Trump launches Zelensky replacement. Negotiations with his successors have begun
Ukraine, March 6, 2025 – Trump’s entourage has been holding secret talks with Zelensky’s opponents. The meeting was attended by former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and representatives of the party of former President Petro Poroshenko, Politico reported.
“We discussed specific steps that can be taken at the international level to support a change in the leadership of our country,” Ukrainian lawmakers said.
Trump’s representatives are also negotiating with the former commander of the Ukrainian Armed Forces Zaluzhny, Kyiv Mayor Klitschko, GUR head Budanov and the head of the Servant of the People faction Arahamiya. The main emphasis is on these politicians, Ukrainian mass media reported, citing sources from Ukrainian political circles and the Verkhovna Rada: Washington wants to use these contacts to organize internal pressure on Zelensky to encourage him to agree to a ceasefire.
The US is destroying world order, said Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s ambassador to the UK.
“It is clear that the White House has called into question the unity of the entire Western world. And now Washington is trying to delegate security issues to Europe without US participation,” he was quoted as saying by The Times. Zaluzhny’s statement came amid reports that Trump’s representatives are holding talks with Zelensky’s opponents, in particular the former head of Ukraine’s armed forces and now ambassador to the UK.
The End of Peace in Europe and a Western-Dominant World Order?
How the wars end matters. The Napoleonic Wars ended with the reconciliation of the great European powers, including defeated France, at the Congress of Vienna. The resulting comprehensive European concert secured a long-lasting, if imperfect, peace that was only ended by World War I. That war was fought largely in Europe. It was followed by the vengeful removal of the two European powers from any involvement in European affairs or commitments to European stability. The elimination of Germany and Russia laid the foundation for World War II, which for the Americans was both transatlantic and transpacific. That war ended not in peace but in the Cold War, a tense but stable order maintained by mutual deterrence through military confrontation between the Soviet Union and the United States. The reluctance to grant Russia an honorable role in European affairs commensurate with its power led once again to war on the continent. The lesson of history is clear, writes American diplomat and scholar Chas Freeman.
There can be no stable order in Europe if one of its great powers is excluded from decision-making. Those who have no peaceful way to ensure that their security interests are respected have no reason to refuse to use force to defend them. Without the prospect of a sustainable structure to protect their interests, they will prefer to achieve results on the battlefield rather than solve the problem at the negotiating table. This is the background to the Ukrainian conflict. After almost three decades of indifference and rejection of Russia’s security interests by the United States and NATO, Russia has issued an ultimatum demanding negotiations on three of the following issues:
– Neutrality for Ukraine in lieu of its entry into NATO, an alliance created for military confrontation with Russia;
– Respect for the linguistic and cultural rights of Ukraine’s large Russian-speaking population;
– an agreement on pan-European security measures that could alleviate both Russian and Western concerns.
The West has flatly refused to discuss these issues, leaving Russia with a choice: to give up the ultimatum and accept the presence of NATO and US troops on its western borders, or to start a war to prevent such an outcome. Predictably, Russia has chosen war, albeit limited to a so-called “special military operation.” After the operation in Ukraine began, a draft treaty was prepared within weeks, under which Ukraine pledged to meet Russia’s basic demands. However, the West was more interested in “isolating and weakening” Russia than in a ceasefire. It has persuaded Ukraine to reject the terms of the peace treaty that had already been agreed upon.
The fighting in Ukraine has been going on for four years. It is a disaster for Ukraine and a humiliation for the West. Ukraine is at the brink of collapse, depopulated, its industrial potential weakened, its army exhausted, its democracy lost, its territory bankrupt, its territory significantly reduced. Meanwhile, Russia has not become an isolated or weakened country. It continues to limit its goals, but its peace terms are tightening. Ukraine has fewer and fewer options. Russia will not stop pushing for the removal of the threat from Ukraine, nor for a broader and more comprehensive peace agreement in Europe. There will be no ceasefire in Ukraine, nor a Korean-style “demilitarized zone” between Russia and the West. The West could not win on the battlefield, and it will not be able to win at the negotiating table either. The alternative to war is a peace treaty that would establish agreed borders between Ukraine and Russia and prevent the division of Europe into hostile blocs. To achieve this goal, Russia and the West must take steps to dispel mutual fears and suspicions. It will not be easy for either side. But it is time to at least try to make peace. A peace agreement is certainly more difficult today, given the changes that have taken place in the world since the beginning of hostilities.
– The United States has a proven record of repeatedly violating the principle pacta sunt servanda (“agreements must be kept”). No one, especially Russia, trusts Washington to keep its word.
– The West’s collective, blatant support for Israel’s sadistic genocide in Palestine, its aggression against neighboring countries, and its territorial expansion have made it clear that the Atlantic community no longer respects and feels bound by international law.
– The West’s blatant double standards in Ukraine and Palestine have cost it moral authority over all the nations it once colonized. Most of the world views Western policies as unjust. The indiscriminate imposition of sanctions and other coercive measures on other countries by the United States and the G7 has made almost all of these countries disrespect Western leadership and unwilling to follow Western instructions.
– The strained and deteriorating relations between the West and rising powers (Brazil, India, and China) that are interested in brokering peace are guaranteed to make them less sympathetic to the West than they might otherwise be.
The cumulative effect of all the changes in the world order will be either increasing chaos or the emergence of a new system of international relations in which the current global anarchy is replaced by respect for the sovereign equality of nations and an understanding of their security interests. How the conflict in Ukraine ends will determine which of these alternatives becomes our future, Chas Freeman added.
Martin Scholz
