Analysis: Zelensky faces a fateful choice as Ukraine reels from Trump's aid suspension
Pausing military aid is the most damaging move the Trump administration can make to Ukraine's war effort, and however opaque the immediate practical consequence may be, the psychological impact for Ukrainians has been immense and catastrophic.
The last time US military aid was held up – by Trump-leaning Republicans in December 2023, when $60 billion was stalled for several months – the damage to morale was seismic. And after that delay, the momentum on the front lines changed from Ukraine pursuing a mostly unsuccessful counteroffensive, to being largely in defense.
On Tuesday morning, Kyiv was still reeling from the hammer blow, and trying to suggest the impact might not be catastrophic. An adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mykhailo Podolyak, posted: 'First, it is necessary to assess which specific programs will cease to function, considering that many were already in their final stages.'
Ukraine's stocks of critical artillery shells could run out by May or June following the pause, a Ukrainian official told CNN on Tuesday. The official said that the first ammunition crisis following the US military aid pause would involve Patriot air defense missiles, which could run out in a matter of weeks.
'We will adapt, but the question is how many additional people, and how much more territory, we lose while we do,' the official said.
Reactions from frontline troops noted the heavy role drones, or UAVs, play in holding back Russian assaults, but also the vital need for American-supplied air-defense missiles.
'Our weakness is in air-defense missiles – the Patriots,' said Yegor Firsov, the chief sergeant of a UAV strike platoon. 'Even we, the military, would like to have our families, our rear, protected as much as possible when we are serving on the frontline. Eighty per cent of all destruction, from a tank to an enemy dugout, is carried out directly by drones. So, of course, we have a chance to survive together with Europe.'
Serhii Filimonov, commander of the 108th Separate Mechanized Battalion, or 'Da Vinci Wolves,' which has been fighting outside the strategic town of Pokrovsk for nine months, said: 'American support is critical for defending the sky, and financial assistance affects the economy and morale of society, which is also important for the frontline.'
A Ukrainian source told CNN the decision did not impact intelligence sharing, which is a lower-cost but impactful component of US support to Kyiv's war effort. Yet the nature of President Donald Trump's move – however it plays out in practical terms – throws a focus on his rift with Zelensky and what must be done to heal it.
Trump officials have hinted at the need for a public apology. It is clear they are also reluctant to present the proposed deal giving the United States access to Ukraine's mineral riches for signature, although Trump did hint Monday that that agreement might see progress in the coming days. The Trump administration has also said Zelensky needs to commit to peace, yet not specified in any great detail what this peace would look like.
Washington has laid out a vision of peace that appears a little binary – a moment in which the war stops and Moscow agrees to Trump's solution unequivocally. Trump has said repeatedly he does not believe President Vladimir Putin will violate any deal they forge together.
His European allies disagree, and insist any peace deal is made with enough security guarantees for Ukraine that it can fend off any renewed Russian aggression. Ukrainian officials highlight, with evidence on their side, that Russia has violated more than 20 ceasefires or deals in the past decade.
The peace Trump wants appears to require Zelensky to demand no further US support; rely on European allies possibly functioning without American assistance; sign up to a deal which provides Washington with an unspecified stream of cash from Ukraine's natural resources to repay the US for aid, as well as invest in reconstruction; and then finally accede to whatever peace deal terms and conditions Trump agrees with Moscow, possibly without Ukraine at the table.
That is a big ask of a wartime leader. It demands of Zelensky that he unconditionally trust that the US president is acting in Ukraine's interests. A public apology to Trump would go some distance, perhaps, in resolving the horrific collapse in Kyiv and Washington's alliance. Yet it could have a fundamental impact on some Ukrainian morale: troops would see their commander in chief, in their eyes, apologizing for being bullied. It would say to Ukraine's European allies that Kyiv has put Trump entirely in the driving seat, unclear on the destination he has in mind.
Ukraine has reason to distrust: The Budapest Memorandum of 1994 saw Kyiv surrender its nuclear weapons for security guarantees from the US, United Kingdom and Russia. Ukrainians have since endured a decade of Russian aggression, starting with its illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. If even these explicit security guarantees changed nothing, why sign away the country's mineral wealth if that comes without any specific promise to continue military aid?
