President of Ukraine Volodimir Zelenski’s last visit to Washington begun with great hopes diplomatically but has ended with a much more cautious air. The meeting the Ukrainian President’s meeting with the President of the US, Donald Trump, has been deemed “incisive”. This word has hinted at a meeting in which Zelenski’s diplomatic politeness held disappointment in the background.[i] The optimism the Ukrainian committee held was overshadowed with the Trump-Putin phone call. The visit has once again made clear the difference in expectation and position on the diplomatic front of the two leaders.
The Ukrainian side has seen this meeting as a turning point for the war’s course of events. Ukrainian Chairperson of Parliament Ruslan Stefanchuk defined this meeting as a “historical moment”, with the belief that Trump is beginning to consider Russian President Vladimir Putin’s approach more precisely. However, the long phone call between Trump and Putin and the summit preparation that followed has caused these expectations to be rocked severely. In the diplomacy world, symbols have often carried more powerful messages than expressions. The low-profile greeting of Zelenski when he arrived in Washington is one of these symbolic messages.
Just a few weeks ago, Trump was said to be fed up with Putin. Yet after the meeting, the sentiment seems to have left its place to the emphasis of “understanding” and “negotiation”. Trump’s statement “He wants to make an agreement” pointed to the potential of the US’ harshness toward Russia softening.[ii]
Zelenski’s every move was followed in the footsteps of his past experiences in Washington. The tense moments with Trump on his previous visits has caused him to act much more warily this time. He adopted a strategy which could be described as flirtatious diplomacy and spoke in praise of his peacemaker identity. The phrase “The currency of diplomacy are compliments” embodies the spirit of the time.[iii]
Zelenski explicitly voicing his mistrust for Putin was an attempt to protect Ukraine’s position. However, Trump’s priorities lie not in ending the war but pushing forward America as a global mediator once again. This approach has reduced the war from its geopolitical dimension to the personal balance between leaders. Trump’s “both sides should return home” phrasing has revealed that he views the conflict as personal antagonism rather than international law.[iv]
The chief aim for the Zelenski administration for this meeting has been getting long-range American Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine. These weapons were seen as ways to pressure Russia and gain the upper hand in negotiations. Additionally, security guarantees by the US carried vital importance in the case of a possible ceasefire in the future. Yet both topics did not gain concrete milage.
The Trump administration has failed Ukrainian expectations by putting forward the option of “freezing” the war. This suggestion has built a foundation for legitimizing the areas where Russia has de facto control over. This was seen by Zelenski as something which would overshadow Ukraine’s sovereignty.
The scene in Washington is the result of not only the disagreement between the two leaders but also the echoes of American politics. “Make America Great Again (MAGA)”-leaning circles in the White House has empowered Trump’s messaging toward the local public. These circles believe that the war continuing will not serve American interest and resources should be used inside the nation.
This approach has also made the process of approval for relief supply kits toward Ukraine more difficult. Zelenski has therefore avoided addressing the American public directly and moved forward with expressions such as “thanks and trust”. However, the cautious wording has not made enough of an echo in the balance of power in Washington.
This visit was not just a diplomatic contact for Ukraine but also a measure of how sustainable support from the West is. The Zelenski administration has stood its ground with Western support since the beginning of the war. However, as time passed the material and political implications of this support have been questioned by Western capitals. The Trump administration’s “America First” line is an example of this.
Zelenski now faces not only the Kremlin but also the shifting global balances. The differing positions of China, the Middle East and the European Union have cornered Ukraine diplomatically. So the failure in Washington has been both a disappointment and a greater indicator of strategic decline.
Despite it seeming like a dead-end, Zelenski’s visit was not entirely a failure. The international world has seen Ukraine’s continuing diplomatic determination. Also, Trump’s “want for an agreement” phrasing has cracked open a door to diplomacy for the war’s future.
This has been a small window of hope for Ukraine. This is because the continuation of the war has become unsustainable military-wise and fiscally. At this point both sides are messaging to their respective public audience that there is “progress”. Zelenski’s silent diplomatic approach has been read as preparations for a new potential negotiation period.
Zelenski returning from the White House emptyhanded has caused a morale loss for Ukraine. However, this situation has reminded that war dynamics do not rely solely on firepower but also on diplomatic patience. The Trump administration has used this meeting to push forward the role of America as a global peacemaker once again.
Both leaders have adopted a “balanced language” in which to address their public, Upon returning home, Zelenski has kept his diplomatic silence. This silence was perhaps the strongest message of all: The war has entered an era where it is not being fought only on fronts but with words.
The Washington visit has been an experience where realistic expectations and patience on politics ran thin for Ukraine. Although the targeted weapons and guarantees were not obtained, the Kiev administration once again demonstrated its will to maintain its presence on the international stage.
[i] “Disappointment in Kyiv as Zelensky Leaves White House Empty-Handed”, BBC News, www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn97gjqgq9po, (Date of Access: 19.10.2025).
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Ibid.
