Donald Trump says Volodymyr Zelenskyy 'could end war with Russia' if he wanted to - ahead of crucial White House meeting
news.sky.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 10:58:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, U.S.–NATO Relations
Ukraine faces biggest challenge yet ahead of White House talks
Volodymyr Zelenskyy could "end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to", Donald Trump has said - ahead of crucial White House talks on the future of Ukraine.
Mr Trump made the comment in a series of social media posts throwing forward to his meeting with the Ukrainian president, who will be supported by Sir Keir Starmer and other European leaders.
The allies are travelling to Washington DC with the aim of protecting Ukraine from having to concede key regions to Russia in exchange for peace, following the US president's high-profile meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday.
They will also be keen to avoid a repeat of Mr Zelenskyy's last heated visit to the White House in February, which ended with the Ukrainian leader leaving early and later resulted in US aid to Ukraine being temporarily halted.
"President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight," Mr Trump shared on his own network, Truth Social, on Sunday. "Remember how it started," he added, before highlighting the annexation of Crimea.
Describing today as a "big day" at the White House, he added: "Never had so many European Leaders at one time. My great honor to host them!!!."
Sir Keir and six other political heavyweights will present a united front alongside Mr Zelenskyy, who is expecting to face calls to surrender full control of Donetsk and Luhansk - two mineral-rich regions where large areas are currently occupied by Russian troops.
In September 2022, Moscow announced it was officially annexing them, alongside the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, in a move rejected and condemned as illegal by the West.
Mr Putin would reportedly give up other territories held by his troops in exchange and agree to a "NATO-like" security guarantee preventing Ukraine from further incursion.
At today's Oval Office encounter, Mr Zelenskyy will be joined by France's Emmanuel Macron, Germany's Friedrich Merz, Italy's Giorgia Meloni and Alexander Stubb, president of Finland, as well as head of NATO Mark Rutte and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, and Sir Keir.
They are set to arrive at midday (5pm UK time). Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskyy will hold a bilateral meeting first, before a multilateral meeting with the rest of the European leaders.
In a message on X on Sunday, before Mr Trump's posts, the Ukrainian president said strong unity from Europe was "essential" to achieve an end to the war, and that it was "impossible" for Ukraine to "give up or trade land".
He said a ceasefire was necessary for a deal to be worked on, writing: "We have to stop the killings. Putin has many demands but we do not know all of them.
"If there are really as many as we heard, then it will take time to go through them all. It is impossible to do this under the pressure of weapons."
What is the 'NATO-like' security guarantee?
Following the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska, the two leaders said they had agreed on some points but did not elaborate further.
Speaking to CNN on Sunday, US special envoy Steve Witkoff said: "We were able to win the following concession: that the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in NATO."
Article 5 is a core principle of the 32-member collective, which states that an armed attack against one or more of its members shall be considered an attack against all. It has only been invoked once, by the US, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in 2001.
Russia has repeatedly insisted that Ukraine cannot be allowed to join NATO and has dismissed the idea that NATO member forces could be peacekeepers under some sort of ceasefire deal.
Mr Witkoff, who has held previous discussions with Mr Putin on ending the war, said Friday's summit was the first time he had heard the Russian leader agree to the suggestion of NATO-like protection - and called it "game-changing".
Analysis and explainers:
Alliance against Putin has never been so threatened
How a chaotic 24 hours unfolded ahead of talks
Why Zelenskyy is taking a posse of leaders for talks
In a post on X, Russian envoy Mikhail Ulyanov said Russia agrees a future peace agreement "should provide reliable security assurances or guarantees for Ukraine".
But Moscow should also get efficient security guarantees, he added. "What the West has to offer? Apparently they haven't yet started to think about it. It is a mistake, which needs to be corrected."
He also said efforts now should focus on the "main goal - the need to elaborate quickly an efficient long-term peace accord, not a questionable ceasefire which diverts attention".
No talk of ceasefire after summit
Despite prior threats of severe sanctions for Russia should a ceasefire not be agreed during the talks in Alaska, there was no mention of this from Mr Trump afterwards. Instead, he said he wanted to focus on a long-term deal for peace.
Mr Putin has long refused to agree to a ceasefire as a precondition for talks to end the war, prompting fears that Russia could continue gaining ground in Ukraine as negotiations take place.
Read more from Sky News:
The territory Ukraine could be told to surrender
Body language expert unpacks Alaska summit
At a news conference on Sunday, Ms von der Leyen said the aim was to "stop the killing", and suggested a ceasefire and a peace deal would have that same impact.
