Renee Parsons<\/p>\n
In what was originally billed as a one-on-one\u00a0 <\/span>Oval Office meeting between President Donald Trump and Ukraine\u2019s Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss a possible peace agreement,\u00a0 <\/span>the meeting almost immediately deteriorated into many conflicting contradictions with an expansion of US involvement in the Ukraine war.<\/p>\n Despite being formally welcomed by Trump as if a duly elected member of the Ukraine government and referred to as its President, Zelensky is no longer a constitutional officer having suspended elections in Ukraine and is no longer entitled to sign a legal peace agreement.<\/p>\n Proposed by Trump after his Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, the unilateral meeting with Zelensky was to discuss the potential of adopting a peace agreement as preferable to a temporary ceasefire which would not lead to peace but would provide Zelensky an opportunity to rearm.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n As the Oval Office meeting began, Trump\u2019s expectation that \u201cIf everything works out well today\u201d\u00a0 <\/span><\/i>could lead to a trilateral meeting to include Putin was never in the cards and always out of the question.\u00a0 <\/span>Clearly, Trump was speaking \u2018off the cuff\u201d without conveying that message to Putin.<\/p>\n After more than six months on the job, it has become undeniable that Trump is not a diplomat, nor does he exhibit a President\u2019s unique quality of leadership.\u00a0 <\/span>By the time Zelensky completed his two hour presentation in support of a continuation in Ukraine, Trump had sufficiently walked away from the promise of peace he had appeared to favor during the Alaska Summit.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n In addition, awaiting Trump and Zelensky was a group of EU Members who arrived with their own agenda to crowd their way into the White House in an effort to sway Trump away from a path of peace and follow their continuation of the war.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Specifically uninvited were German Chancellor\u00a0Friedrich Merz,<\/span><\/a>\u00a0French President Emmanuel Macron,<\/span><\/a>\u00a0British Prime Minister\u00a0Keir Starmer\u00a0<\/span><\/a>, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, President of Finland Alexander Stubb including European Commission President\u00a0Ursula von der Leyen\u00a0<\/span><\/a>and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte all in attendance to support Zelensky\u2019s efforts.<\/p>\n Trump would have been within his rights to pointedly show the European interlopers the front door but instead allowed\u00a0 <\/span>the Zelensky-Trump meeting<\/span><\/a>\u00a0 <\/span>to be disrupted as it attempted to woo Trump away from Alaska into accepting\u00a0 <\/span>a temporary ceasefire which Zelensky and the Europeans continue to endorse.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Trump was asked to comment on the presence of seven EU leaders and what they need to see to end the war.\u00a0 <\/span>\u201c We will be meeting with a great representative group, seven very powerful and big countries, they\u2019re friends of mine and friends of yours.\u00a0 <\/span>We\u2019re going to have suggestions made, they want to see peace.\u00a0 <\/span>They want peace.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n The fact that the EU hustled their way into the Ukraine issue is stark reminder of fiscal difficulties that can allegedly be aided by a war-economy.<\/p>\n Also in attendance in the Oval Office was war hawk and former US Gen. Keith Kellogg who had served as a Trump Ukraine advisor.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n As the media began their questions, Trump reiterated a Truth Social statement that \u201cPresident Zelensky\u00a0 <\/span>can end the war<\/i><\/span><\/a> with Russia immediately if he wants to<\/i>\u201d without following up on the opportunity to encourage Zelensky to do just that immediately, right then and there, on the spot.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Instead Trump missed a valuable opportunity, responding with \u201cI think that\u2019s true.\u00a0 <\/span>If everything works out well today, we\u2019re going to have a trilateral and I think there will be a reasonable chance of ending the war when we do that.\u201d<\/i>\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Zelinsky then endorsed Trump\u2019s trilateral announcement as Trump failed to grasp that Putin had no incentive to participate in a discussion about a war that Russia has already won.<\/p>\n When asked whether this was the end of the road for American support for Ukraine, Trump surprisingly responded \u201cI can never say that.\u00a0 <\/span>People are being killed and we want to stop that<\/i>.