Trump says Zelensky can stop war with Russia ‘almost immediately’ ahead of talks
Donald Trump said Volodymyr Zelensky could end the war with Russia “almost immediately” as the Ukrainian president and European leaders including Sir Keir Starmer prepare for crunch White House meetings.
The US president suggested Mr Zelensky would have to accept there was “no getting back” Crimea, which was annexed by Russia in 2014, and Ukraine would not be allowed to join the Nato alliance.
Sir Keir and other European leaders will seek to persuade Mr Trump not to push for a settlement which rewards Vladimir Putin’s aggression and to get US security guarantees for any military peacekeeping force from the so-called “coalition of the willing”.
Those joining Sir Keir include France’s Emmanuel Macron, Germany’s Friedrich Merz, Italy’s Giorgia Meloni and Alexander Stubb, president of Finland.
Nato chief Mark Rutte and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen are also attending.
Alliance
In a message on his Truth Social platform, Mr Trump said President Zelensky “can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight”.
He said there would be “no going into Nato by Ukraine” – keeping its neighbour out of the alliance and its mutual defence pact has been one of Russia’s key aims.
But Sir Keir, along with other Nato leaders, has said Ukraine is on an “irreversible path” to membership of the alliance.
Government minister Stephen Kinnock said the “pathway for Ukraine to Nato” could not be dictated by any other country.
The health minister told Times Radio: “Any decisions taken about Ukrainian territory must be taken with the agreement of the Ukrainian government and President Zelensky.
“The other is that the pathway for Ukraine to Nato and to security guarantees cannot be dictated to them by any other country, and the other is to send a very clear message that we the British people stand firmly shoulder-to-shoulder with the Ukrainian people as we showed when we opened our homes and our hearts to the Ukrainian refugees.”
Mutual defence provision
Mr Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff has suggested that measures similar to Nato’s Article 5 mutual defence provision could be offered by the US without Kyiv joining the alliance.
Mr Witkoff, who took part in the talks between Mr Trump and Russian president Mr Putin last week, said it “was the first time we had ever heard the Russians agree to that” and called it “game-changing”.
“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,” Mr Witkoff told CNN.
Mr Zelensky said any peace deal must be lasting “not like it was years ago, when Ukraine was forced to give up Crimea and part of our East – part of Donbas – and Putin simply used it as a springboard for a new attack”.
He said: “Russia must end this war, which it itself started. And I hope that our joint strength with America, with our European friends, will force Russia into a real peace.”
Concede control
At the White House, Mr Zelensky is expecting to face calls from the US president to concede to full Russian control of Donetsk and Luhansk, two mineral-rich regions of Ukraine that are mostly occupied by Vladimir Putin’s forces.
In exchange for these demands, the Russian president would reportedly withdraw his forces from other areas of Ukraine and accept the Nato-like guarantee designed to prevent him launching further incursions.
Ahead of their Oval Office encounter, the allies are likely to be mindful of the previous occasion Mr Zelensky visited Mr Trump in the White House.
February’s public spat, which saw Vice President JD Vance accuse Mr Zelensky of not being thankful enough to the US, resulted in American aid to Ukraine being temporarily halted.
Mr Trump will again host Mr Zelensky in the Oval Office before a separate meeting with the European leaders.
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
Funny how putins idiot in the Whitehouse doesn’t say putin must withdraw. Had is orders from putin then. What is it, tape? puting knows how to play trump then therefore the US.
Trumps off his rocker. Treat him as such. Putin rinsed the US on the worlds stage and trump is desperate for a medal from Nobel and will throw millions to putins death squads.
There is very recent film of a russian APC running about in Ukraine flying a US flag.
And farage is a big fan of trump and putin.
What does Putin have on this guy?
