This public clash, derailing a rare earth minerals deal and a joint news conference, was no accident, but the boiling point of deep frustrations, diplomatic blunders, and clashing priorities.
The disagreement is a stark reminder of how tough it will be to broker a Russia-Ukraine peace deal that also satisfies the U.S. and Europe. It also raises a critical question: is Zelenskyy the right leader to end the war, or should he step aside for someone less combative?
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a post-meeting interview, suggested that the public was unaware of the full backdrop to this outburst, hinting at a history of strained interactions.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s post-meeting remarks to Bloomberg TV gave further context to the depth of these tensions when he described a similarly heated exchange with Zelenskyy in Kyiv over the same minerals deal, and mentioned another tense encounter that Rubio and Vance had with Zelenskyy at the Munich Security Conference earlier in February.
Bessent called Friday’s meeting “one of history’s great diplomatic own goals,” arguing that Zelenskyy’s refusal and combative stance had torpedoed the deal and further strained U.S.-Ukraine ties.
The U.S. administration’s apparent loss of patience with Zelenskyy, however, traces back even further, with reports of a notable outburst from then-President Joe Biden in 2021 over Zelenskyy’s approach, underscoring a pattern of friction.
Zelensky told Fox News’ Bret Baier that he didn’t feel he owed U.S. President Donald Trump an apology, but added that he thought the relationship between them could be salvaged.
“Yes of course [it can be salvaged], because it’s relations [between] more than two presidents. It’s historical relations, strong relations between our people. And that’s why I always begin your people from our people. And this is the most important,” Zelensky said.
In the aftermath, world leaders including New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon rallied behind Zelenskyy, posting support on X and other platforms. Yet, ominously, influential Republican Senator Lindsey Graham firmly backed Trump’s stance. Should Zelenskyy lose Senate and House Republicans, along with American public opinion, his position could become untenable.
The immediate trigger for the Oval Office confrontation was the proposed rare earth minerals deal, which the Trump administration saw as a critical component of its strategy to end the Ukraine-Russia War.
Floated by Trump in early 2025, the deal would have handed the U.S. up to 50% of Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, key for tech production, as payback for billions in aid since Russia’s 2022 invasion.
Trump and his team, including Bessent, Vance, and Rubio, presented this as a win-win: economic benefits for the U.S. and a pathway to peace for Ukraine. The intention was that this deal would demonstrate strong U.S. support for Ukraine to Russian President Putin and be the catalyst to rebuild the Ukrainian economy. White House aides highlighted that, at the Cold War’s end, Poland and Ukraine’s economies were similar sizes; today, Poland’s is four times bigger, a gap the deal sought to close.
However, Zelenskyy repeatedly resisted signing the agreement, arguing that it lacked sufficient security guarantees to protect Ukraine from future Russian aggression, a non-negotiable demand from Zelenskyy’s perspective given Kyiv’s precarious position.
Bessent’s February 2025 Kyiv trip, where he presented the minerals deal’s first draft, lit the fuse for this simmering disagreement. According to reports, Zelenskyy became visibly angry during their meeting, shouting at Bessent and rejecting the proposal as inadequate and overly focused on U.S. interests.
The U.S. proposal countered Zelenskyy’s “Victory Plan,” unveiled to Western allies in October 2024. That plan offered critical natural resources in exchange for U.S. support, but the specifics of the Trump administration’s counterproposal, which required access to minerals without explicit security guarantees, were seen by some Ukrainian officials as reminiscent of colonial exploitation.
On Bloomberg TV, Bessent defended the proposed economic deal, including criticism from economist and former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers that it was akin to the Treaty of Versailles. Bessent pointed out that Versailles was debt and that this proposal was an equity deal where both the U.S. and Ukraine would share in significant upside together.
U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is set to host a summit of European leaders on Sunday at Downing Street to discuss support for Kyiv. Zelensky has already landed at the U.K’s Stansted Airport and will be meeting with Starmer before the summit.
Arriving in the U.K. around midnight on Saturday NZ time, Zelenskyy sent a lengthy post on X which struck a conciliatory tone. The Ukrainian President saying, “We are very grateful to the United States for all the support, I’m thankful to President Trump, Congress for their bipartisan support, and the American people.” Quoting former President Reagan, Zelenskyy said it was crucial to have President Trump’s support and indicated that he was ready to sign the minerals agreement.
This is a welcome first step from Zelenskyy towards repairing the damaged relationship. No doubt much time will be spent during tomorrow’s leaders summit discussing how Europe can also help patch things up on Zelenskyy’s behalf. Starmer and French President Macron will presumably lead efforts to reach out to the Americans and re-establish a timetable to sign the minerals agreement.
Lawyer and writer Philip Crump explores political, legal and cultural issues facing New Zealand. Sometimes known as Thomas Cranmer. This article was published HERE
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a post-meeting interview, suggested that the public was unaware of the full backdrop to this outburst, hinting at a history of strained interactions.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s post-meeting remarks to Bloomberg TV gave further context to the depth of these tensions when he described a similarly heated exchange with Zelenskyy in Kyiv over the same minerals deal, and mentioned another tense encounter that Rubio and Vance had with Zelenskyy at the Munich Security Conference earlier in February.
