Ukrainian President Zelensky offered a path to peace, trying to mend the rupture with the U.S. He rejected the previous deal presented by Trump because it was negotiated by the U.S. and Russia, without the participation of Ukraine, and it contained no security guarantees, no protection for Ukraine if Putin decided to renew the war.
President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Tuesday offered a course of action that he said could end the war, while trying to assure the Trump administration that his government was dedicated to peace.
“Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be,” Mr. Zelensky wrote on X. “It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right.”
He was referring to an explosive meeting at the White House last week in which President Trump berated Mr. Zelensky and called him ungrateful. Mr. Trump followed up on Monday by announcing that he was pausing all U.S. military aid to Ukraine.
The Ukrainian leader said he was ready to release Russian prisoners of war, stop long-range drone and missile strikes aimed at Russian targets, and declare a truce at sea immediately — moves that he said would help establish a pathway to peace.
Only, however, “if Russia will do the same,” he added.
Mr. Zelensky’s proposal seemed clearly designed to shift the burden for ending the war onto Russia, which launched its invasion three years ago. The White House has claimed that the Ukrainian leader is the main obstacle to peace.
In his post, Mr. Zelensky offered effusive praise for American support, noting specifically “the moment when things changed when President Trump provided Ukraine with Javelins.”
“We are grateful for this,” he wrote. “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer,” he added. “My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts.”
There was no immediate reaction from the Kremlin to Mr. Zelensky’s proposal. Despite the ferocity of the fighting, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has shown a willingness to do side deals with Ukraine. The two countries have conducted numerous prisoner-of-war exchanges, and Russia and Ukraine had been set to participate in talks in Qatar last August about halting strikes on each other’s energy infrastructure. Moscow pulled out of the meeting after Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk region.
In recent weeks, however, Mr. Putin has offered no hint of being willing to de-escalate the war before winning major concessions from the West and Ukraine — like ruling out Ukrainian NATO membership, reducing the alliance’s footprint in Europe, limiting the size of Ukraine’s military, and giving Russia influence over Ukraine’s domestic politics.
“There is no evidence that Russia would be prepared to accept a deal, and what that would be,” said Malcolm Chalmers, deputy director general of the Royal United Services Institute, a research group in London. He said the decision by the United States to pause military aid would only encourage Putin to ask for more — including Ukrainian demilitarization and neutrality.”
Mr. Zelensky sought to strike a careful balance in his statement. Aware of Mr. Trump’s stated desire to get a quick deal, he said Ukraine was “ready to work fast to end the war.”
At the same time, he suggested a staged process, similar to an idea raised by the French government, that could start immediately.
“We are ready to work fast to end the war, and the first stages could be the release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same,” he wrote. “Then we want to move very fast through all next stages and to work with the US to agree a strong final deal.”
The article goes on to expressions of dismay by Ukrainians who are disappointed that it was their strongest ally, the U.S., that betrayed them.

That a man as brave and great as President Zelensky should have to humble himself before that disgraceful clown 🤡 that is our current president is sickening. God bless that man for putting aside his ego and continuing to try to do what is best for the Ukrainian people.
LikeLike
The United States didn’t do it. FELON47, the first dictator in US history, the January 6, 2021, Traitor did.
The alleged child rapist did the same thing to end the Afghan War. His regime negotiated directly with the Taliban leaving out the elected Afghan government, our country’s ally at the time, and the US Constitution gives the president the power to make treaties, but only with the Senate’s advice and consent. Did the US Senate ever consent to that treaty?
That is who the convicted rapist is. The malignant narcissist has had a reputation for decades as an extreme micromanager as the head of his family crime empire. The mangers of his hotels can’t even order drapes or carpet without his approval.
LikeLike
Never forget the Doha Agreement. That’s where Trump, the dealmaker, agreed to a unilateral surrender to the Taliban and left Biden to take the blame.
LikeLike
My concern is this: Should we really be reading the New York Times, given how complicit they are in the destruction of democracy? I’m sure there are at least a dozen phrases in this story that normalize Trump and do untold damage to America.
LikeLike
Here’s the AP story
LikeLike
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-trump-zelenskyy-military-aid-2ce8b167f0ba948b2b606381192de71d
LikeLike
I read the NYT article so I know this:
Zelensky is “trying to assure the Trump administration that his government was dedicated to peace.” Of course that is what the article is about. Zelensky needs Trump’s help, and the way to get Trump’s help is to show Trump he is “dedicated to peace”. What is true without question is that Trump’s motives are of course “peace”.
