In a highly anticipated diplomatic encounter, former U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met on September 27, 2024, in New York. The meeting, held at Trump Tower, came just weeks before the U.S. presidential election, where the outcome is expected to have profound consequences for America’s role in the Russia-Ukraine war. The timing of this meeting highlights the immense stakes for Ukraine, as the U.S. election looms large over the future of international support for Kyiv’s defense against Russian aggression.
This encounter also follows Zelenskyy’s meeting with Vice President Kamala Harris, who has consistently reaffirmed the Biden administration’s unwavering commitment to supporting Ukraine. As the U.S. presidential race tightens, the positions of the leading candidates—Trump and Harris—on Ukraine couldn’t be more different. While Trump calls for reevaluating U.S. involvement in the war, Harris advocates for continued military aid to Ukraine. The contrasts between the two stances underscore the potential seismic shift in U.S. foreign policy depending on the election’s outcome.
During their meeting, both Trump and Zelenskyy emphasized the importance of ending the war. Zelenskyy made clear that stopping Russian President Vladimir Putin’s military ambitions remains a shared goal, stating, “I think we have a common view that the war in Ukraine has to be stopped and Putin can’t win.” Trump, in turn, described the conversation as “a very good sign,” though the two leaders clearly approach the issue with different strategies in mind.
Trump’s past comments about the war reflect a more ambiguous stance. He has repeatedly criticized the level of U.S. military funding going to Ukraine, even praising Russia’s historical military achievements. Trump claims that, if elected, he could swiftly negotiate a resolution to the conflict, often pointing to his personal relationships with both Zelenskyy and Putin as assets that could broker peace. He suggested in the meeting that his rapport with both leaders might pave the way for a “fair deal” to be made, though the details of such a deal remain unclear.
For Zelenskyy, the priority is Ukraine’s continued sovereignty and defense. He is unlikely to accept any resolution that involves ceding Ukrainian territory to Russia, a proposal some commentators fear could be on the table if Trump returns to the White House. Throughout the meeting, Zelenskyy highlighted the need for Ukraine to remain strong and outlined a strategy to bolster the country’s defenses, though the specifics of his “victory plan” were not made public.
The 2024 U.S. presidential election has become a critical factor in determining the future of U.S. support for Ukraine. If Trump wins the election, a significant reduction in U.S. military aid to Ukraine seems possible, which could dramatically alter the balance of the conflict. Trump has hinted at rethinking America’s role in NATO, and some of his allies have proposed that Ukraine should cede territory to achieve peace—a suggestion firmly rejected by the Ukrainian leadership.
On the other hand, a victory for Kamala Harris, running as the Democratic candidate, would likely mean the continuation of current U.S. support for Ukraine, including military assistance. Harris has remained firm in her criticism of any notion of Ukraine ceding territory, framing the conflict as part of a broader defense of democratic values and international law. In her meeting with Zelenskyy the day before, she reiterated the Biden administration’s stance that “Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity must be protected.”
The stakes are high not only for Ukraine but also for Europe and NATO. Many European countries have already expressed concerns that they would struggle to fill the gap if U.S. military support for Ukraine were to be reduced. The European Union has been a strong backer of Ukraine, but without the extensive U.S. contributions—both militarily and financially—there is fear that the coalition supporting Kyiv could weaken, potentially emboldening Russia.
One of the key challenges for pro-Ukraine politicians in the U.S. is the growing divide in public opinion over continued military assistance. In March 2022, support for aiding Ukraine stood at a strong 79% among Americans, but by February 2024, that number had fallen to 58%. The war, which initially evoked a wave of bipartisan solidarity, has become increasingly politicized, especially as economic pressures at home and concerns about U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts have grown.
For Trump, this shift presents an opportunity to appeal to voters who are weary of America’s long-standing role as the world’s policeman. His messaging on foreign policy—framed around the idea of prioritizing American interests and reducing foreign entanglements—resonates with a significant portion of the electorate. Trump’s claim that he could swiftly end the war is a potent part of his pitch to voters who want a quick resolution to the conflict.
Meanwhile, Harris and other Democrats will need to work hard to maintain public support for continued military aid to Ukraine. Their argument centers on the idea that standing up to Russian aggression is essential for maintaining global stability, and that withdrawing support could embolden authoritarian regimes around the world. However, as the campaign heats up, Harris will need to convince a skeptical public that continued investment in Ukraine is in the best interests of both the U.S. and global democracy.
The media has portrayed the Trump-Zelenskyy meeting as a significant, if somewhat enigmatic, moment in the broader context of U.S. foreign policy. Outlets have noted the stark contrast between Trump’s negotiating-heavy rhetoric and Zelenskyy’s focus on Ukraine’s continued resistance. Despite Trump’s past criticisms of Zelenskyy and the U.S. role in the war, their meeting was cordial, with both leaders expressing hope for future cooperation.
However, Trump’s remarks about his relationship with both Zelenskyy and Putin have raised eyebrows. Critics argue that Trump’s praise for Putin and his ambiguous stance on U.S. military support might signal a troubling shift in the event of his reelection. His comments about a potential “deal” with Russia have left many wondering what kind of compromises might be on the table.
On the international stage, reactions to the meeting have been mixed. European allies, who have closely followed the U.S. presidential race, are likely wary of Trump’s return to power, particularly if it leads to a reduction in military aid for Ukraine. Some European leaders have privately expressed concern about the future of transatlantic unity if the U.S. scales back its involvement in the conflict. On the other hand, Moscow has signaled that it would welcome a Trump victory, hoping that it could lead to a softening of U.S. policy on Ukraine.
As the U.S. presidential election draws closer, the stakes for Ukraine—and for the broader international order—could not be higher. A Trump victory might dramatically alter the trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine war, potentially forcing Ukraine into a negotiated settlement that could involve territorial concessions to Russia. Such an outcome would represent a significant win for Putin, who has faced international isolation and economic sanctions since launching the invasion in 2022.
In contrast, a Harris victory would likely mean the continuation of current U.S. policy, with sustained military support for Ukraine. While this could prolong the war, it might also weaken Russia in the long term, as continued military pressure from Ukraine, bolstered by Western aid, could further erode Putin’s regime. The U.S. election is not just a domestic political event—it is a crucial moment for the future of the international system, particularly for Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty and democracy.
For Zelenskyy, the meeting with Trump was a delicate balancing act. On one hand, he must maintain good relations with the former U.S. president, who could very well become the next occupant of the White House. On the other hand, Zelenskyy must continue to advocate for robust support from the U.S. and its allies to ensure that Ukraine does not falter in its resistance to Russian aggression.
As the world watches, the meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy serves as a reminder of the complex, often fraught nature of diplomacy and the interconnectedness of domestic politics and global affairs.
