Zelensky can end Russia-Ukraine war 'almost immediately': Trump
siasat.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 10:56:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–Russia Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–NATO Relations
Washington: US President Donald Trump has urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky could chose to end the war with Russia "almost immediately", however, retaking Russian-occupied territory of Crimea or joining NATO are off the table.
"President Zelensky of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight," Trump said on Sunday on his Truth Social platform.
"No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!)...and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!"
On the eve of highly consequential talks with Zelensky and a large delegation of European leaders, President Trump has previewed the message he will deliver to his White House visitors: Zelensky must agree to some of Russia's conditions for the war in Ukraine to end.
The post underscored the pressure Zelensky will face on Monday as Trump works to end the conflict.
The two conditions he listed -- that Ukraine cede Crimea, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014, and that it agree never to join NATO -- are among the conditions Russian President Vladimir Putin has set for ending the war.
European leaders visiting the White House with Zelensky on Monday are concerned the meeting will amount to Trump pressuring the Ukrainian leader to accept the conditions Putin put forward in their Alaska summit last week.
They hope to glean more information from Trump on what Russia might concede as part of a peace deal, including what role the US would play in providing security guarantees going forward.
"Big day at the White House tomorrow. Never had so many European Leaders at one time. My great honour to host them!!!" Trump posted after his message to Zelensky.
The European delegation: French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Finland President Alexander Stubb and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte will all join Zelensky for the visit to the White House on Monday.
Trump met Putin in Alaska on Friday but the talks failed to yield any breakthrough on a ceasefire -- though White House envoy Steve Witkoff said both leaders had agreed to provide "robust security guarantees" to Ukraine.
European Commission Chief Ursula von der Leyen hailed the news, but Zelensky, speaking alongside her at a news conference in Brussels, rejected the idea of Russia offering his country security guarantees.
"What President Trump said about security guarantees is much more important to me than Putin's thoughts, because Putin will not give any security guarantees," he said.
Zelensky later said on social media that the US offer regarding security guarantees was "historic".
French President Emmanuel Macron, who will take part in the Washington meeting along with von der Leyen and others, said European leaders would ask about the extent of the security guarantees offered to Ukraine in any peace agreement.
Of Moscow's position, he said: "There is only one state proposing a peace that would be a capitulation: Russia."
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called that an "abject lie" in a statement on Telegram later on Sunday.
Moscow had been proposing a "peaceful resolution" of the conflict for seven years under the terms of the Minsk Accords, she said.
Macron, she added, was trying to convince Ukraine that it could win on the battlefield even when he knew that that was "impossible".
Trump, who pivoted after the Alaska meeting to say he was now seeking a peace deal rather than a ceasefire, on Sunday posted "BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA. STAY TUNED!" on his Truth Social platform, without elaborating.
Trump's sudden focus on a peace deal aligns with the stance long taken by Putin, one which Ukraine and its European allies have criticised as Putin's way to buy time while trying to make battlefield gains.
Zelensky also said he saw "no sign" the Kremlin leader was prepared to meet him and Trump for a three-way summit, as had been floated by the US President.
The leaders heading to Washington on Monday to appear alongside Zelensky call themselves the "coalition of the willing".
On Sunday, all the European leaders held a video meeting to prepare their joint position.
Speaking to US broadcaster CNN, Witkoff said: "I'm hopeful that we have a productive meeting on Monday, we get to real consensus, we're able to come back to the Russians and push this peace deal forward and get it done."
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking to NBC on Sunday, warned of "consequences" -- including the potential imposition of new sanctions on Russia -- if no peace deal was reached on Ukraine.
European leaders have expressed unease from the outset over Trump's outreach to Putin, who has demanded Ukraine abandon its ambitions to join the EU or NATO. They were excluded from Trump's summit with Putin.
Witkoff, in his CNN interview, said the process of offering "game-changing" security guarantees would involve territorial "concessions".
According to an official briefed on a call Trump held with Zelensky and European leaders as he flew back from Alaska, the US leader supported a Putin proposal that Russia take full control of two eastern Ukrainian regions in exchange for freezing the frontline in two others.
Putin "de facto demands that Ukraine leave Donbas", an area consisting of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine, which Russia currently only partly controls, the source said.
In exchange, Russian forces would halt their offensive in the Black Sea port region of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia in southern Ukraine, where the main cities are still under Ukrainian control.
Several months into its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia in September 2022 claimed to have annexed all four Ukrainian regions even though its troops still do not fully control any of them.
