European, Ukrainian leaders scramble to respond to Trump's shift of position on Russia-Ukraine conflict
globaltimes.cn -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 12:27:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–Russia Relations, Social Media & Public Statements, Foreign Policy & International Relations
Change suggests prioritizing US-Russia ties over Ukraine ceasefire: expert
US President Donald Trump (right) looks toward Russian President Vladimir Putin during a joint press conference after they participated in a US-Russia summit at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, on August 15, 2025. Photo: VCG
European leaders said Sunday that they will join Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday when he meets with US President Donald Trump at the White House, as US President on Saturday split from key European allies and Kiev after his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, backing Putin's plan for a sweeping peace agreement based on Ukraine ceding territory it controls to Russia, instead of the urgent ceasefire Trump had said he wanted before the meeting, according to media reports.
Chinese experts said Trump's major shift prioritizes improving US-Russia ties over a quick ceasefire, as his administration aims to negotiate a comprehensive plan with Russia that aligns with American interests.
Europe, on the other hand, has been trying to sway Trump but finds itself increasingly powerless, as the Trump administration does not see it as an equal counterpart. Trump's change in stance also suggests shifting pressure onto Europe while aiming to detach the US from European security concerns, experts noted.
Trump told European leaders that he believed a rapid peace deal could be negotiated if Zelensky agreed to give up the rest of the Donbas region to Russia, even those areas not occupied by Russian troops, the New York Times reported citing two senior European officials briefed on the call.
The US President wrote on Truth Social early on Saturday that he had spoken by phone to Zelensky and some European leaders after his meeting with Putin. He said "it was determined by all" that it was better to go directly to negotiating a peace agreement without first implementing a ceasefire, according to the report.
Skipping ceasefire discussions would give Russia an advantage in the talks, which are expected to continue on Monday when Zelensky visits Trump at the White House. It will be their first meeting in Washington since the Oval Office fallout in March, which quickly devolved into chaos, media reported.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, President Emmanuel Macron of France, Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain and Finnish President Alexander Stubb were among the leaders who announced that they will join Zelensky in Washington on Monday, according to the New York Times. Giorgia Meloni, Italy's prime minister, will also join, as will NATO's secretary general, Mark Rutte, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
Following a phone call with Trump after the summit, Zelensky said the "fire must cease." In a post on X, he added that Russia's refusal to agree to a ceasefire is complicating efforts to end the war, according to the BBC.
In what appears to be rejection of Trump's proposal, Serhiy Leshchenko, an adviser to Zelensky's chief of staff, said that "Our vision is a ceasefire, and then everything else,'' according to CNN.
In an interview with Fox News following Friday's summit, Trump was asked what advice he has for the Ukrainian leader, to which he responded by saying "make a deal."
"Russia's a very big power and they're not," he added.
On the Ukraine issue, the Trump administration's focus has always been on negotiating a comprehensive plan that aligns with American interests. Ceasefire serves only as a lever for his goal, which is to arrange a larger strategic framework with Russia and jointly shape a postwar world order with Russia. Consequently, his goals are at odds with Europe's objectives, Jiang Feng, professor of European Studies at the Shanghai International Studies University and president of the Shanghai Association of Regional and Country Studies, told the Global Times on Sunday.
Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, added that Trump's shift in stance demonstrates his urgency to repair US-Russia ties. "Currently, improving the strained relations with Moscow is simply more important than pushing for a swift Russia-Ukraine ceasefire," Li said.
"After the Trump-Putin meeting, both sides realized that a rupture in relations would cause irreversible damage, as both hold the world's largest nuclear powers," said Lü Xiang, research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The expert believes the summit's focus was more on strategic balance between the two countries rather than on the Ukraine issue.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer (L) shakes hands with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at 10 Downing Street in London, Britain, on Aug. 14, 2025. (Xinhua/Li Ying)
Europe frustrated
Following Trump's comments, European leaders issued a statement that did not echo Trump's claim that peace talks were preferable to a ceasefire.
The statement said Zelensky, who was not invited to the summit, should be present during any future talks, and that "it will be up to Ukraine to make decisions on its territory," CNBC reported. Britain, France, Germany and others threatened to increase economic penalties on Russia "as long as the conflict continues."
Ukraine's allies in Europe also expressed concern that Trump was moving closer to Putin's position following their meeting, and Trump's comments indicate a dramatic shift in his position on how to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict, media reported.
"Europe is desperately trying to influence Trump but feels deeply powerless," Jiang noted. "With no real military strength or control over nuclear weapons, Europe lacks leverage, leaving it increasingly voiceless in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Critically, Europe has no strategic plan, relying solely on arming Ukraine to prolong the war as its only means to counter Russia, while offering no substantial peace proposals."
"It's even more irritating for Europe to see that Putin, whom they disdain, is now warmly received by Trump, even sharing a car ride," Jiang said.
"Europe needs to wake up," said Lü. "Now if it can't join the negotiation table, it should at least avoid becoming a 'dish on the menu.' Europe should realize its role will become increasingly marginal under the Trump administration and its future depends on Europe itself."