Who knows. Numerous things. Trump went to Alaska claiming Russia ceasefire or else then came away saying Ukraine must roll over or else. He has been rolled over, and by extension of him being President, the US has been played as well. The US is now Putins unless they yank trump from the Whitehouse. But the gop wont do that. They are bought and paid for as well. trump is desperate for a nobel prize because Obama had one, putin says do this and I nominate you, another reason, trump really is that shallow. Trump is not the deal maker… Read more »
Look, it is pretty obvious to any intelligent person that Putin does not want the war to end. He carries on attacking the Ukraine even when he is attending peace talks. If Zelensky stopped firing missiles Putin would carry on. The man is insane and his demands are similar to a spoiled child having a tantrum. World leaders should stop all trading with Russia immediately thus stopping the flow of cash that is used in warfare. It does not take brains, presidents or expensive heads of state flying around in fuel-guzzling Boeings to work that out. Trump does not know… Read more »
Trump was going to stop this war on day one back in office so what went wrong there? Oh, same as his 3rd executive order in 2017 to build a 3000 mile long wall along the Mexican border. Not a block of it laid yet to the best of my knowledge. In his first term, I heard people even here saying ‘he gets things done’. Replace ‘things’ with ‘nothing’ and you’ve nailed it. It’s always ‘2 weeks’ or ‘2 to 3 weeks’ or ‘soon maybe’ or NEVER ACTUALLY. A total fraud but what does anyone expect of someone who said… Read more »
Sorry. Correction to the above. He gets damage done and lots of it.
If they want to keep some captured territory they need to at least pay a fair market price for it and compensate for the inconvenience.
…and what leverage does Ukraine have to demand that? It might be the fair thing to do, but war isn’t about what is fair, and ending wars rarely results in a fair outcome. This war can end in one of three ways: 1a A convincing military victory for Ukraine / surrender by Russia. 1b European governments commit their armed forces to the war to improve Ukraine’s odds of achieving option 1a. 2 A convincing military victory for Russia / surrender by Ukraine. 3 A negotiated settlement in which everybody gets something they want in exchange for something they don’t. Option… Read more »
Thank you Thomas for that good analysis and sorely needed dose of realism. .
It’s not about fairness, it’s about avoiding a repeat of the almost identical Munich appeasement. Any genuine deal needs quid pro quo. If Russia can’t agree to this then the so-called deal won’t stop anything. Both sides need equivalent gains. Cash is just one option. Another is Russia ceding other land to Ukraine. A third option is symbolic concessions that don’t directly benefit Ukraine but require Russia to give up something precious. Perhaps returning the Kuril Islands to Japan. A fourth option might be that Russia agrees to join NATO and the EU, and Putin to stand down within a… Read more »
Bryce, I agree with you on what the deal should look like, but there is little leverage to drive a hard bargain with Putin and he won’t accept a deal that dents his ego. Unfortunately, the ‘Munich’ moment happened back in 2014. The failure of Obama to lead a strong response then is what led to the current situation. Russia’s actions will be rewarded. It is very unfortunate, but it is inevitable. They will either win on the battlefield when Ukraine runs out of men to sacrifice, or they will win with a lop-sided settlement. I wish it were not… Read more »
As noted below, Trump’s threat of 50% tariffs on any state that buys Russian oil and gas is a very good lever. Russia is in real trouble if no-one will by their main export.
Hopefully, the European leaders will encourage Starmer to show some backbone in his dealings with Trump – something he has been very reluctant to do so far.
Trump is completely untrustworthy, he never keeps to his agreements. He is frighteningly ignorant of the world, and thinks he can bully everyone else whilst doing Putin’s bidding.
Thanks to Trump’s weakness, the West is losing the struggle for democracy in the face of tyranny and dictatorship.
Only things I can pin it on are Brexit and Nukes and F35’s etc.
Starmer and backbone in the same sentence, is laughable. Thanks for making me chuckle.
Judging by Trump’s appearance yesterday, it won’t be long before European leaders will be dealing with President J.D. Vance. It’s a race to re-arm Europe before the US finally pulls the plug.
Would Trump be willing to give up Alaska in a peace deal? Oh wait.
Loathe to say it but historians will one day conclude that this, now lost, proxy war was essentially precipitated by the US’s covert reckless push for NATO expansion. Something it was warned against many times, something it knew full well re what the likely consequences would be. Rather it should have helped Ukraine remain neutral – a small price to pay for peace – neutrality would have cost Ukraine nothing. The EU too should have striven harder to remain true to one of its primary purposes – namely to be an impartial third block providing some semblance of balance between… Read more »
Verifiable bull shine straight from putins bot farms.
British nationalist Labourites furious at Trump, because their world view has been pushed out of focus, don’t like cold hard political truths… More comforting to blame it all on the infantile shiny medal narrative…
Verifiable bull shine straight from putins bot farms.