Zelensky's fate has become an occasional Trump talking point, and his future as a US partner hinges on his 'acceptance of peace.' The peace Zelensky, and his European backers, seek is one where Ukraine is adequately armed and protected so that any renewed Russian assault – after months of re-fit and replenishment during a ceasefire renders Moscow's war machine potent again – can be repelled.
Zelensky and Europe appear guided in their approach by the lessons of the 1930s. Trump appears guided by his belief that his personal relationships and deal-making acumen can disruptively win out over the brutal realities of war and geopolitics.
Ukraine's president has a fateful choice ahead of him: accede to your erstwhile ally's demand, and say you are sorry, while handing over your nation's wealth, and assenting to undefined terms of a peace deal discussed without you. It places Ukraine in the most unfavorable position imaginable, after three years of savage Russian assault.
The payback is that, if Trump agrees, the US might continue to provide Ukraine with the vital third to a fifth of all military assistance they have in the past received. Laid out bare, is this a choice at all?
CNN's Svitlana Vlasova contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘Never use violence': Camp Pendleton Marines could be deployed to LA protests as governor continues to push back
SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — President Trump is deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles after two days of clashes between immigration authorities and demonstrators following several raids across the city, and the Secretary of Defense has put Camp Pendleton Marines on high alert to be deployed if needed. Governor Newsom has been vocal Saturday, taking to X to push back against President Trump's orders to deploy the state National Guard, saying, in part, 'This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust. Never use violence. Speak out peacefully.' Federal agents conducting immigration raid in Los Angeles County; protest quickly erupts While protestors and federal immigration authorities in riot gear continued to clash Saturday and tear gas and smoke filled the air on and off, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, posted on X Saturday night he was mobilizing the National Guard immediately to support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles, and placed active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton on high alert to be mobilized 'if violence continues.' Governor Newsom responded on X, saying, 'the Secretary of Defense is now threatening to deploy active-duty Marines on American soil against its own citizens. This is deranged behavior.' It began Friday when ICE and federal immigration authorities raided several businesses in the Los Angeles area and people took to the streets to push back. Large groups of protestors gathered near the site of the raids on Friday and again on Saturday. Trump deploying California National Guard over governor's objections to LA to quell protests Law enforcement in riot gear and gas masks were seen blocking streets, firing tear gas and smoke bombs as protestors continued to gather, in some cases throwing cement pieces and firing off fireworks. Watch a live feed of the scene of ICE activity in Paramount here. Viewer discretion is advised. This is developing. Stay with FOX 5/KUSI for the latest updates Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
an hour ago
What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
President Donald Trump says he's deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests, over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. It's not the first time Trump has activated the National Guard to quell protests. In 2020, he asked governors of several states to send troops to Washington, D.C. to respond to demonstrations that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors he asked agreed, sending troops to the federal district. The governors that refused the request were allowed to do so, keeping their troops on home soil. This time, however, Trump is acting in opposition to Newsom, who under normal circumstances would retain control and command of California's National Guard. While Trump said that federalizing the troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California, the Democratic governor said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Here are some things to know about when and how the president can deploy troops on U.S. soil. Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency. An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday. Instead, he relied on a similar federal law that allows the president to federalize National Guard troops under certain circumstances. The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests. Often it operates under state command and control, using state funding. Sometimes National Guard troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding. The law cited by Trump's proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' with regular forces. But the law also says that orders for those purposes 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.' It's not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. Notably, Trump's proclamation says the National Guard troops will play a supporting role by protecting ICE officers as they enforce the law, rather than having the troops perform law enforcement work. Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, says that's because the National Guard troops can't legally engage in ordinary law enforcement activities unless Trump first invokes the Insurrection Act. Vladeck said the move raises the risk that the troops could end up using force while filling that 'protection' role. The move could also be a precursor to other, more aggressive troop deployments down the road, he wrote on his website. 'There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves,' Vladeck wrote. The Insurrection Act and related laws were used during the Civil Rights era to protect activists and students desegregating schools. President Dwight Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states. In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district. At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd's death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back, saying the law should be invoked 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations.' Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term. But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, 'I'm not waiting.' Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals, and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on 'The Charlie Kirk Show,' in 2023. After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized 'if violence continues.'