Before Zelensky's visit to the White House on Monday, the "coalition of the willing" - a group of countries that have pledged to strengthen support for Ukraine that includes the UK, France, and Germany - will hold a call on Sunday afternoon local time.
The leaders said they were "ready to work" toward a trilateral summit with European support.
During an interview with public broadcaster ARD on Saturday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that a trilateral meeting involving Putin, Zelensky and Trump is expected to follow Monday's meeting, though uncertainties remain, Xinhua News Agency reported.
Trump reportedly told European leaders in a post-summit call that he wants to arrange a trilateral summit with Putin and Zelensky as soon as next Friday, according to Axios citing sources.
"Ukraine and Europe may face more challenges in managing their relations with the US following Trump's shift in stance, which signals the US government's transfer of pressure onto Ukraine and Europe," Li told the Global Times.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent shift in U.S. foreign policy regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict, as articulated by President Donald Trump, has profound implications not only for the immediate geopolitical landscape but also for the historical struggles of nations seeking sovereignty and self-determination. Trump's apparent willingness to endorse a peace agreement that prioritizes a territorial concession by Ukraine to Russia starkly contrasts with the longstanding U.S. and NATO position that emphasizes territorial integrity and the sovereignty of nations. This pivot raises critical questions about the United States' role on the world stage, particularly in the context of historical precedents where great powers have exerted influence over smaller nations, often to their detriment.
Historically, the relationship between the U.S. and Ukraine has been defined by a commitment to democracy and self-governance. The 2014 Maidan protests, which were catalyzed by a desire for closer ties with Europe and a rejection of Russian influence, underscored Ukraine's struggle for autonomy. The U.S. positioned itself as a supporter of these democratic aspirations, offering not just diplomatic backing but also military aid to bolster Ukraine’s defenses against Russian aggression. Trump's new stance appears to undermine this historical commitment and, by extension, the sacrifices made by the Ukrainian people in their pursuit of sovereignty. For many observers, this represents a troubling abandonment of U.S. values in favor of transactional diplomacy that prioritizes relations with authoritarian regimes.
Furthermore, Trump’s approach to negotiations—suggesting a comprehensive peace deal without first establishing a ceasefire—risks further entrenching violence and instability in the region. By bypassing a ceasefire that could provide immediate relief to civilians caught in the crossfire, the U.S. may inadvertently empower Russia to dictate the terms of the conflict, exacerbating human suffering and undermining the very principles of peace and diplomacy that the U.S. claims to champion. This is particularly salient in light of the humanitarian crises that have unfolded in conflict zones across the world, where ceasefires have historically been crucial to protecting civilians and facilitating negotiations.
The response from European leaders, including those from Germany, France, and the UK, highlights the dissonance between U.S. and European perspectives on security in the region. Europe's historical experience with authoritarianism and the consequences of territorial expansion should foster a more cautious approach to negotiations. The willingness of European leaders to stand alongside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky demonstrates a commitment to collective security and mutual defense, values that are enshrined in NATO's founding principles. However, Trump’s apparent dismissal of these alliances raises concerns about the future of transatlantic unity and the effectiveness of collective security arrangements in the face of aggressive state actors.
This scenario serves as a potent reminder of the broader struggles for social justice and self-determination that are not confined to the borders of Ukraine or Europe. As people around the world grapple with the consequences of imperialism and authoritarianism, it is essential to recognize the interconnectedness of these struggles. The fight for democracy and human rights is a collective endeavor, one that transcends national boundaries and requires solidarity across diverse movements. In navigating these complex geopolitical challenges, advocates for justice must remain vigilant and hold leaders accountable for their choices—choices that can either uplift or undermine the very fabric of democracy and human rights globally. It is through this lens that citizens and activists can engage in meaningful conversations about foreign policy and its implications, challenging narratives that prioritize power over principles.
The recent developments surrounding President Trump's shifting position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict reveal not only the complexities of international diplomacy but also the precariousness of America's role in global security. As Trump appears to prioritize a rapprochement with Russia over the interests of Ukraine and its European allies, we must recognize the broader implications of this shift. Historically, the United States has positioned itself as a defender of democratic nations against expansionist regimes, a narrative that is now being rewritten to favor a transactional approach to foreign policy. This raises serious concerns about the future of international alliances and the moral standing of the United States in the world.
The backdrop of this situation is steeped in a long-standing conflict that has seen Ukraine striving to maintain its sovereignty against Russian aggression. Since Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, the West has largely supported Ukraine's efforts to resist this incursion. However, Trump's overtures to Putin suggest a willingness to abandon these principles in favor of a peace agreement that could involve significant territorial concessions from Ukraine. This not only undermines the sacrifices made by the Ukrainian people but also sends a troubling message to authoritarian regimes that aggression can yield rewards—a dangerous precedent that could embolden further global destabilization.