Mr Trump has previously said today's meeting with Mr Zelenskyy could potentially pave the way for a three-way meeting with Mr Putin.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent comments by former President Donald Trump regarding Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the ongoing conflict with Russia offer a fascinating lens through which to examine the geopolitical landscape of modern warfare, diplomatic negotiations, and the historical context of U.S. foreign policy. Trump's assertion that Zelenskyy could "end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to," underscores a recurring theme in discussions surrounding international conflicts: the oversimplification of complex situations and the tendency to place the burden of resolution on those most affected by the violence. This perspective not only misrepresents the realities on the ground but also diverts attention from the systemic issues that perpetuate conflict.
To understand the depth of Trump's comments, one must first recognize the historical backdrop of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 marked a significant turning point, revealing the aggressive expansionist tendencies of the Russian state under Vladimir Putin. In this context, Trump's remarks can be seen as an attempt to shift responsibility for the ongoing violence onto Ukraine while downplaying Russia's role as the aggressor. This narrative echoes throughout history, from the Munich Agreement of 1938 to contemporary discussions about appeasement, where peace is often sought at the expense of those who have already been victimized. Such a framing can dangerously normalize the unjust demands of aggressor states, undermining the principle of self-determination that is fundamental to international law and human rights.
Trump's comments also coincide with a moment of critical negotiations, where Zelenskyy and his European allies are attempting to forge a united front against Russian encroachment. The presence of multiple European leaders during these talks indicates a significant collective commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Yet, Trump's narrative risks fracturing this solidarity by implicating Zelenskyy as the roadblock to peace, rather than recognizing the multifaceted challenges that include Russian demands for territorial concessions. The notion that Ukraine should concede vital regions like Donetsk and Luhansk—regions rich in resources and strategic importance—undermines not only Ukraine's sovereignty but also sends a chilling message to other nations grappling with similar forms of aggression.
Moreover, the implications of Trump's statements resonate beyond Ukraine’s borders. They reflect a broader trend within U.S. foreign policy, where interventions and alliances are often predicated on strategic interests rather than genuine commitments to democracy and human rights. The historical context of U.S. involvement in conflicts around the world—from Vietnam to Iraq—demonstrates a pattern of prioritizing geopolitical calculations over the intrinsic rights of nations to defend themselves. This raises uncomfortable questions about the role of the United States as a global leader. Are we to continue supporting nations like Ukraine in their fight for sovereignty, or will we fold under the weight of realpolitik and turn our backs on those who look to us for support?
Finally, it is essential to highlight the ongoing social struggles at home that intersect with international conflicts like the one in Ukraine. The questioning of U.S. commitments to human rights abroad must be viewed in light of domestic issues, such as systemic racism, economic inequality, and the ongoing fight for workers' rights. The framing of conflicts often ignores the voices of those most affected, both domestically and internationally. As discussions around Ukraine continue, it is critical for advocates of justice and equity to remind their counterparts that our understanding of peace and security must be deeply rooted in the principles of inclusivity and justice, rather than simplistic narratives that place the onus of action on the victims of oppression.
In conclusion, Trump's remarks about Zelenskyy and the war with Russia encapsulate a troubling dynamic in contemporary discourse surrounding international relations. By pushing the narrative that the resolution rests solely on the shoulders of the aggressed, we risk perpetuating cycles of violence and injustice. As citizens engaged in social justice, it is imperative to challenge these oversimplifications and advocate for a nuanced understanding of the geopolitical landscape that honors the voices of those who fight for their rights and freedoms amidst the chaos of war.
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has taken center stage again, particularly with the upcoming meetings between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and a multitude of European leaders, alongside notable figures such as Donald Trump. Trump's assertion that Zelenskyy "could end the war with Russia almost immediately" if he wanted to is not only a bold statement but also a reflection of a broader political discourse that often oversimplifies complex geopolitical issues. This comment serves as an opportunity for deeper analysis and discussion on the real dynamics at play in Ukraine, the implications of foreign intervention, and the roles of leadership in conflict resolution.
Historically, Ukraine has been at the crossroads of East and West, with its sovereignty repeatedly challenged by external powers. The annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 marked a significant turning point, igniting a conflict that would evolve into a full-scale war. The portrayal of Zelenskyy as a reluctant actor in this tragic play is both misleading and dangerous. It ignores the agency of the Ukrainian people, who have consistently demonstrated their desire for self-determination and sovereignty in the face of aggressive external pressure. Trump's comments, rather than fostering understanding and support, risk minimizing the sacrifices made by Ukrainians. They also align with a broader narrative that often places blame on the victim rather than addressing the systemic issues of imperialism and power dynamics.
Furthermore, Trump's meeting with Zelenskyy and the European leaders highlights the precarious balance of power and alliances currently at play. The emphasis on a "NATO-like" security guarantee, as mentioned in the article, reflects the complexities of international relations in the 21st century. As citizens, we must recognize that these discussions are not merely political theater; they have real consequences for millions of lives in Ukraine and beyond. The question must be raised: how can we, as engaged citizens, advocate for policies that prioritize diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, and support for the Ukrainian people rather than framing the conflict as a binary choice of capitulation or continued warfare?