an hour ago
Travel ban may shut door for Afghan family to bring niece to US for a better life
IRMO, S.C. -- Mohammad Sharafoddin, his wife and young son walked at times for 36 hours in a row over mountain passes as they left Afghanistan as refugees to end up less than a decade later talking about their journey on a plush love seat in the family's three-bedroom suburban American home. He and his wife dreamed of bringing her niece to the United States to share in that bounty. Maybe she could study to become a doctor and then decide her own path. But that door slams shut on Monday as America put in place a travel ban for people from Afghanistan and a dozen other countries. 'It's kind of shock for us when we hear about Afghanistan, especially right now for ladies who are affected more than others with the new government,' Mohammad Sharafoddin said. 'We didn't think about this travel ban.' President Donald Trump signed the ban Wednesday. It is similar to one in place during his first administration but covers more countries. Along with Afghanistan, travel to the U.S. is banned from Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Trump said visitors who overstay visas, like the man charged in an attack that injured dozens of demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado, earlier this month, are a danger to the country. The suspect in the attack is from Egypt, which isn't included in the ban. The countries chosen for the ban have deficient screening of their citizens, often refuse to take them back and have a high percentage of people who stay in the U.S. after their visas expire, Trump said. The ban makes exceptions for people from Afghanistan on Special Immigrant Visas who generally worked most closely with the U.S. government during the two-decade war there. Afghanistan was also one of the largest sources of resettled refugees, with about 14,000 arrivals in a 12-month period through September 2024. Trump suspended refugee resettlement on his first day in office. It is a path Sharafoddin took with his wife and son out of Afghanistan walking on those mountain roads in the dark then through Pakistan, Iran and into Turkey. He worked in a factory for years in Turkey, listening to YouTube videos on headphones to learn English before he was resettled in Irmo, South Carolina, a suburb of Columbia. His son is now 11, and he and his wife had a daughter in the U.S. who is now 3. There is a job at a jewelry maker that allows him to afford a two-story, three-bedroom house. Food was laid out on two tables Saturday for a celebration of the Muslim Eid al-Adha holiday. Sharafoddin's wife, Nuriya, said she is learning English and driving — two things she couldn't do in Afghanistan under Taliban rule. 'I'm very happy to be here now, because my son is very good at school and my daughter also. I think after 18 years they are going to work, and my daughter is going to be able to go to college,' she said. It is a life she wanted for her niece too. The couple show videos from their cellphones of her drawing and painting. When the Taliban returned to power in 2021, their niece could no longer study. So they started to plan to get her to the U.S. at least to further her education. Nuriya Sharafoddin doesn't know if her niece has heard the news from America yet. She hasn't had the heart to call and tell her. 'I'm not ready to call her. This is not good news. This is very sad news because she is worried and wants to come,' Nuriya Sharafoddin said. While the couple spoke, Jim Ray came by. He has helped a number of refugee families settle in Columbia and helped the Sharafoddins navigate questions in their second language. Ray said Afghans in Columbia know the return of the Taliban changed how the U.S. deals with their native country. But while the ban allows spouses, children or parents to travel to America, other family members aren't included. Many Afghans know their extended families are starving or suffering, and suddenly a path to help is closed, Ray said. 'We'll have to wait and see how the travel ban and the specifics of it actually play out,' Ray said. 'This kind of thing that they're experiencing where family cannot be reunited is actually where it hurts the most.' The Taliban have criticized Trump for the ban, with their top leader Hibatullah Akhundzada saying the U.S. was now the oppressor of the world. 'Citizens from 12 countries are barred from entering their land — and Afghans are not allowed either,' he said on a recording shared on social media. 'Why? Because they claim the Afghan government has no control over its people and that people are leaving the country. So, oppressor! Is this what you call friendship with humanity?'
