Zelenskyy's Office on cooperation with Trump: His attitude towards war and Russia will change

Contents

• Negotiations with Russia and Trump’s position
• How Ukraine is working with Trump's team
• How Trump’s position on Ukraine will be influenced by US public opinion
• Ukrainian sentiments about freezing the war and negotiating with Russia
• Trump’s victory and the Oreshnik strike: Is Europe ready to help Ukraine?
• Contacts and possible assistance from South Korea

Negotiations with Russia and Trump’s position

The Russian Federation does not want negotiations; it is all fiction. They will not stop unless forced into an objective negotiation process. Therefore, the option of "let’s negotiate, and Russia will agree to freeze the conflict on its terms" does not exist. Russia can only function in a state of expansion until it is defeated. Our partners need to understand this.

At present, there is an understanding of which weapons have proven effective on the battlefield and in what quantities they should be supplied to Ukraine. Again, Russia also has significant problems with resource saturation. They are compensating for this through North Korea and Iran and investing much more in their own production. Therefore, investments in European production are increasing, wi th agreements for supplies throughout 2025.

For me, it’s somewhat strange to hear all the fears about whether Trump will halt assistance. Is Russia supposed to win the war and claim world dominance? Conceptually, this even seems odd for conspiracy theories. Would they voluntarily give up global dominance? Russia will behave much more arrogantly in international negotiations. They won’t just say: let Ukraine give up some more territory. Russia will insist that Europe be under its control. That NATO should pull back its bases to the territories where they were before 1997.

Here (with Trump – ed.), the issue is simply in the communications that need to be established at the presidential level, etc. It is about working on explaining the logic of the war and Putin’s personal motives. The Americans have already signed the protocol for the transfer of power from the Biden administration to Trump’s. This will allow Trump’s team to delve deeper into federal programs and gain access to critically important information that clearly defines Russia’s intentions. This will significantly influence, in my view, the perception of the war, not just by Trump, but by his inner circle.

President Zelenskyy says that there are agreements. The key is to ensure that they are fulfilled on time and in full. We are not talking about increasing anything. At least what has already been agreed upon should arrive in Ukraine on time. And this will have a very concrete impact on the frontline.

We understand that everything depends on logistics. If before we talked about using, for example, HIMARS to destroy logistics in the occupied territories, now we understand that the main Russian logistical resource is the border area up to 200-300 km deep. And if long-range missile strikes are scaled up, this will significantly limit Russia in terms of resources.

How Ukraine is working with Trump's team

Intensive negotiations are undoubtedly underway. I don't want to dive into the details yet, as everything is still fragile and communication is just starting to take shape. But I believe it's not as straightforward as it might seem — whoever communicates with Trump first (Ukraine or Russia - ed.) will gain some benefits.

Russia has, and will have, certain communications in place. It's important for them to mislead everyone, and they have the kompromat and financial resources to do so. They have connections and have incorporated many people who belong to the information, economic, and financial sectors. Even politicians have been integrated into Russia's agenda.

The issue is that we must get our communications right and work on them. Then, there will be a voice against voice, and we will always have a more adequate position because we adhere to international law. We say that the West created the rules, while the Russian Federation is breaking them. If Russia is allowed to continue, all the rules will be nullified, and we will simply wait for wars to escalate.

If you don't want that, you must use Ukraine's communication experience to understand what to do next in this war. These relationships are being built at various levels, and I believe they will be effective.

I think we don't fully understand the psychotypes of the people we're dealing with. Putin is understandable. Trump too — he's a leadership type. Playing a secondary role is not for him. He’s a pragmatic person and will calculate the pros and cons he will gain. The losses from playing Russia's scenario are much greater than any gains, while the Ukrainian scenario offers much more in terms of political, reputational, and economic benefits. I don’t understand why Trump would risk losses; what’s the logic behind such actions?

To publicly talk about working with Trump, we first need to align with the American side. There are many of our delegations, including military, MPs, and ongoing communication with congressmen and senators. There are many lobbyists, and a large amount of work is being done. Expecting one or two meetings to change the situation would be naive. Today, Ukraine’s subjectivity, realized through communications with the US, is much greater than it was two or three years ago.

How Trump’s position on Ukraine will be influenced by US public opinion

Trump cannot ignore American public opinion, but the views on aid to Ukraine are divided. There are several factors at play. Firstly, the electoral campaign was tough, and his team wanted to distance their foreign policy from Biden's. However, this is slowly beginning to change.

If we conduct the right communication policy towards the US, and they adjust their information policy, we could return to the situation from the early days of Russia's invasion, when 70-75% of Americans supported full-scale assistance to Ukraine.

