Tag: Donald Trump

  • Trump, Putin to speak today about war in Ukraine

    Trump, Putin to speak today about war in Ukraine

    United States President Donald Trump will speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin today in a possible pivot point in efforts to end the war in Ukraine and an opportunity for Trump to continue reorienting American foreign policy.

    Trump disclosed the upcoming conversation to reporters while flying from Florida to Washington on Air Force One on Sunday evening, while the Kremlin confirmed Putin’s participation yesterday morning. “We will see if we have something to announce maybe by Tuesday. I will be speaking to President Putin on Tuesday,” Trump said. “A lot of work’s been done over the weekend. We want to see if we can bring that war to an end.”

    Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov  yesterday morning confirmed the plans for the two leaders to speak on Tuesday, but declined to give details, saying that “we never get ahead of events” and “the content of conversations between two presidents are not subject to any prior discussion.”

    European allies are wary of Trump’s affinity for Putin and his hardline stance toward Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who faced sharp criticism when he visited the Oval Office a little more than two weeks ago.

    Read Also: USAID and resilience of terror in Nigeria

    Although Russia failed in its initial goal to topple Ukraine with its invasion three years ago, it still controls large swaths of the country.

    Trump said land and power plants are part of the conversation around bringing the war to a close.

    “We will be talking about land. We will be talking about power plants,” he said, a process he described as “dividing up certain assets.”

    Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff recently visited Moscow last week to advance negotiations.

    Russia illegally annexed four Ukrainian regions after launching its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 — the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in the east and the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions in the southeast of the country — but doesn’t fully control any of the four. Last year, Putin listed Kyiv’s withdrawal of troops from all four regions as one of the demands for peace.

  • Savvy King, nervy Trump

    Savvy King, nervy Trump

    US President, Donald Trump, felt he had gamed the world when, after bullying poor Voldomyr Zelensky, embattled President of Ukraine, the UK Prime Minister Kier Starmer came bearing a flattering letter from Charles III, the British monarch, inviting Trump to a state visit.

    Trump’s body language was utterly triumphalist.  He just read the riot act to Zelensky: go grab humiliating peace or roll over before Russia’s Vladimir Putin!  Trump, with his glorious isolationism, had become global emperor, before whom everyone must fawn!

    But not quite!  A day or two after, King Charles was warmly welcoming Zelensky to his royal presence, even as London streets, bubbled with the British hoi polloi, toasting Ukraine, and decrying as disgraceful Trump’s show of shame at the White House. 

    That horrid show, they insist, exalted the aggressor and buried the victim.  That would not happen under their watch as Britons!

    On that, all Brits, royals, patricians or plebs, appear to agree.  But that was tantamount to pelting rotten eggs on the pink face of Trump — and just as well!

    From a Daily Mail report, quoting diplomatic sources from Washington DC, PM Starmer’s public show of massaging Trump’s ego, bang in front of klieglights, now feels “less special” to Trump.

    Read Also: Confronting Nigeria’s counterfeit drug crisis

    The stark MAGA mob  always around Trump reportedly questioned how appropriate it was for Charles III to shower Zelensky with such open affection — someone their bully ensemble had left for dead? They also wondered why 10, Downing Street did not stop the king, knowing insecure Trump would declare himself displeased and ruffled.

    But the British order fired back: though the King reigns, not rule, no one dictates to him who to see or who not to; though polite British conventions have worked out fine cohabitation between the Crown and the Commons, hinged on mutual respect and honour. But such fine etiquettes seem beyond the bullying and transactional ken of the Trump presidential court.

    Still, the British King had more aces up his royal sleeves, it would appear.  He also hosted Prime Minister Justin Tradeau of Canada, at a time Trump was buffeting Canada in a needless trade war, aside nettling the PM as “governor” of US’s 51st state!

    Weighing in on suggestions that Trump might just be “sulking”, Downing Street dismissed such outright.  Still, the PM’s office admitted, per Daily Mail: “Things definitely went a bit cool in Washington after Sandringham” — the King’s house Zelensky visited — “We told them that the King makes his own decisions about who he meets.”  Trust the British, supreme masters of ambiguities!

