By T.M Awan
Imagine standing against a much stronger adversary, convinced to fight by a powerful ally who reassures you, “I am with you.” You hold your ground for years, defying overwhelming odds, only for your powerful friend to suddenly withdraw, leaving you alone on the battlefield against an enraged giant. This is precisely the predicament Ukraine finds itself in today.
The recent meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was supposed to chart a path toward peace. Instead, it turned into a tense, almost humiliating exchange, with Trump openly berating Zelensky and U.S. Vice President JD Vance demanding gratitude from the Ukrainian leader. It was a moment that underscored the brutal realities of international politics where power, not principle, dictates the terms of survival.
Diplomacy or Submission?
Zelensky, seeking security guarantees and continued support, found himself facing a dismissive Trump and an increasingly confrontational Vance. When he reminded them that Russia’s aggression in Ukraine began in 2014, long before Biden’s presidency, Trump cut him off with a simple, “Oh, 2014? I was not here.” The message was clear—Ukraine’s suffering was irrelevant to Trump’s narrative.
Vance, taking a harsher stance, scolded Zelensky for airing grievances publicly and repeatedly pressed him to “say thank you.” His demand was not just about recognition,, it was a stark assertion of power, a reminder that U.S. aid comes with expectations of absolute deference.
Realism on Full Display
This exchange was a textbook example of realism in international politics. Trump bluntly told Zelensky, “You don’t have the cards right now. With us, you start having the cards.” The implication? Ukraine was in no position to negotiate or demand; it was expected to accept whatever terms were handed down.
Trump’s focus was on a ceasefire, not necessarily on Ukraine’s sovereignty. His impatience with Zelensky’s resistance to rushed peace talks suggested that he viewed the war not as a fight for freedom, but as an inconvenience to be resolved on America’s terms.
On the other hand, Zelensky appeared visibly frustrated during the meeting, which indicated that the discussions behind closed doors may not have been very productive either. Moreover, the way he turned the press talk into a negotiation table did not leave a good impression too. Such an approach is rarely seen in international diplomacy. Perhaps this frustration pushed him to speak openly, but Trump and Vance took advantage of the situation, exerting more pressure and further weakening his position.
As Zelensky attempted to make his case, he was repeatedly interrupted and dismissed. When he spoke about Ukraine’s hardships, Vance brushed it off as “propaganda.” When he reminded them of Ukraine’s resilience, Trump shot back, “You’re not in a very good position.”
The most telling moment came when Trump scolded Zelensky for not appearing thankful enough. “You’re not acting at all thankful. And that’s not a nice thing.” It was a chilling reminder that, in global politics, alliances are rarely about shared values—they are about power and control.
The Harsh Reality of Global Politics
What unfolded was not a diplomatic discussion but a power play. The U.S. was no longer treating Ukraine as a partner but as a dependent—expected to obey, accept its fate, and, above all, express gratitude.
For now, Trump may frame his approach as “saving” Ukraine. But his words made it clear that his administration sees Kyiv not as a sovereign ally, but as a pawn in a larger geopolitical game.
Ultimately, this showdown was not just about Ukraine’s war—it was about the nature of international politics itself. And as realism dictates, in a world where power reigns supreme, the weak must either fall in line or be left to fend for themselves.
T.M. Awan is a journalist, communication strategist, media trainer, and researcher pursuing an MPhil in International Relations at Riphah International University, Islamabad.
