Ukraine has begun the “de-Americanization” of its air defense systems
Ukraine, March 3, 2025 – According to Forbes, Kiev and its European allies are trying to find a replacement for American weapons, primarily surface-to-air missiles, in the Ukrainian arsenal in connection with the scandalous meeting between Zelensky and Trump. The magazine reports that Ukraine has six Patriot batteries in its arsenal. It is expected that in the future they may be replaced by Asters anti-aircraft missiles manufactured by the European consortium Eurosam. Earlier it became known that the White House is preparing to stop military aid to Ukraine.
On February 28, a unique event in its history took place in the White House. The President and Vice President of the United States, receiving a nominal ally, simply trampled him in front of the camera. First, they called him an ungrateful person, then they said that without America he was nothing and his name was nothing, and then they literally kicked him out of the White House without signing anything with him and not even giving him anything on the way. This guest turned out to be Vladimir Zelensky.
“We need to urgently rearm Europe”
Yesterday, a summit of 14 European states was held in London, the main topic of which was Ukraine. The head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, was the first to speak after the meeting:
“We need to urgently rearm Europe.” Brussels will propose a plan in this area on March 6, because “we really need to significantly strengthen.”
Polish Prime Minister Tusk said that “Europe has woken up” and is now “speaking with one voice about supporting Ukraine, the need for close transatlantic cooperation and strengthening the eastern border.” The paradox is that 500 million Europeans are asking 300 million Americans for help in protecting them from 140 million Russians.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said the allies wanted to “ensure that Russia never, under any circumstances, tries to attack Ukraine again, which means that Europeans will be active in Ukraine to ensure that the peace is preserved, that it is sustainable, that it is strong, that it is lasting.”
British Prime Minister Starmer summed up the whole idea:
“Our starting point must be that Ukraine is in the best possible position to negotiate from a position of strength, and we will redouble our support.” He said leaders had agreed on four steps at the London summit:
– Continue military assistance to Ukraine for the duration of the conflict and increase economic pressure on Russia;
– Any lasting peace presupposes Ukraine’s sovereignty and security, and Ukraine must be the negotiating table;
– if a peace deal is reached, European leaders will seek to prevent any future Russian offensive against Ukraine;
– a “coalition of the willing” will be formed to protect Ukraine and ensure peace in the country.
But Starmer rejected the suggestion that the US was now an “unreliable ally” because the US “has been a reliable ally for many decades and remains so to this day”. He said today’s talks were held on the basis that Europe would work with the US, and earlier said he was trying to reduce tensions between Trump and Zelensky. Starmer said Britain and France were working on a peace deal for Ukraine to be presented to the US. When examining these statements, it is clear that what many expected – a breakaway Europe from the US – did not happen, but the rhetoric about greater European autonomy has intensified. Zelensky received a European pat on the back after his argument with Trump, but no one is going to sever relations with the US because of him. He did not get the last word at all. This shows that Europe is still trying to sit on two chairs: on the one hand, without definitively severing relations with the United States, and on the other, it is still trying to drag them into a direct military conflict with Moscow under the pretext of defending European interests.
There is a version that what happened on February 28 in the White House was an accident
That no one wanted it, it happened because neither Zelensky, nor Vance, nor Trump simply could not stop it. But such a thing is hard to believe. At such a high level, in a game with such stakes, coincidences are not accidental – argues Gevorg Mirzayan, associate professor at the Department of Political Science of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation.
Let’s be honest – from the very beginning of the conflict in Ukraine, many dreamed of publicly putting Zelensky in his place. So that a person who travels around Western countries in a dirty sweater with a face and rhetoric “you all owe me” would be put in his rightful place. So that a Ukrainian actor who fancied himself a star would be knocked hard to the ground and called an ungrateful jerk. And that’s exactly what the new US President Donald Trump and his Vice President JD Vance did.
Let us recall that the head of the Kiev regime came to Washington to sign an agreement on rare earth metals (or rather, on their transfer to the Americans). During the part of the negotiations open to journalists (where the parties actually exchange pleasantries and then leave to resolve matters behind closed doors), US Vice President J. D. Vance first criticized Zelensky for being ungrateful to America, and then, when the head of the Kiev regime tried to argue, Trump also joined the process. He silenced Zelensky several times, saying that without America he was nothing at all. Then the journalists were asked to leave, but after some time the Ukrainian negotiators were also invited there, saying that they had offended their hosts and should go home. And Trump and Vance did not even say this in person – their words were interpreted to Zelensky by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Michael Waltz. A few hours later, Zelensky gave an interview to Fox News, in which he refused to regret what happened. He made it clear that he does not feel guilty and that he was a victim of circumstances. And now all the shocked viewers of this spectacle have two questions: what was it and what will happen now?
