In the last few days, President Donald Trump has engaged in two highly prestigious but controversial meetings—one with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the other with UK Labour Party leader Keir Starmer. Both meetings, intended to discuss critical geopolitical issues, quickly devolved into spectacles of undiplomatic behavior and unfiltered comments.

During his meeting with Zelenskyy at the White House, Trump made remarks on Zelenskyy's appearance and attire, which were seen as breaches of protocol. He accused Zelenskyy of disrespecting U.S. support and even suggested that Zelenskyy was "gambling with World War Three." Zelenskyy, however, confronted Trump and Vice President JD Vance bravely, standing his ground and refusing to back down. The meeting ended without any agreements being signed, leaving U.S.-Ukraine relations in a precarious state.
Zelenskyy,who tried to prove himself like our Porus before Trump ,Just after the aid cut indication, perhaps understood Trump is not Elaxander the Great and in
his first public comments since Mr. Trump halted U.S. military aid to Ukraine overnight, Mr. Zelenskyy called for a “truce” in the sea and sky as a first step to securing an end to the three-year-long war.
“Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than Ukrainians. My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts long" expressed Zelenskyy in a post on X..
This is because Trump means his word is final and be kept but at the same time his failure to address the Hamas-Israel conflict with lasting solutions as promised during his election campaign raises doubts about his commitment to global peace.
In contrast, Trump's meeting with Keir Starmer was marked by a different tone. While the discussion centered around the UK's political landscape and Brexit, Trump took the opportunity to criticize Starmer's policies and leadership style. However, the meeting remained cordial, with Starmer often laughing and pressing Trump's shoulder heartfully, and proved a Kashmiri saying '' Bande kohund chhukh ,Nanderamun'' (I am the subject of NandRam". When Starmer tried to emphasize the importance of providing security to Ukraine and Trump urged Britain to take a more active role in ensuring Ukraine's safety. The meeting concluded with the signing of several agreements, and Trump even accepted an invitation from Prince Charles, stating that he and his wife would "honor Great Britain and the people of that country." This difference in atmosphere highlights the varying dynamics between the two meetings and the leaders involved. But buggers cannot be chosers, Zelenskyy understood immediately.
Historically, leaders who have taken unconventional approaches to diplomacy have often faced mixed results. For instance, Richard Nixon's visit to China in 1972 was initially met with skepticism but ultimately led to the normalization of relations between the two countries. On the other hand, Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement towards Adolf Hitler in the 1930s is widely regarded as a failure that emboldened Nazi aggression.
The implications of these meetings are profound. With the U.S. potentially withdrawing military support and intelligence from Ukraine, Russia could swiftly bring Ukraine under its control. This shift in power dynamics would destabilize European countries that view Russia as a constant threat. Trump's promise to end the Russian-Ukrainian war seems serious, but his failure to address the Hamas-Israel conflict as promised during his election campaign raises doubts about his commitment to global peace.
Looking ahead, Trump's actions could have far-reaching consequences. If the U.S. continues to withdraw from its traditional alliances and pursue a more isolationist foreign policy, it could create a power vacuum that other nations, such as China and Russia, may seek to fill. This could lead to a realignment of global power structures and increased instability in regions that have historically relied on American support.
Moreover, Trump's behavior during these meetings has set a concerning precedent. Heads of state may hesitate to engage with Trump, fearing public humiliation or undiplomatic treatment. This could erode trust and cooperation between the U.S. and its allies, further isolating America on the global stage.
Trump's actions have left both Ukraine and the UK in precarious positions, and the world watches as the political landscape shifts. The question remains: what is Trump's endgame? Is he willing to sacrifice long-standing alliances for short-term gains, or is there a deeper strategy at play? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain—Trump's unconventional diplomacy is a gamble with global stability.

Email:-------------------------shamshadkralwari@gmail.com