Bessent called Friday’s meeting “one of history’s great diplomatic own goals,” arguing that Zelenskyy’s refusal and combative stance had torpedoed the deal and further strained U.S.-Ukraine ties.
The U.S. administration’s apparent loss of patience with Zelenskyy, however, traces back even further, with reports of a notable outburst from then-President Joe Biden in 2021 over Zelenskyy’s approach, underscoring a pattern of friction.
Zelensky told Fox News’ Bret Baier that he didn’t feel he owed U.S. President Donald Trump an apology, but added that he thought the relationship between them could be salvaged.
“Yes of course [it can be salvaged], because it’s relations [between] more than two presidents. It’s historical relations, strong relations between our people. And that’s why I always begin your people from our people. And this is the most important,” Zelensky said.
In the aftermath, world leaders including New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon rallied behind Zelenskyy, posting support on X and other platforms. Yet, ominously, influential Republican Senator Lindsey Graham firmly backed Trump’s stance. Should Zelenskyy lose Senate and House Republicans, along with American public opinion, his position could become untenable.
The immediate trigger for the Oval Office confrontation was the proposed rare earth minerals deal, which the Trump administration saw as a critical component of its strategy to end the Ukraine-Russia War.
Floated by Trump in early 2025, the deal would have handed the U.S. up to 50% of Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, key for tech production, as payback for billions in aid since Russia’s 2022 invasion.
Trump and his team, including Bessent, Vance, and Rubio, presented this as a win-win: economic benefits for the U.S. and a pathway to peace for Ukraine. The intention was that this deal would demonstrate strong U.S. support for Ukraine to Russian President Putin and be the catalyst to rebuild the Ukrainian economy. White House aides highlighted that, at the Cold War’s end, Poland and Ukraine’s economies were similar sizes; today, Poland’s is four times bigger, a gap the deal sought to close.
However, Zelenskyy repeatedly resisted signing the agreement, arguing that it lacked sufficient security guarantees to protect Ukraine from future Russian aggression, a non-negotiable demand from Zelenskyy’s perspective given Kyiv’s precarious position.
Bessent’s February 2025 Kyiv trip, where he presented the minerals deal’s first draft, lit the fuse for this simmering disagreement. According to reports, Zelenskyy became visibly angry during their meeting, shouting at Bessent and rejecting the proposal as inadequate and overly focused on U.S. interests.
The U.S. proposal countered Zelenskyy’s “Victory Plan,” unveiled to Western allies in October 2024. That plan offered critical natural resources in exchange for U.S. support, but the specifics of the Trump administration’s counterproposal, which required access to minerals without explicit security guarantees, were seen by some Ukrainian officials as reminiscent of colonial exploitation.
On Bloomberg TV, Bessent defended the proposed economic deal, including criticism from economist and former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers that it was akin to the Treaty of Versailles. Bessent pointed out that Versailles was debt and that this proposal was an equity deal where both the U.S. and Ukraine would share in significant upside together.
U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is set to host a summit of European leaders on Sunday at Downing Street to discuss support for Kyiv. Zelensky has already landed at the U.K’s Stansted Airport and will be meeting with Starmer before the summit.
Arriving in the U.K. around midnight on Saturday NZ time, Zelenskyy sent a lengthy post on X which struck a conciliatory tone. The Ukrainian President saying, “We are very grateful to the United States for all the support, I’m thankful to President Trump, Congress for their bipartisan support, and the American people.” Quoting former President Reagan, Zelenskyy said it was crucial to have President Trump’s support and indicated that he was ready to sign the minerals agreement.
This is a welcome first step from Zelenskyy towards repairing the damaged relationship. No doubt much time will be spent during tomorrow’s leaders summit discussing how Europe can also help patch things up on Zelenskyy’s behalf. Starmer and French President Macron will presumably lead efforts to reach out to the Americans and re-establish a timetable to sign the minerals agreement.
Lawyer and writer Philip Crump explores political, legal and cultural issues facing New Zealand. Sometimes known as Thomas Cranmer. This article was published HERE
3 comments:
Maybe the American people should be considered as well? I read that 88 billion had been contributed by them to this war. Zelensky simply can't come to the White House and start dictating terms. A rare mineral deal was to benefit both parties and help rebuild Ukraine. Obviously, Trump needs to keep Putin onside or no peace deal will happen at all. Of course, the US involvement after WW2 was beneficial to both West Germany and Japan. Hawaii is also wealthy and peaceful as a US state. It was plain silly for Zelensky to say "This will happen to you one day, you are lucky you are surrounded by ocean". New Zealand could easily be attacked, being surrounded by ocean won't help.
Agree with Janie above albeit I suggest the $88b may have a third number included in the quantum of assistance from US.
I thought it was dumb or very poor timing for Luxon to tweet Zelensky showing support which could be pushed in NZ face just as
JD Vance silenced Zelensky at the oval office reminding him that campaigning against Trump in Pennsylvania last election was ill considered .
You are right Basil. It's a great deal more than $88 billion. Luxon opens his mouth, only to put his foot in it. Obama is not the president now.
Post a Comment