In late February, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met with former U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington, but the discussion failed to secure promised Tomahawk missiles, leaving the trip inconclusive and Ukraine’s expectations unmet.
Commentators Criticise Outcome
Ukrainian and Russian analysts stressed that the encounter was neither a breakthrough nor a defeat, noting the influence of Russian propaganda portraying the U.S. as opposed to the Kremlin. Both leaders appeared unsatisfied and uncertain about next steps.
American‑focused researcher Aleksandra Filipienko called Trump’s demand for an immediate ceasefire “unplanned and reckless,” while Zelensky backed a pause but insisted on long‑term negotiations. Military expert Yuriy Fedorov argued the U.S. president was swayed by vague promises from Vladimir Putin, whose own intentions for a ceasefire remain unclear.
Foreign Media Focus on Tomahawks
The BBC highlighted the shift in U.S. willingness to supply long‑range Tomahawk missiles after the Trump‑Putin call, noting that Zelensky’s Washington visit seemed to end with him “empty‑handed.” The German paper Süddeutsche Zeitung compared the mood to February but warned that phone talks with Putin carry inherent risks.
Der Spiegel reported a more positive vibe, suggesting Zelensky learned how to “talk to Trump,” whereas the Italian Corriere della Sera noted Trump’s coolness over the missile issue dampened Ukrainian enthusiasm.
Tomahawks as a Step Toward Peace
The Wall Street Journal argued that delivering Tomahawk missiles could be a “step toward peace,” as it would restrict Russia’s ability to prolong the war and align U.S. interests with lasting stability. Conversely, The Washington Post reported that Trump appeared to withdraw from this proposal, opting instead for another meeting with Putin in Budapest.