    English romantic poet, William Wordsworth, may have quipped: “The child is father of the man,” a brilliant irony from his 1802 poetics.  But that has held a literal truth in the contemporary globe, with America, Britain’s “child”, strutting as the father of the so-called free world.

    Charles III, with Zelensky and Tradeau, just told the child not to overreach himself!

  • Why Trump ordered air strikes on Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen

    Why Trump ordered air strikes on Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen

    United States  ordered air strikes against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen Saturday that reportedly killed several of the group’s leaders, according to the White House, adding Iran was “put on notice” to cease support for the rebels.

    This image taken from video provided by the US Navy shows an aircraft launching from the USS Harry S. Truman in the Red Sea before airstrikes in Sanaa, Yemen, Saturday, March 15, 2025. © US Navy via AP

    US President Donald Trump says he ordered air strikes against Iran-backed rebels in Yemen, that the White House said reportedly killed several Houthi leaders, and issued a warning to Tehran.

    The Houthi rebels started attacking military and commercial ships on one of the world’s busiest shipping corridors shortly after the war in Gaza began between Hamas and Israel in October 2023.

    The Houthis said they were targeting vessels on the Red Sea with links to Israel or its allies – the United States and the UK – in solidarity with Palestinians, but some vessels had little or no link to the war.

    The Houthis targeted over 100 merchant vessels with missiles and drones, sinking two vessels and killing four sailors, until the current ceasefire in Gaza took effect in mid-January. Other missiles and drones were intercepted or failed to reach their targets, which included Western military ones.

    The attacks paused during the ceasefire, but the Houthis on Wednesday said they would resume against “any Israeli vessel” after Israel cut off all aid supplies to Gaza to pressure Hamas during talks on extending their truce. The rebels said the warning also affects the Gulf of Aden, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and the Arabian Sea.

    Read Also: Only 3% of Nigerian workers access consumer credit – CREDICORP

    No Houthi attacks have been reported since then.

    “These relentless assaults have cost the U.S. and World Economy many billions of Dollars while, at the same time, putting innocent lives at risk,” Trump said Saturday while announcing the airstrikes in a social media post.

    The earlier Houthi campaign saw US and other Western warships repeatedly targeted, sparking the most serious combat the US Navy had seen since World War II.

    The United States under the Biden administration, as well as Israel and Britain, previously struck Houthi-held areas in Yemen. But a US official said Saturday’s operation was conducted solely by the U.S.

    The USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group, which includes the carrier, three Navy destroyers and one cruiser, are in the Red Sea and were part of Saturday’s mission. The USS Georgia cruise missile submarine has also been operating in the region.

    Trump said the strikes were to “protect American shipping, air, and naval assets, and to restore Navigational Freedom”.

    The focus on the Houthis and their attacks have raised their profile as they face economic and other pressures at home amid Yemen’s decade-long stalemated war, which has torn apart the Arab world’s poorest nation.

  • Donald Trump: How Europe must react to the Disruptor-in-Chief

    Donald Trump: How Europe must react to the Disruptor-in-Chief

    Concluding his essay, ‘They say Zelensky wont walk alone’, last week, Palladium asserted, and  correctly too,  that after nearly half a century of close relationship with the US and dependency on the Transatlantic accord to guarantee global order and security, Europe should now begin to acknowledge  that such hopes

     have become anachronistic, all because of President Donald Trump’s shambolic politics since his second coming.

    Which, of course,  is quite a shame because in his first term in office, President Trump did so much for the Transatlantic alliance in spite of his acerbic  comments regarding  Europe’s defence spending which in many cases was as low as 2 per cent of the respective country’s GDP.

    During those 4 years, President Trump did, arguably, more to bolster Europe’s security than any US president since Ronald Reagan. It is on record, for instance,  that his administration implemented policies that significantly strengthened NATO, and US commitments in Europe.

    As reported by Luke Coffey in his article ‘Despite the Bombast, Trump Never Turned His Back on Europe’,

    of 8 November, 2024 Trump’s administration  ensured that there were more American troops stationed in Europe than when he took office. The US also increased military exercises and stationed forces further east, including in Poland.