\u201d\u00a0 <\/span>Rather than endorse a peace agreement, Trump reverted back to \u201cthis is not my war, it is Joe Biden\u2019s war<\/i>\u201d despite the fact that Trump has allowed the war to continue with US funding and US weapons since his inauguration.\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Trump continued to dig his hole deeper with each question:\u00a0 <\/span>would Trump be \u201cwilling to send American peacekeepers to Ukraine.\u201d <\/i><\/p>\n Trump responded in a way that left the door open: \u2018we\u2019re going to work with Ukraine, we\u2019re going to work with everybody and we\u2019re going to make sure if there is peace, the peace is going to stay long term, this is very long term.\u00a0 <\/span>We\u2019re not talking about a two year peace and then we end up in this mess again.\u00a0 <\/span>We\u2019ll make sure everything\u2019s good.\u00a0 <\/span>We\u2019re going to work with Russia, we\u2019re going to work with Ukraine.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n The next question further muddied the waters with \u201ccould security guarantees involve US troops.\u00a0 <\/span>Have you ruled that out in the future?\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n Shockingly, as if there might suddenly be a role for US military, Trump responded \u201cWe\u2019ll let you know later today. We\u2019ll be meeting with seven great leaders from great countries and we\u2019ll be talking about that.\u00a0 <\/span>They\u2019ll be involved. There will be a lot of help.\u00a0 <\/span>It\u2019s going to be good.\u00a0 <\/span>There will be a lot of help when it comes to security.\u00a0 <\/span>They\u2019re the first line of defense, because they are there.\u00a0 <\/span>But we\u2019re going to help them out also, we\u2019ll be involved.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n Another question:\u00a0 <\/span>\u201cVladimir Putin has mentioned the war will not end without addressing the root causes of this war.\u00a0 <\/span>Do you have an understanding of the root causes of this war?\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n In another display lacking in self awareness : \u201cWell, look.\u00a0 <\/span>The war is going to end.\u00a0 <\/span>When it ends I can\u2019t tell you but this gentleman wants it to end <\/i>(nodding to Zelensky), Vladimir Putin wants it to end.\u00a0 <\/span>I think the whole world is tired of it and we\u2019re going to get it ended.\u00a0 <\/span>I\u2019ve ended six wars and I thought maybe this would be the easiest one and it\u2019s not the easiest one.\u00a0 <\/span>It\u2019s a tough one\u2026.a lot of reasons for it and they\u2019ll be talking about it for a long time. \u201c\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n Trump then claimed to solve wars between India and Pakistan and between the Republic of the Congo\u2019s thirty year was with Ruwanda as well as claiming what he believes was \u201ctotal obliteration of future nuclear capability<\/i>\u201d in Iran.\u00a0 <\/span>Trump expressed confidence that \u2018we\u2019re going to get this one solved<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n One reporter reminded Trump that he had warned of \u201csevere consequences if a thirty day ceasefire<\/i>\u201d were not agreed to by Russia.<\/p>\n Trump responded that \u201ci don\u2019t think you need a cease fire<\/i>; it might be good to have\u201d<\/i> pointing to other conflicts solved without a ceasefire. \u00a0 <\/span>\u201cI like the concept of a ceasefire because you stop killing people for one week or what it takes.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n Another zinger about adopting an Article 5-like NATO security guarantee without full NATO membership?\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Missing an opportunity to dismiss NATO, Trump responded: \u00a0 <\/span>\u201cWe haven\u2019t done anything on that yet\u2026if you look back, even before President Putin, there was a statement that NATO would never be allowed into Ukraine.\u00a0 <\/span>We\u2019re going to be discussing it today but we will give them very good protection, very good security; that\u2019s part of it and the people we are meeting with later I think they are like minded; they want to help out also.<\/i> \u201c<\/p>\n Zelensky responded that Ukraine now has the ability to provide funds, \u201csome money to finance\u201d<\/i>, buying US weapons in order to rearm;\u00a0 <\/span>thanking the US and the European community.\u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>Trump added that \u201cWe\u2019re not giving anything ; we\u2019re selling weapons<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n In other words, as much as Trump condemns the killing, he is willing, if the price is right, to sell US weapons to NATO.<\/p>\n