THE very public fallout between US President Donald Trump and his visiting Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, at the White House has complicated Europe’s implicit plan to prolong their proxy war with Russia.

Even for Diplomacy 101, Zelenskyy failed spectacularly. The diplomatic decorum requires at its fundamental basis the ethos of humility, calmness, and erudite exposition at all material times. Others have described diplomacy as the art of telling someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to trip, a far cry from the ill-advised confrontation between an out-of-sorts visitor and his hosts in the White House.

Zelenskyy knew, or should have known, that the Trump administration is totally opposed to the continuation of the war that broke out three years ago over strong geopolitical differences between Russia and the West.

Trump campaigned and was voted for on the promise of ending the war the minute he assumed office. The era of the US-led Western warmongering that was driven by the Biden administration is no more. Zelenskyy, I reiterate, should have known that there is a new sheriff in the White House, and his name is the no-nonsense Trump.

Former President Joe Biden’s ignominious departure from public life, laced with his party’s dismal showing in the November 2024 elections, has triggered a new wave in the reconfiguration of the global relations.

Zelensky’s doomed visit to the White House was preceded by the visit days earlier of the French President Emmanuel Macron and the UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer. The common theme of the pair’s visit was to persuade Trump to retain a confrontational posture against Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Additionally, the two leading EU leaders, who both want to send their troops to Ukraine to take charge of whatever the truce Trump is attempting to thrash out, wanted US guarantees for support of their post-war boots on the ground.

They got none such, for Trump is averse to unending conflicts that he believes would never have started had he been the president at the time.

Zelenskyy arrived at the White House to prove Trump wrong in his optimism in the preliminary talks with Putin. You can’t trust Putin; Zelensky appeared to advise a visibly irritated Trump before the world media.

Well, Trump trusts Putin to sign up to a peace treaty and to live by its terms for a lasting peace.

This is an intersection at which Trump and Zelenskyy had to go separate ways. Unfortunately, and sadly for Zelenskyy, no matter how wide the gap in bilateral talks with your host, you simply do not bite the hand that feeds you. That’s downright foolish.

Granted, Europe has worked very hard to continue to project a united front in support for Kyiv and opposition to Moscow. But truth be told, Europe without the US would not invoke such a constant, continuous war-mongering behavioural pattern. Europe knows, and Trump knows too. No wonder he checkmated Sir Starmer in front of the media when he asked him if Europe could fight Russia without the US backing. Sir Starmer giggled, but the answer is a big no.

Such is the scenario that is all too common knowledge. Zelenskyy should have shown appreciation of this factor by maintaining diplomatic decorum in front of Trump and US anti-war Vice President JD Vance. Instead, he behaved like a spoilt brat. Talking back and frequently interrupting Trump and Vance, Zelensky muddied the waters that he needed to drink.

In a way, and in my sympathy to Zelenskyy, the Biden administration had trained him that way. Europe has also packaged Zelenskyy as their singular most rallying point in their Russophobia. There is no one issue that unites especially Western Europe against Moscow more than support for Zelenskyy. They see Ukraine as a viable vehicle in pursuit of Europe’s “existential threat” to Russia, as Putin has previously said.

Zelenskyy is the first visiting head of state in modern history to be kicked out of the White House. In fact, perhaps in the entire history. The significance of the episode cannot be overemphasised and will surely be used as a case study in diplomacy and international relations studies as an example of “how not to behave”.

It is inconceivable in the immediate to short-term future how the US under Trump will continue to support Ukraine, irrespective of the chorus of EU appeals that are sure to follow overtly and covertly.

Biden had ill-advised Zelensky to fight Russia “until the last soldier” in return for US support “for as long as it takes”. But without US support, the warmongers in Europe are simply unable to back their words with action against the world’s biggest nuclear power.

Methinks Europe is trapped in a dangerous time warp. They are unable to appreciate that Biden is no more, gone with the US military might they relied on until recently.

Zelensky is a victim of this imaginary scenario where Russia will give up against Europe, or the West, meekly without pressing that dreaded nuclear button. Trump is fully aware of the avoidable dangers that are nonetheless inherent in the EU’s approach. That is why he berated Zelensky as follows: “You are not in a good position. You don’t have the cards right now. You are gambling with the lives of millions of people. You’re gambling with World War 3.”

The new US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, added later: “Zelensky has been trying to drag the US into a nuclear war with Russia/WW3 for years.” Predictably, European leaders immediately threw their weight behind Zelensky, assuring him of their unwavering support that is simply unimaginable without the US.

As the EU leaders now gather in London wondering which path to thrash out in search of independence from the US, they do so faced with just the support for Zelenskyy. The schism between Europe and Trump’s US is rapidly growing wider. That is a bigger headache, probably a migraine. Of significance, Europe’s disunity is also beginning to rear its head, led by the likes of Hungary, and will become more apparent in the coming days than weeks.

It is very difficult to locate the EU's logic to want to keep the war going. Normal leaders would grab every opportunity for peace in times of conflict. As the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio correctly pointed out after the Zelenkyy White House fiasco, “even if there is only 1% chance for peace, that must be explored”.

In my book, here’s the glaring danger for Europe—a hell of a conundrum: With or without the EU, peace talks between the US and Russia will continue, inevitably leading to the lifting of the unprecedented barrage of economic sanctions and triggering a new era of bilateral relations between the two nuclear powers.

Furthermore, peace will also lead to enormous economic cooperation between Moscow and Washington. After only their first round of diplomatic talks in Riyadh recently, moves are afoot for the reinstatement of their embassies to full operation, and all channels of communication have also been reinstated.

Perhaps this is Europe’s greatest fear—that close ties between Russia and the US could signify the end or reduction in their very preferential treatment that has been the case since the end of WWII in 1945. In one word: privilege. Amid the brouhaha, Zelensky is a mere tool. Tragic indeed.

*Abbey Makoe is Founder and Editor-in-Chief: Global South Media Network (gsmn.co.za).

** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL.

#us-foreign-policy

'Acting in national interest' - DA defends US visit amid backlash

Activists demand US senators block funding for Elon Musk's companies

Zelenskyy’s White House fallout triggers a new era for US, EU relations

EU leaders urgently seek Trump's support amid global tensions