But you’ve already hurled that particular piece of abuse have you not? Oh! OK then, tell us about the shiny medal motivation one more time? We’re listening 😉
You have heard the saying from the Trojan war Beware of Greeks bearing gifts well the Modern version BEWARE OF TRUMP AND PUTIN BEARING GIFTS both are dangerous nut jobs and will carve Ukraine up and God forbid there is a War with NATO countries and Putin Russia dont Trust America under Trump
Simple choices really. The EU & UK accepts the deal Trump has done with Putin and help build a new (albeit smaller ) Ukraine. Or, reject the deal, Trump walks away, and the EU/UK has to go to war with Russia to preserve every inch of Ukrainian territory.
Spot on Pete. A realistic perspective at last.
“There’s no deal until there’s a deal”
You don’t see what’s going on then Bryce? The outlines of a deal have already been worked out between Trump and Putin. It’s basically a fait accompli as far as poor Zelenskky’s concerned. It’ll be presented to him, take it or leave it. He has no choice. He will be provided with face savers, but realistically he has no further room for manouever.The war is lost.The best he can do now is damage limitation. And best do it quickly else he risks losing even more ground.
Putin barks, Trump caves. Trump is a coward, we know that.
Next deal trump does is, say, hand the falklands to Argentina. This is the type of deal that is happening now. trump, whose grasp of history is non existent, is carving up countries to do deals.
What has scared all the EU leaders to get on a plane to Washington?
‘Great Britain’ has lost its Lord Protector – he doesn’t care a hoot about you – America First and it’s sending the Britnats bananas 😉
Because the only option outside the deal is for the UK and EU to fight Russia. Trump has tried to end it, the EU has done nothing.
It’s not a deal unless all parties agree of their own free will. You’re arguing for a stitch up and history tells us that never works out well.
The war is lost my friend. Those who lose wars, justly or unjustly (the Welsh will know everything about the latter experience in their own psyche), are not in a position to negotiate much further. Losing a war is not easy.
You’re determined to ignore the warning from history.
All the same arguments were made about gifting Sudetenland to the failed artist.
It didn’t end anything.
And you’re ‘determined’ to draw parallels where none necessarily exist. Invoking Godwin’s Law to try to push your political argument. All conflicts are different. Putin may be an authoritarian ruler but he’s not an ideological Nazi. Quarter of million Ukrainians fought for the Germans, set up SS divisions, kick started the Holocaust, but we don’t go there if we can avoid it do we?
Many Ukrainians and other Soviet citizens fought alongside the Nazis because they had suffered under Stalin’s regime, including the Holodomor genocide.No that does not excuse their participation in Nazi crimes but it explains their motivation. ‘The enemy of my enemy is my friend.’
Given that Putin has invaded two sovereign countries and imprisons or murders his political opponents, comparisons to totalitarian dictators aren’t hyperbole—they reflect a real pattern of authoritarian behavior. Godwin’s Law feels rather apt here.
‘Does not excuse their participation but it explains their motivation…’ Indeed it does. Azov Nazi brigade is still active this night…
Whats that got to do with it? What country does not have neo-nazi or far right militias? I know that the Azov batallion have been incorporated but the Ukrainian military need all the help they can get.
I don’t think the UK suffers far right militias to march on its streets last I heard. Still less has the UK government knowingly allowed Nazis to join its regular armed forces. ‘Ukrainian military needs all the help it can get…’? The Nazi Azov brigade was incorporated into the Ukrainian regular armed forces well before the outbreak of this current conflict. But I think Azov soldiers were fighting in Pokrovsk last night… ‘The Azov brigade was formally incorporated into the National Guard on 11 November 2014, and redesignated Special Operations Detachment “Azov”, also known as the Azov Regiment. In February 2023,… Read more »
And in order to push your argument you’re ‘determined’ to draw parallels where none necessarily exist. All conflicts are different. Putin maybe an authoritarian ruler but he’s not an ideological Nazi. And unless you’re a prophet and a seer maintaining that Putin will invade the continent is a cheap shot.
The basic principle is the same. Sudetenland and Ukraine were both symbols of a lost glorious past that needed to be reclaimed to fix hurt nationalist feelings. Trouble is, the hurt feelings weren’t fixed and the next fix was sought, and the next.