    Under him, US defense spending for Europe, through the European Deterrence Initiative, was more than 40 percent greater than under the Obama administration. His record on Ukraine equally deserves mention. He was the first US president to provide advanced anti-tank weapons to Ukraine, where his predecessor, Barak Obama, offered only non-lethal aid. Trump also supplied air defense and anti-tank systems to Georgia within his first year in office, something the Obama administration  resisted for a whole eight years.

    Read Also: The case for a Tinubu second term

    As an aside, Nigerians would recall that as against Obama’s refusal, citing rights abuses, President Trump enabled the sale to Nigeria, of the Super Tucano A-29 aircrafts which can be used for both surveillance and attack for use  against Boko Haram.

    In Europe, President Trump championed the Three Seas Initiative, led by Poland and Croatia, which aimed at enhancing infrastructure, connectivity, and trade across Central and Eastern Europe. His administration withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty, and welcomed North Macedonia and Montenegro into NATO, thus strengthening the alliance”.

    At his second coming in January, 2025, Russia had not only invaded Ukraine, it has engaged in a merciless war with Ukraine since the previous two years.

    For Trump, this would appear to have changed everything.

    So unremittingly has he supported and canvassed the Russian viewpoint, in the process obdurately pressurising Ukraine’s President Zelensky, that the suggestion has re- echoed again,  that the Russian President probably has something on Trump with which  he could be blackmailed.

    Under Donald Trump’s presidency therefore, the idea of relying on the Transatlantic accord to bring peace to Europe has become unthinkable.

    The Transatlantic accord, which has been the cornerstone of European security since World War II, is no longer a viable solution in today’s complex geopolitical landscape.

    During his first term, his rhetoric often made European leaders uneasy, but in spite of that, and as shown above, his administration  demonstrated copiously that he was committed to European security.

    However, his second term, barely a month and a half, has sparked great concern in Europe. As things stand in Europe today, EU’s largest economic powers, Germany and France, are presently weakened by economic and political crises, making them seamingly more vulnerable to external threats than hitherto. This, unfortunately, is the point at which Trump has made the US completely unreliable. Happily, however, Europe has become well aware that it can no longer rely solely on the Transatlantic accord to ensure its peace and security.

    Besides the above, the Transatlantic accord was forged in a different era, at a time when the US and Europe shared a common enemy in the Soviet Union. Today, the geopolitical landscape has dramatically changed. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Trump’s complete volte face, have reshaped the  alliance. 

    Additionally,  Europe is now facing new challenges, including terrorism, migration, and economic instability, among others.

    In this new era, therefore, Europe must take greater responsibility for its own security. Her increased defence spending, and greater commitment, to her  security as demonstrated at the recent meeting in France are developments in the right direction, and therefore, welcome even though, more needs to be done.

    Europe must develop her military capabilities as well as improve its cybersecurity, and enhance its cooperation with neighboring countries.

    NATO remains a vital component of her security, but its role must evolve to address the new challenges.

    There is urgent need for increased defence spending to a minimum 5 per cent by member nation as Trump has never ceased to urge.

    NATO’s expansion into Eastern Europe has created new tensions with Russia.

    Indeed, many say it is the ‘casus belli’ for the Russian – Ukraine war. Europe must find a balance between its commitment to collective defense and how to avoid Russia hiding under that to pursue its expansionist designs.

    There is also the additional challenge of the impact of US tariffs on the economies of Europe. The EU’s decision to impose retaliatory tariffs on US goods has further escalated the trade war to a point Trump has been bandying about the possibility of imposing a 200 per cent tariff on goods from Europe.

    Unfortunately, you do not know exactly when the man is serious as he imposes tariffs today, postpones it for 30 days but doubles it the next day, making it of immediate effect.

    Thank God not many statesmen are wired like that.

    It is heartwarming that before Trump introduced this new global trade instability, the EU was already far into looking for new trading partners amongst countries in Asia, South America and Africa.

    It is gratifying too to know that no matter how difficult it may be initially, Europe will never permit Trump and his MAGA accomplices run roughshod over her.

    But above all, she must not give up on Ukraine. It must not let that beautiful, and mineral rich, country become one for a deal between an extravagant Deal Maker and an unreflecting Russian leader whose only wish is to run over Eastern Europe.

    For its precious minerals, President Trump will give Ukraine away without batting an eyelid.

    Even if the Russian – Ukranian war will become a 30- year war, Europe must stand ramrod behind Ukraine knowing, for a certainty, that Trump will be history in 4 years.

