News and Analysis:

Live Updates:

Relevant text-based live update pages are being maintained by the following outlets: AP, NBC, The Guardian, CNN (soft paywall), and The Washington Post (soft paywall).

Where to Watch:

Discussion Thread: Press Conference with US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy
byu/PoliticsModeratorBot inpolitics

8 comments

  1. For the longest time I was against the US policing the world; shipping weapons anywhere. But seeing Trump stop our support of Ukraine and try to shake them down has started to change my mind.

    And here’s the thing – we should be helping them because it will affect us down the road, if Putin starts to take over Europe. Sending munitions over there now prevents us from having to send troops there later. It’s for our own long term security; and if no one does it there will be another world war.

    Congrats DJT, you made me, a liberal, more hawkish and actually widened my view of global geopolitics.

  2. I hope Zelensky gets the opportunity to call Trump out to his face, and I hope he corrects Trump anytime he lies or says some bullshit like Macron did the other day.

  3. This whole thing reeks of transactional geopolitics disguised as a “win-win” deal. Ukraine is getting squeezed into bartering its natural resources just to keep the lights on, while Trump is framing it as America “getting its money back” for aid—completely ignoring the actual stakes of the war. Meanwhile, Russia is sitting back, watching, and offering its own mineral deals from occupied Ukrainian land.

    This isn’t about securing Ukraine’s future—it’s about carving it up. Trump is openly telling them to “forget about” NATO and pushing Europe to take the security burden, while the U.S. claims a stake in Ukraine’s rare earths. Zelensky’s got no real choice but to sign whatever deal keeps the war effort alive, because without Western backing, Ukraine collapses.

    If Trump is already entertaining peace talks without Ukraine at the table, what happens when Russia demands control over the very land holding these resources? If the U.S. gets what it wants without a military commitment, does Ukraine get left out in the cold? And if Europe wasn’t even in the room for these talks, do they even have a say in how this plays out?

    This feels less like a strategic alliance and more like a fire sale of Ukraine’s future.

  4. Trump can tear up deals, even ones that he made. So can Zelensky. But in this case there are very few rare earth minerals in Ukraine (compered to other countries), and non accessible in the foreseeable future, so it’s Trump who’s getting played. Again.

  5. Sounds like a surprisingly good deal for US and Ukraine despite the rhetoric tossed around lately. Is it wrong to be optimistic about this?

  6. Not trying to start an argument here but is there a reason the Biden Administration didn’t think of creating a deal of this type 1-2 years ago with Ukraine?

  8. Trump has made it pretty clear that Ukraine is really the enemy. His language and actions clearly show it. This all lines up with Trump’s hostile communications towards allies and rosy communication with dictators. It all makes sense if Trump is looking to create a new American empire, with the world dividing into spheres of influence for the great powers. Russia can do what it wants with Ukraine and Europe, China can have it’s way with Taiwan, and the US can do what it wants with Canada, Mexico, Greenland and Panama.

    Ukraine is blocking this world order of the great powers by refusing to get with the program and accepting Russian suzerainty. Small countries like Ukraine have no agency, and don’t really “exist” other than as tools for the great powers to play with. By helping Russia defeat Ukraine, Trump will have sent a clear message to Canada and Panama that they’d better get in line or else.

Comments are closed.