On the ground in Ukraine, the conflict rages on, with both Kyiv and Moscow launching attack drones.
Ukrainian authorities reported early Monday that 13 people were wounded in Russian strikes on Kharkiv and the Sumy region.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent comments made by former President Donald Trump regarding the Russia-Ukraine war have reignited discussions surrounding the conflict and the potential pathways to peace. His assertion that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky could end the war "almost immediately" by conceding to Russia's demands raises critical questions about sovereignty, international law, and historical precedent. Trump's suggestion that Ukraine should cede Crimea—a territory unlawfully annexed by Russia in 2014—and abandon its aspirations to join NATO reflect a troubling alignment with Russian interests rather than a commitment to uphold Ukraine's territorial integrity and democratic aspirations.
Historically, the annexation of Crimea marked a significant turning point in post-Cold War relations between Russia and the West. The international community largely condemned the annexation, viewing it as a blatant violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, principles enshrined in international law. Trump's remarks seem to dismiss the historical context of Ukraine's struggle against Russian imperialism and its desire for self-determination. Rather than acknowledging the suffering endured by Ukrainians in the wake of Russia's aggression, the former president's statements risk framing the conflict as a mere bargaining chip in geopolitical negotiations, undermining the lived realities of millions affected by war.
Furthermore, the suggestion that Ukraine should consider forfeiting its NATO ambitions is particularly alarming. NATO membership has been a key aspect of Ukraine’s strategy for ensuring national security against potential aggression from Russia. This perspective is rooted in a broader historical understanding of alliances that have allowed smaller nations to resist domination by larger powers. The precedent set by denying Ukraine the right to pursue NATO membership could have implications extending beyond the current conflict; it risks emboldening authoritarian regimes worldwide while undermining the ability of democratic nations to defend themselves against aggression.
The reactions from European leaders present at the White House summit underscore the complexities of the situation. With figures like French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz attending, there is a palpable tension between the need for diplomacy and the unwavering commitment to support Ukraine's sovereignty. The acknowledgment by Zelensky that security guarantees from Russia are meaningless reflects a broader sentiment shared among many nations: security must come from reliable and democratic partners, not from autocratic regimes known for their unpredictability and violation of agreements. This sentiment is particularly relevant in light of historical instances where promises made by authoritarian leaders have often been broken, leading to further conflict.
In the context of ongoing social struggles, the idea of conceding territory for peace can be viewed through the lens of various historical conflicts, where oppression and colonization have often been legitimized by the notion of compromise. For instance, the tragic history of Indigenous peoples in the Americas demonstrates how such compromises have historically led to dispossession and systemic injustice. Similarly, in the current geopolitical landscape, advocating for concessions that undermine a nation's right to self-determination echoes past injustices that marginalized vulnerable populations. The urgency of supporting Ukraine in reclaiming its territory and sovereignty is not merely a political issue; it is a matter of justice that reverberates through the annals of history and speaks to the broader fight against oppression.
In conclusion, Trump's comments about the Ukraine-Russia war illuminate a critical juncture in international relations. The call for concessions to Russia not only undermines Ukraine's sovereignty but also sets a dangerous precedent for how the international community addresses territorial disputes and aggression. As we consider the ramifications of such a stance, it is essential to engage in informed discussions about historical contexts, the moral implications of sovereignty, and the ongoing fight for justice in the face of authoritarianism. Advocating for Ukraine's right to self-determination is not merely a matter of geopolitical strategy; it is a reaffirmation of the values that underpin democracy and the international order.
In the complex web of international relations, the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine serves as a poignant example of the precarious balance between diplomacy and aggression. Recently, former US President Donald Trump made statements suggesting that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky could "end the war with Russia almost immediately" by conceding to key Russian demands, namely the recognition of Crimea as Russian territory and a commitment to non-alignment with NATO. This framing is not just simplistic; it is laden with historical implications and reflects a broader trend in how geopolitical conflicts are navigated, particularly when it comes to the rights and sovereignty of nations.
Historically, the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 was a significant turning point, marking a blatant violation of international law and Ukraine's territorial integrity. The West, particularly the United States and European nations, responded with sanctions and diplomatic condemnation, signaling a commitment to uphold international norms against such aggressions. Trump’s recent comments echo a troubling narrative that seeks to normalize Russia's annexation, implying that national sovereignty can be bartered away for peace. This perspective is not only dismissive of Ukraine's struggles but also undermines the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity that are foundational to international relations.
