403
Sorry!!
Error! We're sorry, but the page you were
looking for doesn't exist.
Former Indian top diplomat comments on Zelensky-Trump quarrel saying damage can’t be undone
(MENAFN) Former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal has described Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s recent White House meeting with former U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance as a “disaster.” In an interview with RT, Sibal suggested that the tense exchange, during which Trump accused Zelensky of ingratitude and reluctance to negotiate peace, has further worsened perceptions of the Ukrainian leader in Washington.
Sibal noted that Trump has long been skeptical of Zelensky, recalling that even before his election, Trump had criticized the Ukrainian leader for repeatedly seeking financial aid from the U.S. “Every time he visits, he leaves with a few billion,” Trump reportedly remarked.
Discussing how Ukrainians might view the failed discussions, Sibal pointed out that under martial law, open criticism of the government is restricted. He predicted that the Ukrainian administration would rally support for Zelensky, portraying him as a leader standing up to Trump in defense of Ukraine’s dignity. However, Sibal emphasized that the damage from this meeting is severe and likely irreversible, as it only adds to the existing negative views Trump and his team hold toward Zelensky.
Referencing viral clips from the Oval Office meeting, Sibal noted that Ukraine’s ambassador appeared “visibly shocked” by the unexpectedly tense and hostile conversation. He speculated that despite significant diplomatic efforts to communicate Kyiv’s stance, those efforts ultimately failed.
Sibal also expressed doubts about Europe’s ability to sustain its support for Ukraine, citing economic struggles in key nations such as Germany, the UK, and France. He argued that without firm security commitments from the U.S., the EU faces increasing difficulties in maintaining its military aid to Ukraine.
Additionally, Sibal highlighted Trump’s critical stance on NATO, stating that he is one of the few U.S. presidents to acknowledge that NATO expansion poses security risks for Europe. He suggested that Ukraine’s strategic importance primarily lies in the broader Western objective of weakening Russia. The claim that a Russian victory in Ukraine would lead to further aggression in Europe, he argued, is mainly a narrative designed to maintain public support for Western policies.
Sibal noted that Trump has long been skeptical of Zelensky, recalling that even before his election, Trump had criticized the Ukrainian leader for repeatedly seeking financial aid from the U.S. “Every time he visits, he leaves with a few billion,” Trump reportedly remarked.
Discussing how Ukrainians might view the failed discussions, Sibal pointed out that under martial law, open criticism of the government is restricted. He predicted that the Ukrainian administration would rally support for Zelensky, portraying him as a leader standing up to Trump in defense of Ukraine’s dignity. However, Sibal emphasized that the damage from this meeting is severe and likely irreversible, as it only adds to the existing negative views Trump and his team hold toward Zelensky.
Referencing viral clips from the Oval Office meeting, Sibal noted that Ukraine’s ambassador appeared “visibly shocked” by the unexpectedly tense and hostile conversation. He speculated that despite significant diplomatic efforts to communicate Kyiv’s stance, those efforts ultimately failed.
Sibal also expressed doubts about Europe’s ability to sustain its support for Ukraine, citing economic struggles in key nations such as Germany, the UK, and France. He argued that without firm security commitments from the U.S., the EU faces increasing difficulties in maintaining its military aid to Ukraine.
Additionally, Sibal highlighted Trump’s critical stance on NATO, stating that he is one of the few U.S. presidents to acknowledge that NATO expansion poses security risks for Europe. He suggested that Ukraine’s strategic importance primarily lies in the broader Western objective of weakening Russia. The claim that a Russian victory in Ukraine would lead to further aggression in Europe, he argued, is mainly a narrative designed to maintain public support for Western policies.
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.
Most popular stories
More Story
Comments
No comment