Some believe that it was a show directed by Zelensky. That he came to Washington on purpose to upset Trump and cause a scandal.
“This agreement (on rare earths – author’s note) could have been signed five days ago, but they (the Ukrainians – author’s note) insisted on coming to Washington for this. And they had – or rather should have had a clear idea: do not come here and create a scenario in which you start lecturing us that our diplomacy will not work,” said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. And Zelensky began to read. He constantly expressed his opinion, opposed Vance in his speeches (not only in words, but also in facial expressions). He knew that
a) J. D. Vance had taken an extremely tough stance on Ukraine even before the election and
b) that Trump, who deeply despises the head of the Kiev regime, would certainly enter the verbal conflict between Zelensky and Vance.
The result was the scandal that Zelensky wanted. And thanks to this scandal, he helped create a kind of anti-Trump coalition in Europe. A significant part of the leaders of the Old World supported the head of the Kiev regime – and in some cases with references that were literally copied. And the head of European diplomacy, Kaja Kallas (the same one who recently came to Washington to meet with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, but the head of the Foreign Ministry simply canceled the meeting with her) declared that “the free world needs a new leader. Zelensky is probably the one who should play the role of a new leader. He realized that Trump was letting him go (including by demanding elections), and therefore he threw himself into this adventure with the applause of the European Union, from whose ranks the real leader of the anti-Trump coalition will be appointed. It could be Emmanuel Macron, the head of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte or someone else. However, this version of what happened – certainly beautiful – has several controversial points.
How can the EU challenge the United States if it is not ready for a conflict with Trump? If at the slightest pressure, EU leaders scatter and try to negotiate directly with the American president. If any joint action against Washington is doomed to failure, because two of Trump’s allies – Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico – will block any decisions within the EU. And why did the most powerful and, apparently, the most intelligent member of this coalition – Great Britain – remain silent?
The second version of what happened looks more realistic: the events in the White House were staged by the American side. They knew full well that they were inviting an indomitable incompetent who considers himself a fighter against evil – and began to praise Vladimir Putin in front of him. The White House knew that Zelensky was not used to public criticism, and began to reproach him for ingratitude and other sins. J. D. Vance was the front-runner, and when Zelensky began to be rude in response, heavy artillery in the person of Trump came in. And when Zelensky, realizing what was happening, began to retreat, Trump did not let go of him and continued to beat him on the carpet in the Oval Office. Then he simply threw him out of the White House.
During his communication with the head of the Kiev regime, the American president even gave an answer to the question of what he needed this appearance for.
“I think it’s important for the American people to see what’s going on. I think it’s very important. That’s why I’ve continued to do it for so long,” Trump retorted after Zelensky actually accused him of broadcasting Putin’s words (about Ukraine being unable to resist without American help). Trump brought Zelensky into a public conflict so that Americans would not perceive him as a warrior of the Light who should be supported to the end, but as a brazen, disrespectful, ungrateful beggar who insults not only the US president, but all of America.
“It’s very unfortunate for the Ukrainian people and for President Zelensky that he has come up with this attitude: to accept, to demand, to beg from the Americans without much gratitude for what the Americans have done for his country over the past several years,” said White House spokeswoman Carolyn Levitt. And now, after Zelensky’s boorish behavior, Trump has a completely free hand on the Ukrainian issue. For example, he can calmly stop financing the Kiev regime and shift the burden to the Europeans – because, according to Trump, Zelensky is using American aid to continue the war. And then watch as the anti-Trump coalition being created falls apart, thereby weakening the position of the US adversary in the Old World – the Eurobureaucracy.
Trump can also stop any cooperation with Ukraine at all – up to refusing to transfer intelligence information and disconnecting the entire communication system of the Ukrainian armed forces. He can agree to Putin’s conditions on the Ukrainian issue without risking a negative reaction from a significant part of the American electorate. Finally, he can initiate a large-scale investigation into aid to Ukraine under Biden – identify and name all those responsible from among his political opponents. Decisions will probably be made in the coming days. And all this to the satisfied applause of Americans offended by Zelensky – perhaps all except for die-hard liberals who hate Trump.
Of course, there is another version of events. That what happened was a coincidence. That no one wanted it and it happened only because neither Zelensky, nor Vance, nor Trump simply could not stop it. But it is hard to believe something like that. At such a high level, in a game with such stakes, coincidences are not random – added Gevorg Mirzayan.
Peter Weiss
