to do something ultimately stupid.”

Ahead of Zelensky’s post on X, “our side was really afraid,” another former Ukrainian official said. “All politicians in this country were discussing potential sanctions from the U.S. side. … A lot of people were very nervous, and the president was very nervous.”

Such sanctions could have weakened Zelensky even more than aid cuts, the former official and a lawmaker said, in part because if Washington did so by accusing anyone in his inner circle of ties to corruption schemes, he could quickly lose the European backing that has only become more crucial in recent days.

Even if Zelensky has taken a cautious approach since his Washington trip, Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, his former top military commander who now serves as ambassador to Britain, has not. Zaluzhny, who is widely seen as a top contender to run against Zelensky in future elections, blasted Washington in remarks at the Chatham House think tank in London on Thursday, saying “the United States is destroying the world order.”

His bluntness suggested that despite longtime tension between the men, there is at least some sense of unity between them in the face of a dramatic shift from a key partner.

A makeshift memorial to fallen Ukrainian defenders at Maidan Square in Kyiv on Feb. 8. (Oksana Parafeniuk/For The Washington Post)

Making ties great again

Still, concerns remain over how and whether Zelensky can persuade Washington to rejoin Ukraine’s cause.

Serhiy Taruta, a millionaire opposition lawmaker and former governor of Ukraine’s Donetsk region, said he has major questions for the presidential office over how it prepared for the Washington trip.

“What Trump wanted was to confirm Ukraine was ready for negotiations and to sign the deal. He also wanted to show he’s not [President Joe] Biden — he’s not giving anything for free,” Taruta said. “He’s taking a more business approach. Zelensky should have followed this approach.”

With Washington seeking to play the role of mediator, it appears “Trump will make history as the leader who stopped the war — but at the cost of Ukraine,” Taruta said.

To try to salvage the situation, he said, Zelensky must empower a broad coalition in parliament and “appoint a person for negotiations with huge expertise, especially in conflict.”

Another lawmaker, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak freely, said Zelensky crossed a line in Washington by publicly raising security guarantees in front of the press. Trump’s team made clear he would have preferred to discuss such matters privately, the lawmaker said.

“It was a cold shower for him in London,” the lawmaker added, referring to Zelensky’s subsequent trip to Britain. There, despite a public show of warmth, partners warned Zelensky: “We will help you, definitely, but you need to go back to the United States and talk to them and say sorry. … We simply don’t have the ability to replace all assistance you have from them.”

Still, Europe has taken extraordinary steps to bolster Zelensky and Ukraine in the days since. On Thursday, European leaders met for an emergency summit where they agreed to major steps to ramp up aid for Ukraine, strengthen their militaries and lessen their reliance on an increasingly unpredictable United States.

In Ukraine, there are worries that Europeans’ good intentions cannot replace the bulwark Washington once provided.

Fears on the front

Among soldiers, especially, there are growing fears that Trump’s apparent lack of interest in aiding Ukraine could result in a deal that will only strengthen Russia’s military and help prepare Moscow for another war very soon.

Vladyslav, a military officer in Ukraine’s 241st brigade, who spoke on the condition that only his first name be used, in adherence to military rules, said the outburst in the Oval Office emerged for Washington as “a beautiful pretext to implement its strategy, where Trump needs a quick peace.”

He acknowledged that Ukraine is facing “very tough times at the front” but said he fears that Russian demands to eliminate the possibility of a NATO membership and weaken Ukraine’s army, among other measures, amount to “not just capitulation but complete humiliation.”

Until last week, he said, he had expected the war might be coming to an end in which Moscow and Kyiv would both be forced to make concessions, and that despite territorial and human losses, Ukraine would be able to rebuild without the threat of future attacks. He thought he might even get to demobilize after years on the front — hopes that have since disappeared.

Artem, 33, who serves as a vehicle commander for the U.S.-made High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, said he backs Zelensky completely but that soldiers in his unit “would react negatively to a ceasefire” after losing so many friends to this war. “Forcing us to surrender would be a deep wound for every Ukrainian,” he said.

“Putin cannot be trusted, and I don’t understand Trump’s political strategy,” he added. “Ukraine must continue to fight. We cannot give in. … If we concede even a little, they will take everything. We must win peace on our own terms.