“an explosive meeting at the White House last week in which President Trump berated Mr. Zelensky and called him ungrateful.” Keep that narrative going! President Trump – motivated by his desire for peace – “berated” Zelensky and said he was ungrateful for everything America has done for him already. I guess “berate” is the NYT’s replacement for their former euphemism where Trump “scolded” Zelensky. Again, the NYT reinforces the narrative that the meeting was an example of Trump being very uncouth and maybe too rude in service to Trump’s motive to bring “peace”.
“Aware of Mr. Trump’s stated desire to get a quick deal, he said Ukraine was “ready to work fast to end the war.”
Again, the NYT story presents Trump’s motives clearly for all to see – getting a quick deal. And the allowable conversation and debate is whether you agree or disagree with how Trump is going about getting that deal — and the NYT will no doubt write a follow-up story about people who think there might be a better way for a president like Trump to achieve his laudable goal of getting a quick deal to achieve peace.
The Emperors New Clothes. Repeating as truth whatever Trump says are his “beautiful new goals” but believing that you are being “fair and balanced” because you bravely present “both sides” – the views of some townspeople who don’t think that that the Emperor’s New Clothes are nearly as fabulous as the Emperor says they are, and “the other side”: people who DO think that the Emperor’s New Clothes are truly fabulous.
What is verboten is saying that the Emperor isn’t wearing clothes. What is verboten is saying that Trump’s goal is NOT “a quick deal” but “a deal that gives Putin whatever he wants” and Trump clearly believes that getting Putin what he wants means pressuring Zelensky to accept a quick deal.
Apparently, it never occurred to a NYT reporter that a president who was motivated by “getting a quick deal” would be pressuring Putin, too. Just because Trump is only pressuring Zelensky should absolutely not affect the NYT’s truth that Trump is motivated by wanting peace and making a quick deal to get peace.
Here is what I know because I read news sources other than the NYT:
Zelensky has been meeting with European leaders who know that Trump is NOT motivated by “wanting a quick deal” but is motivated by flattery and obeisance.
The Brits were talking about how their Prime Minister’s approach to Trump addressed what REALLY motivates Trump, and it isn’t “a quick deal”. He started the meeting by giving Trump the letter from Prince Charles and emphasizing that Trump was the FIRST leader given the great honor of getting a royal invitation to a state visit TWICE!!! Way to go! THAT’S how you deal with a US president who is a toddler with a fondness for evil, powerful authoritarians, but who sometimes responds to flattery and a show of extreme deference and expression of how great he is. The other European leaders also get this.
Zelensky’s new approach to Trump is him doing exactly what the western leaders told him can sometimes work to lead Trump away from his natural desires to give Putin what he wants.
Although the NYT covers Zelensky’s new approach to Trump as being a reasonable approach to a US President who is motivated by his desire for peace and getting peace done as soon as possible.
The US has King Joffrey Baratheon in the White House, sitting on the Iron Throne, and the NYT reports on King Joffrey as if his only motivation was “making Westeros Great Again” because King Joffrey has said that is his motivation, and it would be too “biased” to write anything that does not strongly reinforce that “the good of Westeros” is King Joffrey’s guiding motivation. But the NYT is bravely willing to question whether King Joffrey’s approach to making Westeros Great Again is working well, or may need some changes to work better.
LikeLike
^^”The White House has claimed that the Ukrainian leader is the main obstacle to peace.“
Dear NYT, while some folks here admire your perfect and accurate characterization of reality, in fact, an accurate sentence would read:
“The White House has FALSELY claimed that the Ukrainian leader is the main obstacle to peace.“
I do realize that if you include the word FALSELY or LIED in every story instead of dutifully quoting Trump’s words without informing readers of the intentional lie that Trump is pushing, then that creates a very difficult problem because obviously it would lead people to question the absurd narrative that characterizes Trump’s motives as NOT DANGEROUS AT ALL BUT IN SERVICE TO HIS CLAIM THAT HE WANTS PEACE!
So maybe you might consider that you change the “true narrative” from “Trump acts to achieve peace quickly” to “Trump acts to please Putin”. There is a lot more evidence for the 2nd narrative, and the only evidence for the narrative you are currently premising all your stories on is “Trump says so”.
And “Trump says so” should not get equal weight with all of Trump’s actions that are very obviously about keeping Putin happy and not getting a quick deal UNLESS it makes Putin happy.
LikeLike
I guess Macron and Starmer just told Zelensky to kiss up…
LikeLike