‘Basic principle the same’? Thank goodness for that eh? Just like the British position in the Falklands war then I take it? I take it then you were not supportive of Britain’s actions in seeking to embrace and protect its own ethnic population in that particular dispute? Reclaiming, clinging on to, former colonial glories, territories, clearly wrong on principle eh? All the British counter insurgency wars fought in the 20th century morally despicable? Yes or no? Britain’s claim on Ireland? Does Britain have a moral right to be in Ireland based on there being British identifyers living there? Cf German… Read more »
Oh dear. Did you really miss the point that badly? Let me spell it out for you.
If we let him have this incy wincy bit of land because it’ll be fine trust me, he won’t stop there. Like all good megalomaniacs, before you know it he’ll come for the rest of Europe.
Remember this is someone who rewrote the constitution so he can stay in power forever.
You have yet to explain how you propose stopping him. Ukraine has done a fantastic job and held out better than Putin or anybody else expected, but there is little sign of them winning this war. The only alternative to winning is losing.
I completely agree that it will embolden Putin but I can’t see how it can be avoided. Please explain how your preferred end-game plays out.
My preferred end-game is Russia joins NATO and the EU.
Oh dear! Being encouraged to play around with the idea of joining NATO is what has caused this war in the first place my friend.
…and what probability to you attach to that scenario?
I’d like to see the offer made and see what it does to internal politics in Russia. If Putin’s platform is all about resisting this alliance, it’ll undermine that and may trigger a regime change.
How about you answer the points made re your attempts at drawing simplistic parallels and seeking to be a prophet and a seer Mr Ap Rhys? 😉
You can dwell in the past if you like but I’m interested in what a better future looks like.
You’re the one intent on making sweeping simplistic comparisons Bryce. You intimated that you thought Russia’s occupation of Ukraine has been the ‘same in principle’ as Germany’s occupation of the Sudetenland. I don’t neccessarily disagree with you. But I then asked you whether you thought the ‘same principle’ applied to Britain’s continuing presence in Ireland, ostensibly justified, because there are British identifyers living there? Just like Hitler’s justification for claiming Czeckoslovakia was based on German identifers living there? Just like Putin’s justification for invading Ukraine has been that there are ethnic Russians living there? I got no answer from you… Read more »
The only way this ends is for Putin to stop and withdraw to his own territory. Permanently.
Anything else has alreadyn been foreshadowed in Hitler’s series of invasions and annexations.
Oh dear… How we should bewail the profound lack of history, politics, teaching in Welsh schools…
You do know the story of Germany between 1918 and 1939?
Yes I do.
Do you know which political and military block eventually defeated Nazi Germany?
And the diametrically opposed ideological positions held by each side which lay behind the conflict?
There were plenty of opportunities to stop Germany’s invasions and annexations long before the invasion of :Poland by them and their soviet allies in 1939.
Whats that got to do with it? This is the 2020s not the 1940s.
Exactly!! So how about Hogyn y Gogledd and other folk stop trying to draw meaningless parallels?
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
Santayana 1905.
Our understanding of the past is always politically constructed my friend – as your simplistic comparisons with the 1940’s clearly demonstrate. The matrixes, templates, don’t always fit but we frantically try to apply them in order to undergird the positions which we wish to promote today. Basically what you’re seeking to do is paint a swastika on Putin’s face to bolster support for Ukraine. I understand your motivation but whether the exercise is really reflective of the ideological or historical truth is another matter.
Hey! Got a better quote for you!
‘He who controls the past controls the future; he who controls the present controls the past…’
Orwell.
Then war it is. Thousands of young Welsh men and women will have to go to Ukraine to fight. I would suggest this is a bad idea. Unless you think a stern telling off will force Putin back.
There is not going to be a war. There cannot be a war between Russia and NATO because that would lead to Mutually Assured Destruction. NATO knows this, Russia knows this. But that does not mean we should allow aggression to go unchallenged. If sovereign nations can be invaded and dismantled without consequence, international law collapses and every authoritarian power will feel emboldened to do the same. Trump has already spoken of imposing his will on neighbouring countries, what would stop him from doing the same especially if American democracy continues to be undermined?
With respect Rob there is a contradiction here. You maintain that a wider war cannot be contemplated – very true. Yet you still say we can’t ‘allow aggresion to go unchallenged’ – admirable indeed. But this then still begs the question how on earth are you now going to put together this ‘challenge’? What effective levers do you envisage are left at the West’s disposal?
