Over the past few days, the Russian-Ukurein conflict appears to have reached its peak. They are in the Hall of Fame, not in the battlefield. On February 28th, Ukrainian President Voldy Mee Zelensky faced a verbal flagellum by President Donald Trump and White House Vice President JD Vance.
It all felt like Trump was looking for an excuse to break up with Ukraine. The decision to freeze military aid actually came to fruition on March 4th, and the suspension of intelligence news sharing continued on March 5th, which soon affects Ukrainian military operations.
Meanwhile, Zelenskyy appeared to stand in his position, but European leaders rushed to hold a summit and express their solid support for him. They pledged to continue military and financial aid to Ukraine.
It’s fascinating to trace events from the past few days to Trump’s whim. But what we’re seeing is a political show aimed at selling the bitter reality of Ukraine’s defeat to the Western masses. This has been given the story for many years that Russia could be weak and defeated or weakened by unrelated points.
The reality is that the US-led West has exhausted its resources and willingness to use what former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who recognized as a “proxy war” against Russia. Hiding behind rhetoric and theater is a game of damage control and responsibility, preparing the public for the inevitable.
Like Kaja Kallas, the head of foreign policy in the EU, Russia Hawks will continue to argue that Russia could still be defeated, just like lobbyists in the military industrial complex. However, they sell this story and various magical solutions, including the supply of F16 fighter jets and the strike of long-range missiles to Russian territory. Ukraine continues to lose its men, territory and infrastructure.
Under the current circumstances, it is likely that Ukraine will be able to achieve a better deal than what it rejected in Istanbul in the spring of 2022. The latter framework agreed between 2015 and 2016 assumes that Ukraine will retain sovereignty over separatist-controlled parts of the Donbas region, where Russia is now officially annexed.
This contract serves as a benchmark for Kiev to determine the outcome of a dispute. Former adviser to the Zelensky regime and Oleksiy Arestovych, Ukraine’s leading talking head at the start of the war, formulated Ukrainian views on what constituted a victory over Russia in March 2022.
In other words, if the outcome is worse than what Ukraine had under Minsk, then the war is not worth fighting. All the horrific losses they endured within the last three years have made Ukraine farther from achieving this goal than ever before. This is why the denunciation game began.
Trump’s version involves denounce Zelensky for extreme incommunity and wasting Western aid. He also falsely denounces European countries to some extent for not sharing the burden of helping Ukraine.
But he’s not the only one playing this game. While European politicians may be lofty about their unwavering support for Ukraine, the warning is that the US should always be on board. When British Prime Minister Kiel Starmer spoke about the “rejoic coalition” in Europe to help Ukraine make a much better deal than Minsk, he admitted it was entirely dependent on “strong US support.”
Despite the strong statement, the EU is unlikely to agree to a 2 billion euro ($21.6 billion) aid package to Ukraine at the upcoming summit. European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has announced ambitious plans to support Ukraine without US support, but Hungary and Slovakia, represented by Trump, said they would refuse additional help to Kiev.
As the EU relies on bringing the US back on board, it is clearly not approaching, so European leaders can easily point their fingers to Trump and blame the inevitable catastrophe in Ukraine.
Zelenskyy, on his part, strives to demonstrate to the people of Ukraine that he endured to the fullest, enduring responsibilities and complete humiliation in order to secure and defend Ukrainian interests.
Last fall he presented the Biden administration with his biggest “winning plan.” I knew very well that it would be rejected.
What he is doing now continues to show that, given Ukraine’s position as a victim of Russia’s brutal attacks, maximalism from its position of moral superiority is entirely natural.
Zelenskyy continues to demand “security guarantees” from the West, and is well aware that it is Western unwilling to provide that it is pressured to not sign an agreement with Russia in Istanbul and that it continues to fight for better results.
This public stance of rebellion and maximalism is all aimed at the Ukrainian people. If he doesn’t get what he’s asking, Zelensky can declare that Ukraine is betrayed and has nothing to do other than to hit a deal with Russia.
In private, the Ukrainian president and other ruling elites were very realistic about the outlook for Ukraine. In late January, Ukrainian media reported that Kyrilo Budanov, Director of the Ukrainian Military Intelligence Report (HUR), told lawmakers at an opportunistic parliamentary hearing that Ukraine could either begin peace talks by summer or face “dangerous” consequences for the Ukrainian state. Hur Lukewarmly denied media reports cited MPs who attended the meeting.
On the inevitable crisis in the US, Europe and Ukraine, the jockey is all characterized by a political culture that prioritizes neatly packaged messaging over material. This political culture has dominated the Western approach to conflict with Russia since 2014.
The West has brilliantly (probably to some extent – true) Moscow in the information realm across multiple media platforms serving a variety of audiences. Still, while brutal and criminal on the battlefield, one must favorably support the form, and the decision must be defeated by someone who is based on the idea rather than wishful thinking: Vladimir Putin.
The views expressed in this article are the authors themselves and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.