As Americans, we have a unique opportunity to influence our government’s stance on foreign policy through grassroots activism and advocacy. This can take many forms, from contacting our representatives to express support for Ukraine’s sovereignty without conditions, to participating in community dialogues that educate others on the complexities of the conflict. Educational initiatives that inform the public about the historical context of Russian-Ukrainian relations, and the implications of U.S. foreign policy decisions are crucial. By fostering a more informed citizenry, we can challenge reductive narratives that blame the victim and support a more nuanced understanding of international conflict.
Moreover, solidarity movements that center the voices of Ukrainian activists, journalists, and civil society organizations are essential. These groups often provide critical insights into the realities of living under occupation and the struggle for self-determination. Engaging with and amplifying their voices is an important step toward ensuring that U.S. policy reflects the actual needs and desires of the Ukrainian people. By prioritizing grassroots movements that align with international human rights frameworks, we can advocate for a diplomatic solution that respects Ukraine’s territorial integrity and fosters long-term peace.
In conclusion, while Trump’s provocative statements may grab headlines, they should serve as a catalyst for deeper engagement with the issues at hand. The war in Ukraine is a multifaceted conflict that requires a careful and informed response from the international community. As we navigate this complex landscape, it is imperative that we advocate for policies that respect the sovereignty of nations, prioritize diplomacy, and center the voices of those most affected by conflict. By doing so, we not only honor the struggles of the Ukrainian people but also work toward a more just and equitable world.
In light of the current geopolitical situation regarding Ukraine and Russia, as highlighted in the article, there are several actions individuals can take to express their support for Ukraine and advocate for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Here’s a detailed list of ideas and actions that can be pursued:
### Personal Actions to Support Ukraine
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: - Stay informed about the ongoing conflict and its implications on global stability. Share articles, documentaries, and books about Ukraine's history and the current situation. - Host discussions or informational meetings in your community to raise awareness about the importance of supporting Ukraine.
2. **Engage with Local Representatives**: - Write to your local representatives to express your support for Ukraine and urge them to advocate for policies that support Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity. - **Example**: Contact your U.S. Senators. You can find their contact information on [senate.gov](https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact).
3. **Petition for Increased Support**: - Start or sign petitions that call for increased humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine. Use platforms like Change.org to gather support. - **Example Petition**: "Stand with Ukraine: Call for Increased Humanitarian Aid" can be created to gather signatures and present to local representatives or the federal government.
4. **Advocate for Peace Initiatives**: - Support organizations that promote peace and conflict resolution. Participate in campaigns that advocate for diplomatic solutions instead of military escalation. - **Example Organization**: The Peace Corps or similar local initiatives that focus on conflict resolution.
5. **Connect with Ukrainian Communities**: - Attend local events or fundraisers organized by Ukrainian communities to show solidarity. This also provides an opportunity to learn more about the cultural and social aspects of Ukraine. - **Real-World Example**: Look for Ukrainian cultural festivals or fundraisers in your area through social media or community boards.
6. **Contact Key Political Leaders**: - Write letters to key figures involved in international relations regarding Ukraine, urging them to support diplomatic solutions and humanitarian aid. - **Example Contacts**: - **U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken**: - Email: [contact form](https://www.state.gov/contact-us/) - Mailing Address: U.S. Department of State, 2201 C St NW, Washington, DC 20520 - **Representative Adam Schiff (Chair of the House Intelligence Committee)**: - Email: [contact form](https://schiff.house.gov/contact/) - Mailing Address: 2210 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
7. **Support Humanitarian Organizations**: - Donate to organizations providing support to those affected by the war in Ukraine. Look for humanitarian aid organizations focused on relief efforts. - **Example Organizations**: International Rescue Committee (IRC), Doctors Without Borders, and local charities focused on Ukrainian relief.
8. **Social Media Advocacy**: - Use social media platforms to raise awareness about the situation in Ukraine. Share relevant news articles, support Ukrainian voices, and amplify calls for peace. - Start a hashtag campaign to unify efforts and raise awareness. For instance, #StandWithUkraine or #PeaceForUkraine.
9. **Participate in Protests and Rallies**: - Join or organize rallies that advocate for peace and support for Ukraine. This can help show public support and draw attention to the issue. - Look for local community groups that are organizing events, and participate actively.
### What to Say in Communications
- **Express your support for Ukraine's sovereignty**: "I stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine and urge you to support measures that protect their territorial integrity." - **Advocate for diplomatic solutions**: "I believe that a peaceful resolution is essential. I urge you to prioritize diplomatic efforts and humanitarian aid." - **Emphasize the need for humanitarian assistance**: "The people of Ukraine need our help. I encourage you to support increased humanitarian aid to those affected by the conflict."
By taking these actions, individuals can contribute to a broader movement supporting Ukraine and advocating for peace, while also fostering community awareness and engagement.