Trump’s threat of 50% tariffs on any state that buys Russian oil and gas is a good lever.
You really think that would constitute a robust, effective, enforceable, ‘lever’? Seriously…?
Yes
Dream on…
Oil and gas is all Russia has. If they can’t sell it to the rest of the world they can’t fund anything let alone pay for a war.
I like your suggestion but, if it was as simple as you suggest, this would have happened two years ago. I have lost count of how many rounds of economic measures have been implemented but they have done little to dent Putin’s ambitions. They are making the Russian people poorer, but Putin doesn’t care about them. In reality Russia and the prospective purchasers would find a convenient route to obfuscate what is going on. The only countries buying at the moment are not renowned for their ethics.
It was Trumps idea, one of his better ones, but he rowed back after Alaska.
Most states would respond to this, certainly China and India. Of course, North Korea would keep buying Russian but that’s hardly going to keep them afloat. Iran would also keep buying, if they didn’t have plenty of their own.
One thing that has not been mentioned in this debate is the Budapest Memorandum of 1994. Ukraine was compelled to give up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for its sovereignty and territorial integrity being respected and upheld. This was signed by the UK, USA, and Russia. Do you think Zelensky is going to allow history to repeat itself? Do you think he is going to give up Ukrainian territory only for Russia to try again in 5 or 10 years time? Would you be willing to give up Welsh sovereignty for some peace agreement? Sometimes you have to stand firm… Read more »
The Wall came down in 1989. The Eastern European states got their independence. Russia from then on did not seek to significantly or systematically interfere in their affairs. However US/NATO did. It was ‘promised’ on German reunification, ‘in spirit’ at least, that there would be no NATO expansion so as to ensure a newly politically vulnerable Russia would not feel threatened. Even if it is cynically argued that no written agreement lets the West of the hook, surely anyone with any semblance of realpolitik in their political skulls should have realized that wisdom and circumspection were going to have… Read more »
So join NATO. Problem solved.
Oh dear…
Being foolishly encouraged by the West to play around with the idea of joining NATO is essentially what caused this war in the first place. You seriously think joining NATO will lessen tensions, prevent friction, avoid further conflict?
On principle and strategically was JFK wrong to oppose close quarters Soviet encroachment in Cuba, having missiles aimed at his country from over the garden fence? Why would we expect Russia to put up with similar posturing?
There will be no joining NATO my friend. If you’ve not understood that you’ve not understood anything…
You’re not making any sense John. The NATO problem that supposedly caused this war was others joining a defence pact without Russia. That goes away if Russia joins. And with them involved in European security we’ll not need the US to be so involved which gets Trump’s thumbs up.
The real barrier to this is economic now that war is a big part of Russian GDP. Peace kills their economy. That’s why they should also join the EU.
Let’s pursue your hypothetical argument for a moment. For an external party to join the EU would require unanimous agreement of the existing member states. Given that half of eastern Europe has a bad memory of being in a union with Russia, I suspect one or two of them may hesitate. France and Germany are also perfectly happy running the EU, so I suspect they may not be enamoured by the prospect of being replaced as top-dogs at the table. Even if, in some parallel dimension, all existing member states agree that discussions can start about Russian membership, history shows… Read more »
You don’t need to complete the process to stop the war, only agree the new direction of travel. An engagement, not a marriage.
And they wouldn’t necessarily become full members. They could become associate members with the other waifs and strays like Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, Turkey, the UK and all the candidate members while their application for full membership is processing.
Essentially formalising an outer tier in a three tier European partnership, alongside the regular members and in the centre the fiscal union that is the Eurozone.
“Russia from then on did not seek to significantly or systematically interfere in their affairs.”
It certainly did so in the affairs of Georgia, Moldova, Chechnya and Dagestan.
But kept out of Ukrainian affairs as long as that country elected pro-Moscow and pro-Putin leaders,
I’m sorry but the countries which you mention are not among those we generally understand to be ‘Eastern European’ countries taken over by Russia following WWII.
‘But kept out of Ukrainian affairs as long as that country elected pro-Moscow and pro-Putin leaders…’?
Yes, in part you’ve said it well my friend! But your take can also be rephrased just as much to read –
‘But kept out of Ukrainian affairs as long as that country elected neutral non- Western aligned leaders who understood the sensitiveness of Ukraine’s geographical and political position…’?
But the US/NATO weren’t happy with that were they…