As Americans, we must be proactive in responding to these developments. First and foremost, it is essential to engage in informed discussions about the implications of Trump's foreign policy. This includes not only understanding the immediate effects on Ukraine and Europe but also recognizing the long-term consequences for global governance and the rule of law. By raising awareness within our communities about the importance of supporting democratic nations, we can counteract the narrative that prioritizes short-term deals over long-term peace and stability. This could involve organizing town hall meetings, writing op-eds, and leveraging social media to foster an informed citizenry that holds its leaders accountable.
Moreover, we can advocate for a robust foreign policy that reaffirms the United States' commitment to its allies. This includes supporting legislative measures that ensure continued military and economic aid to Ukraine and reinforcing NATO's collective defense agreements. By mobilizing grassroots support for a strong transatlantic partnership, we can send a clear message to both our leaders and to authoritarian regimes that the United States will not waver in its support for democratic nations in the face of aggression. Engaging with and pressuring our congressional representatives to support initiatives that uphold international norms will be crucial in maintaining stability in Europe.
Lastly, we should strive to educate ourselves and others about the historical context of US-Russia relations and the evolution of international alliances. Understanding the lessons of history—such as the importance of standing firm against authoritarianism—can provide valuable insights into current events. By fostering a culture of critical thinking and informed debate, we can empower individuals to challenge the narrative that emphasizes isolationism or appeasement. This is not merely about opposing one political figure’s stance; it is about advocating for a principled foreign policy that recognizes the interconnectedness of our world and the shared responsibility we have to protect democratic values.
In conclusion, as we navigate this complex geopolitical landscape, it is vital to recognize the implications of leadership decisions that prioritize expedient diplomacy over ethical considerations. By engaging in meaningful dialogue, advocating for supportive policies, and educating ourselves and others, we can build a robust opposition to any trajectory that risks undermining the principles of democracy and international solidarity. Together, we can work towards a future that honors the sacrifices of those striving for freedom and justice, ensuring that our nation remains a beacon of hope in a tumultuous world.
In response to the shifting dynamics surrounding the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the recent comments by President Trump, individuals concerned about the implications of these developments can take several actions to make their voices heard and advocate for a more just approach to international relations. Below is a detailed list of ideas and actions:
### Personal Actions to Consider
1. **Educate Yourself and Others:** - Stay informed about the historical context and current developments in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Share articles, books, and analyses with your social circle to foster informed discussions.
2. **Engage with Local Activist Groups:** - Join or support local peace and social justice organizations that focus on international issues. Participating in meetings can amplify your voice and connect you with others passionate about peace.
3. **Support Ukrainian Communities:** - Contribute to or volunteer with organizations that support displaced Ukrainians or those affected by the conflict. This can provide direct assistance to individuals and families in need.
4. **Attend Public Meetings:** - Participate in town hall meetings or public forums where representatives discuss foreign policy. Your presence can demonstrate community interest in international issues.
### Exact Actions to Take
1. **Petitions:** - **Change.org:** Start or sign petitions urging the U.S. government to prioritize humanitarian aid and support for Ukraine rather than territorial concessions to Russia. For example, a petition titled "Support Ukraine: No Territorial Concessions" can be created. - **Example Petition:** "Stand with Ukraine" on Change.org, which can be signed and shared among your network.
2. **Contacting Elected Officials:** - Write to your local and national representatives. Here are some key figures to address your concerns: - **U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer** Email: schumer.senate.gov/contact Address: 322 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510 - **House Speaker Kevin McCarthy** Email: kevinmccarthy.house.gov/contact Address: 2468 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515 - **U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken** Email: contact@state.gov Address: U.S. Department of State, 2201 C Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20520
3. **Drafting Correspondence:** - In your letters or emails, express your concerns about: - The importance of maintaining Ukraine’s territorial integrity. - The potential dangers of prioritizing deals with Russia over immediate humanitarian needs. - The need for the U.S. to take a leadership role in global peace efforts that respect national sovereignty. - Example message: ``` Dear [Representative’s Name],
I am writing to express my concern regarding the recent shifts in U.S. foreign policy towards Russia and Ukraine. I urge you to advocate for a strong stance that prioritizes Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity over any negotiations that may involve ceding territory to Russia. It is vital that the U.S. supports peace efforts that are just and equitable, ensuring that we do not compromise on principles of democracy and human rights.
Thank you for your attention to this crucial matter.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] ```
4. **Engage on Social Media:** - Use platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to raise awareness about the issue. Share statistics, personal stories, or expert analyses to spread the message. Tag representatives to increase visibility.
5. **Attend Protests or Rallies:** - Participate in or organize peaceful protests that advocate for Ukraine and against any negotiations that compromise their sovereignty. Look for events in your community or create your own.
6. **Connect with International Organizations:** - Support or join organizations such as Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch that monitor human rights conditions in conflict zones and advocate for humanitarian responses.
### Concluding Thoughts By taking these actions—both personally and collectively—we can work towards ensuring that the voices calling for peace, justice, and respect for sovereignty are heard loud and clear, influencing the direction of both national and international policies.