The Trump-Zelensky showdown – Brenthurst Foundation

Key topics.The Ukraine conflict highlights tensions between Western support and self-interest.Zelenskyy's missteps and Western contradictions complicate the peace process.Trump's stance on Europe and Ukraine signals a shift in global power dynamics..Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here..Support South Africa's bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here..If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here..By Ray Hartley* and Greg Mills* from the Brenthurst Foundation.It seems like a bad hangover, that feeling of 'Did that really happen?'.But it did, and now we are staring at a new world teetering on the very edge of disaster, less brave than brazen..The televised train smash in the Oval Office appears now as one of those moments when the world changed, when the liberal order as we knew it was no more, when an era of unprecedented global prosperity ended. It was a signal that sovereign niceties were no longer enforced, where the defense of Ukraine against an invasion became a parlour toy, and where national ownership became a tradable asset in a game of Trumpopoly..It may also be the moment where the idea of 'The West' – an alliance of post-Second World War nations determined to defend democracy – lost its force. It's a concept that apparently runs counter for this White House to Making America Great Again..It seems now, with early hindsight, that the rights of systems and leaders eclipse those of individuals..Visceral responses aside, there are many things going on here, at various levels..Something seemed to have happened before the Oval Office disaster as President Zelenskyy seemed angry from the outset. Perhaps he realised that the game was up: that he had failed to turn Trump and his team around from what they had been saying for three years about ending the war in Ukraine. Perhaps he felt that he had been cornered into the minerals-for-support deal proposed by the White House, which he was ostensibly there to sign. Tactically, the mistake he made was to preach to JD Vance in a rambling way and ask, "is this how we make a peace deal?". That set Vance off. Zelenskyy furthermore worsened things by almost threatening what the US could expect if it carries on dealing with Russia, which, in turn, set Trump off..Read more: Oval office showdown: Trump overturns the chess board – Ivo Vegter.No doubt the Ukrainian president, a proud man with much to be proud about, was provoked and patronised by those two. But no matter how much Trump and Vance were to blame, Zelenskyy should not have taken the bait. He should have used a translator too to slow things down, to allow space for patience to rule..Delusional.It doesn't seem, as some argue, like it was a pre-prepared ambush. It would have been delusional to think that Trump was going to change his mind. They were there to sign the minerals deal, suck hard in Zelenskyy's case, and smile for the cameras. Perhaps that deal had not gone through the traditional rounds of refinement that precede a meeting of principals because Trump believes he is the ultimate dealmaker and can force agreement in person. Such meetings usually do not happen until there is a tightly agreed script to ensure a smooth encounter. Nonetheless, the Ukrainian president misread the room. And the rest is now history..If anything was achieved, it was to finally ventilate so many contradictions, spoken and unspoken..Ukraine has come to take the West's help for granted, no matter how many thank-yous are made. Zelenskyy's incredulity flowed from a sense that Ukraine was entitled to America's billions and their political support. You could sense that in his amazement, and it's the heart of Vance's annoyance. It's the same frustration which is playing out with USAID, and will play out in South Africa's relations with Washington, which are premised on cost-free criticism while taking American money..This logic has just been undone..Unlike those of us who have heard the Ukrainian lecture to "give us your money and guns and let us do the fighting our way and our terms", Trump and Vance were not going take this, not on their home or for that matter, any turf..How fickle.As a consequence of the deferential approach by Western leaders until now, Zelenskyy has at times been too assertive with foreign capitals, not realising how fickle the West can be. In part he has done so in a Churchillian manner to deliberately instil fighting spirit in his people given the unequal odds that they are so bravely battling. In part he has done this because the Ukrainians are themselves transactional, just like Trump. .But the West is also in part to blame, by filling his head with praise and rhetoric, concealing the real limits of its commitment. The day after the Washington blowout, Zelenskyy was in London, warmly