# Trump-Zelenskyy shoutfest could dissolve support not just for Ukraine but our European alliance

Most of the media are blaming Donald Trump for the shocking shouting match that led to him kicking Volodymyr Zelenskyy out of the White House.

The result, these journalists and commentators say, is to put America’s relationship with Ukraine on life support as its people continue to fight and die in an invasion launched by Russia, even as Trump continues to tout his good relationship with Vladimir Putin. It’s the Kremlin leader who is the dictator, not Zelenskyy, and it is Russia, not Ukraine, that started the war to restore its smaller neighbor to Soviet satellite status – as .

There is no question that Trump, prodded by JD Vance, lost his temper in the Oval Office and that derailed the meeting, leaving the lunch that had been prepared for their teams to be eaten by staffers.

But Trump also makes a fair point that he can’t do a deal with Russia if he’s constantly attacking its leader (something he’s obviously not inclined to do, given their history, including ).



At the same time, Zelenskyy was justified in asking for security guarantees,  has a history of violating agreements, from the 2014 invasion of Crimea to the brutal war – including the deliberate targeting of civilians – that he launched three years ago.

But Zelenskyy had one job: Manage the meeting with Trump and sign the expected rare minerals agreement. And he utterly failed. He took the bait. And while he might have gotten some sympathy – Britain and France embraced him and promised to send peacekeeping troops after a settlement – the Ukrainian leader may have irreparably damaged his relationship with Trump.



Pedro Sanchez, Spain's prime minister, greets Volodymyr Zelenskiy, during a summit at Lancaster House in London on Sunday, March 2, 2025. (Neil Hall/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The president was blunt in saying that without U.S. aid, Zelenskyy doesn’t have "the cards" to play – but he is right.

I did a lengthy "Media Buzz" interview with Karoline Leavitt, Donald Trump’s press secretary, leading off with the White House fireworks. She is very skilled at pushing back.



She told me Zelenskyy was "antagonistic, and frankly, he was rude. He picked a fight with the Vice President of the United States." (It was kinda the other way around.) "He repeatedly interrupted President Trump." (That’s true.)

"President Zelenskyy wouldn't even agree to a ceasefire. If you want a war to end. How can you not agree to stop the fighting? You have the greatest deterrent in the Oval Office in President Trump, and you need to trust his ability to deter Russia's aggression."



President Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin (Getty Images)

Well, Zelenskyy doesn’t trust Trump because he believes a ceasefire would lock in Russia’s territorial gains from the invasion. But what choice does he have?

The thing that struck me most is that I can’t imagine this meltdown would have happened if the meeting was held behind closed doors – the usual venue for finalizing agreements. So as much as I , it’s 40 minutes of press questions that framed the dialogue.

So I asked Leavitt why, even though Trump ended things by pronouncing it "great television," he did the meeting in public.

"Because President Trump is the most transparent president in history," she responded. "And as he said, it was great for the cameras to be in there because the American people and the world were able to see what the president and his team has seen behind the scenes in negotiating with President Zelenskyy's team."

Will Zelenskyy come back to the White House when, as Trump said, he’s ready to make peace? Who the hell knows at this point? But it’s a huge setback.

David Sanger, the veteran diplomatic correspondent for the New York Times, has the most penetrating .

What  "is a normalization of the relationship with Russia. If that means rewriting the history of Moscow’s illegal invasion three years ago, dropping investigations of Russian war crimes or refusing to offer Ukraine long-lasting security guarantees, then Mr. Trump, in this assessment of his intentions, is willing to make that deal."

Sanger suggests that Trump, a constant critic of NATO, is walking away from the Atlantic alliance that has thrived for 80 years.

The president "makes no secret of his view that the post-World War II system, created by Washington, ate away at American power."

To Trump, "such a system gave smaller and less powerful countries leverage over the United States, leaving Americans to pick up far too much of the tab for defending allies and promoting their prosperity.

"While his predecessors – both Democrats and Republicans – insisted that alliances in Europe and Asia were America’s greatest force multiplier, keeping the peace and allowing trade to flourish, Mr. Trump viewed them as a bleeding wound."



Senators react to Trump calling Zelenskyy a "dictator." (Reuters )

Look, Trump ran as the America First candidate who kept us out of wars. Many Americans, especially Republicans, have lost patience with U.S.  when the money could be spent at home. The aid, I should add, is nowhere near the $350 billion that Trump keeps claiming, but it’s been substantial.



David Sanger, the veteran diplomatic correspondent for the New York Times, has the most penetrating .

What  "is a normalization of the relationship with Russia. If that means rewriting the history of Moscow’s illegal invasion three years ago, dropping investigations of Russian war crimes or refusing to offer Ukraine long-lasting security guarantees, then Mr. Trump, in this assessment of his intentions, is willing to make that deal."

Sanger suggests that Trump, a constant critic of NATO, is walking away from the Atlantic alliance that has thrived for 80 years.

The president "makes no secret of his view that the post-World War II system, created by Washington, ate away at American power."

To Trump, "such a system gave smaller and less powerful countries leverage over the United States, leaving Americans to pick up far too much of the tab for defending allies and promoting their prosperity.

"While his predecessors – both Democrats and Republicans – insisted that alliances in Europe and Asia were America’s greatest force multiplier, keeping the peace and allowing trade to flourish, Mr. Trump viewed them as a bleeding wound."



President Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin (Getty Images)

Look, Trump ran as the America First candidate who kept us out of wars. Many Americans, especially Republicans, have lost patience with U.S.  when the money could be spent at home. The aid, I should add, is nowhere near the $350 billion that Trump keeps claiming, but it’s been substantial.

The rare minerals deal at least would have given the United States an economic incentive to keep backing Ukraine and partially paid our country back for its generosity.

But there is, in my view, a far stronger argument for supporting Ukraine. If Putin succeeds in dismembering part of the country, he will have been rewarded for launching the illegal invasion, and its barbaric practice of deliberately bombing apartment buildings and train stations.



Howard Kurtz is the host of FOX News Channel's _MediaBuzz_ (Sundays 11 AM-12PM/ET). Based in Washington, D.C., he joined the network in 2013 and regularly appears on _Special Report with Bret Baier_ and _The Story with Martha MacCallum_ among other programs.
```