As Americans, it is crucial to engage in informed discourse about these issues. We must recognize that supporting Ukraine is not merely a matter of geopolitical strategy but also a moral imperative rooted in the respect for national sovereignty and human rights. Conversations with individuals who may hold contrasting views should aim to elucidate these historical contexts and the implications of appeasing aggressors. When discussing Trump’s comments, we can highlight the dangers of suggesting that Ukraine should concede to Russian demands, framing it as a pathway to peace, when in reality it may only embolden further aggression and set a dangerous precedent for other nations facing similar threats.
Moreover, we can take action by advocating for a robust and unwavering support for Ukraine's rights and sovereignty within our communities. This can be done through various means, including supporting policies that provide military aid to Ukraine, pushing for diplomatic efforts that prioritize Ukrainian voices in peace negotiations, and holding our leaders accountable when they echo narratives that undermine democratic principles. Engaging in grassroots activism, writing to representatives, or even participating in local forums can amplify our collective voice in favor of defending democratic ideals and human rights globally.
Finally, it is essential to educate ourselves about the broader implications of these geopolitical dynamics. Understanding the complex history of NATO, Russia's expansionist policies, and the challenges of post-Soviet states provides a more nuanced view of the current situation. By fostering informed discussions, we can dismantle simplistic narratives and advocate for a foreign policy that reflects a commitment to democracy, respect for sovereignty, and the protection of human rights. When we engage with those who may hold opposing views, we equip ourselves with the knowledge and historical context necessary to encourage a more thoughtful and principled approach to international relations, steering the conversation toward the values that underpin a just society.
The recent statements made by former President Trump regarding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and his call for Ukrainian President Zelensky to consider ceding territory to Russia raise significant concerns about international diplomacy, sovereignty, and human rights. Here are actionable steps individuals can take to engage with this issue:
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: Stay informed about the Ukraine-Russia conflict, its historical context, and the current geopolitical dynamics. Share this information through social media, community events, or local discussion groups.
2. **Advocate for Ukraine's Sovereignty**: Support efforts that prioritize Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty in any negotiations.
3. **Engage with Elected Officials**: Write to your representatives to express your stance on Ukraine's independence and the importance of supporting their right to choose their alliances and territorial integrity.
4. **Promote Peaceful Resolutions**: Advocate for diplomatic solutions that prioritize human rights and the well-being of affected populations.
### Exact Actions You Can Take
#### 1. **Writing to Elected Officials**
**Who to Write To**: - **Your Congressional Representatives** (House and Senate) - **State Senators**
**Example of What to Say**: - Express your support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. - Urge them to oppose any pressure on Ukraine to cede territory to Russia. - Encourage support for humanitarian aid and diplomatic efforts that prioritize peace and the rights of the Ukrainian people.
**Sample Email Addresses**: - U.S. Senate: [senatorlastname]@senate.gov (e.g., warren@senate.gov for Senator Elizabeth Warren) - U.S. House: [representativelastname]@mail.house.gov (e.g., pressley@mail.house.gov for Representative Ayanna Pressley)
**USPS Mailing Addresses**: - U.S. Senate: Senator [Full Name] United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510
- U.S. House of Representatives: Representative [Full Name] U.S. House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515
#### 2. **Petitioning for Support of Ukraine**
- **Initiate or Sign Petitions**: Use platforms like Change.org or Care2 to create or sign petitions that call for: - Continued support for Ukraine against Russian aggression. - Opposition to any diplomatic agreements that would undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty.
**Example Petitions**: - Search for petitions related to "Support Ukraine’s Sovereignty" or "Oppose Territorial Cessions" on Change.org. - Consider creating a new petition if existing ones do not match your views.
#### 3. **Participating in Local Activism**
- **Join Local or National Organizations**: Many organizations actively support Ukraine and advocate for human rights. - **Examples**: Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, or local Ukrainian community organizations. - **Attend Rallies or Events**: Participate in protests or discussions about the Ukraine conflict, often organized by local activist groups or universities.
### Additional Steps
- **Engage in Social Media Advocacy**: Use platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to raise awareness about Ukraine. Share articles, personal insights, and updates about actions that support Ukraine. - **Contact Media Outlets**: Write letters to the editor of local newspapers regarding the importance of supporting Ukraine's right to self-determination and the need for responsible media coverage of the conflict.
By taking these steps, individuals can contribute to a broader movement advocating for peace, sovereignty, and justice in the context of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.