This is especially true given that Republicans, who strongly oppose authoritarianism not only from Russia, will dominate. If American arms manufacturers can also dominate the market and push out Russia, this will add to the pressure to support Ukraine.

Ukrainian sentiments about freezing the war and negotiating with Russia

The question here is whether Russia truly wants a frozen conflict. Do they really not want to act on their hatred, which has intensified especially over the last three years? Ukraine, in essence, humiliated the concept of Russian greatness, which allowed them to see themselves as a global player. They hate us far more now than they did before the full-scale invasion.

On the other hand, we see the transformation within Russian society. It is an increasingly aggressive state, almost like an "urkostan" (country of thugs). Russia will not negotiate civilized relations. They are interested in Ukraine ceasing to exist. There is no point in talking to Russia — they will keep trying to kill us. Even if you are willing to make some agreement, it doesn’t mean the other side will engage in it.

Our people are open about their willingness to stop the war, which is a clear stance. We must persistently explain Russia's true motives and why negotiating with them is impossible. It’s difficult because there’s war fatigue. Some strange people want to ride the wave of the current narrative, claiming it's simple, pointing to Western media. They think they've found a quick solution — make Ukraine lose. Let us give up some territories, and then Russia can dictate the internal and foreign policies of Ukraine.

Western media talks about global rules and international law but, at the same time, about stimulating the aggressor at the expense of the victim. This is nonsense, but the debate continues. We see what is happening in European elections. There are two problems: unassessed risks generated by Russia and the fact that communities in those countries no longer want a policy of collective irresponsibility. They want charismatic leaders who will take responsibility, even if wrong.

This is why I believe Trump can offer a new path to address collective irresponsibility. He could set an example: break the rules, and you must answer for it. This kind of leadership is what people in European countries, too, want to see.

Trump’s victory and the Oreshnik strike: Is Europe ready to help Ukraine?

In Europe, there is a growing understanding that Russia is an utterly irrational state. There are still politicians who believe that a simple phone call to Putin, with a request, would resolve everything and the war would end. But that is not the case. Russia, with its hard-hitting attacks after Chancellor Olaf Scholz's call, showed that Putin seeks to humiliate Europeans. When an intercontinental ballistic missile was used, it became clear that a tougher stance on Russia was necessary. Russia would not stop at the borders of the Donetsk region.

Europe is shifting its political rhetoric, accelerating logistical actions, and realizing the need to fund NATO more and return it to its military role. Europe understands that security issues can only be addressed through Ukraine. Ukraine is the only country in Europe that can pressure Russia directly in combat, no matter how strange that may sound. For this, Ukraine needs to be equipped with the right tools.

It is clear to me that the US must play a leading role, as President Biden has already stated. I don’t understand how there can be greatness if the US distances itself from a major European war and allows regimes like North Korea, Iran (which is simultaneously attacking Israel), and Russia to avoid defeat when they could ensure their loss. That would be a strange kind of leadership. However, Europeans still aim to build a new system of influence and allow themselves to have a more active impact on their rules, their future, and the type of European Union they want tomorrow.

Contacts and possible assistance from South Korea

South Korea is acutely aware of the increasing risk of escalation on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea is gaining combat experience and will begin restructuring its training and military preparation systems, which will result in a very different army. They are training their officers, and this will be an army with practical experience. They will also gain additional technologies, and Russia has shown that if it does not lose the war against Ukraine, it will aggressively support North Korea. This means that North Korea is very likely to attack South Korea.

South Korea has made a direct request to Ukraine — give us your experience, let’s build advisory councils, share information, and so on. There may even be exchanges of weapons. Of course, this is important for Ukraine at the moment. In my opinion, South Korea is interested in having its weapons used in Ukraine because they can then gain experience in using their weapons in a high-intensity war.

Unfortunately, these communications did not exist during the 2.5 years of the war. But the important thing now is that these communications are happening because both South Korea and European countries clearly understand that this war will not end simply.

(Whether South Korea will dare to provide military assistance to Ukraine - ed.) depends on how ready it is to take leadership. If you want to be a leader, like former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson with his clear positions, you will make the right decisions. This is independent of whether it’s South Korea or Germany. If Germany wants to make a decision, it will have calm talks with its allies and get their support. In my view, Germany needs to demonstrate pan-European leadership today. Europe has a historic opportunity to enhance its role as a global player, and South Korea can take advantage of this as well. It is crucial to have a clear discussion with partners and say that there are risks that can be addressed with the help of Ukraine.