received by Prime Minister Keir Starmer..The West's other sin is in taking the courage and sacrifice of Ukrainians for granted. We live this war in the security of assertions. All of those contradictions and abstractions came home to roost in an Oval Office of hard-nosed, cynical impatience. Not to read that environment – after all that's been signalled by Trump and Vance – was either naive or proud, or both..But there is a deeper contradiction at play, an assertion which is now disproven, on which post-war security and, indeed, the whole European enterprise is balanced..European (and Ukrainian) attitudes and incredulity, which Zelenskyy epitomises, about Trump and Vance's views fail to recognise that Europe is actually an American project in its manufacture. Markets, leverage, expansion of NATO – these are all backed by the US. Only now, after the fact, Europe is being told it's on them. This was at the heart of Trump I's irritation with Europe; its now playing out more forcibly in Trump II..As Sumantra Maitra reminds us, writing in the American Conservative, while Europeans believe that their project is about the organic rise of values and markets, the reality is that it has been created by an American hegemonic peace. In other words, someone has had to back it with military resources to maintain its cohesion. Yet Europeans have lost sight of the reality that power determines agency. "Someone has to put the thumb (that is, money or troops, or both) on the scale. In this case, that is the US, and the US is done with it." This dependency breeds disquiet. "In international relations," Maitra writes, "protectorates will never love the benefactor; they will be there only as long as there are benefits. Clients will always want more, and when not given, will resort to means ranging from emotional blackmail to attempts to divide and rule. Subservience isn't respect or affection. What is true for Ukraine is true for Europe and the US." .Few options.Alea iacta est. Zelenskyy has few options in this environment. If the Europeans plug the funding and arms gap, he can try and struggle on. Or he can resign, or at least offer to resign, a sacrificial lamb in a deal gone bad. Even traditionally strong supporters such as the Republican Lindsey Graham are critical. "I don't know if we can ever do business with Zelenskyy again. I think most Americans saw a guy that they would not want to go in business with," he told reporters..It's what comes next that is of greatest concern. Caesar crossing the Rubicon began a civil war that would end the Roman Republic. If Zelenskyy was to depart, this could leave a leadership power vacuum, the same confusing circumstances that existed in 2014 when Russia seized Crimea and invaded the Donbas..Of course, those who will suffer the most in this shift of orders are decent Ukrainian people, their stoicism (not to mention, cynicism) being tested once more. Their shock is now having to look into the abyss of everything possibly having been for naught. The other Europeans have to consider life outside of their US protectorate. They don't have the luxury of the Atlantic between them and Putin's Russia, as Trump has pointed out. They will have to make hard choices about spending more money on defence, which most hitherto have been unwilling to do, no matter how warmly and openly they take Zelenskyy's side..At the very least, if he doesn't kick them out, Trump is going to make it more uncomfortable and definitely more costly for Europe if and when they return to the White House with another peace deal. .The winner, at least in the short-term, is Vladimir Putin and those who prefer authoritarian agency over democracy, usually ruling elites intent on extraction more than inclusive systems of prosperity..The best thing decent, liberal-minded people can do now is keep the conversation focused on Russian aggression – the original sin – and not let the soap opera conceal it. And now we'll see what Europe is made of, or not. As for Trump, at least you can say he is honest. Some irony..Read also:.🔒 The Economist: Team Trump wants to get rid of Volodymyr Zelensky🔒 The Economist: The nightmare of a Trump-Putin deal leaves Europe in shock🔒 Trump's actions threaten democracy – Francis Wilkinson.*Ray Hartley: Research Director, The Brenthurst Foundation.*Greg Mills: Director, The Brenthurst Foundation.This article was first published by the Brenthurst Foundation and is republished with permission.

The Trump-Zelensky showdown – Brenthurst Foundation

Related Stories

Everything you need to know ahead of Bafana Bafana's World Cup opener against Mexico tonight

The Economist: Belfast riots expose the ugliest face of Britain's hard-right surge

The real World Cup final: Nike's Mbappé against Adidas's Yamal

Bregret now UK's majority view — so why won't anyone call another Brexit referendum?