  • Judge orders Trump to rehire fired federal workers immediately

    Judge orders Trump to rehire fired federal workers immediately

    A federal judge has ordered federal agencies to rehire tens of thousands of probationary employees who were fired amid President Donald Trump’s turbulent effort to drastically shrink the federal bureaucracy.

    U.S. District Judge William Alsup described the mass firings as a “sham” strategy by the government’s central human resources office to sidestep legal requirements for reducing the federal workforce.

    Alsup, a San Francisco-based appointee of President Bill Clinton, ordered the Defence, Treasury, Energy, Interior, Agriculture and Veterans Affairs departments to “immediately” offer all fired probationary employees their jobs back. The Office of Personnel Management, the judge said, had made an “unlawful” decision to terminate them.

    And even if it is upheld on appeal, it does not guarantee that all the workers will be able to get their jobs back permanently. Alsup made it clear that agencies still have the authority to implement “reductions in force,” as long as they follow the proper procedures for doing so. Federal agencies are currently finalising “reduction in force” plans.

    Read Also: Tinubu committed to providing quality healthcare for Nigerians – Minister

    Alsup issued his ruling in a lawsuit brought by federal employee unions. He lashed out at the Justice Department over its handling of the case, saying he believes that Trump administration lawyers were hiding the facts about who directed the mass firings.

     “You will not bring the people in here to be cross-examined. You’re afraid to do so because you know cross examination would reveal the truth,” the judge said to a DOJ attorney during a hearing  yesterday. “I tend to doubt that you’re telling me the truth. … I’m tired of seeing you stonewall on trying to get at the truth.”

    Alsup also said the administration attempted to circumvent federal laws on reducing the workforce by attributing the firings to “performance” when that was not in fact the case. The judge called the move “a gimmick.”

     “It is sad, a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that’s a lie,” Alsup said.

  • Ukraine may not survive war with Russia, says Trump

    Ukraine may not survive war with Russia, says Trump

    •Musk: Kyiv front ’ll collapse if I turn off Starlink

    United States (U.S.) President Donald Trump has caused a stir by suggesting that Ukraine may not survive the war with Russia.

    In an interview with Fox News that aired on Sunday, the U.S. president was asked whether he was comfortable with the fact that he had stopped aid to the country and that Ukraine might not survive this.

    Trump replied: “Well, it might not survive anyway.’’

    With regard to Russia’s more than three-year war against its neighbour, Trump went on to say that “it takes two’’ to engage in a conflict.

    “So now we are stuck with this mess,’’ he added.

    Read Also: Cascador launches $2m fund for Nigerian entrepreneurs

    Under Trump, the U.S. government has made a radical U-turn in its policy on Ukraine, most recently ending support for Kiev altogether at least for the time being.

    The White House said this was to force Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into peace negotiations.

    Trump had previously blamed Zelensky for the war which began when Russia attacked Ukraine; the U.S. president accuses the Ukrainian leader of not wanting to end the war.

    Trump has also called the Ukrainian president a “dictator’’ during a meeting at the White House, the two had a major falling out in front of the world’s media.

    Trump claimed he was tough on Russia

    Recently, Trump and Zelensky got along better again, but U.S. aid to Ukraine remained on hold.

  • Reflections on Trump’s ambush on Zelenskyy

    Reflections on Trump’s ambush on Zelenskyy

    By IfeanyiChukwu Afuba

    United States’ President Donald Trump got the shock of his life on Thursday, February 28, at the White House. He had prepared an agreement allowing the US access to Ukraine’s minerals in exchange for America’s military aid and presumed help in brokering a ceasefire with Russia.

    Volodymyr Zelensky refused to sign the draft agreement pointing out that it offered no security guarantees for Ukraine against Vladimir Putin’s obsessive territorial expansion. Despite efforts by Trump and the American vice president, J. D. Vance to bamboozle Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian leader stood his ground. Not even the duo’s subtle and pointed blackmail achieved the intended result of brow-beating Zelensky into submission. He left the White House without according the extortionist document a tinge of respectability. He left a hero.

    Take a sample from Trump’s harassment playbook: “We’re trying to solve a problem. Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel, because you’re in no position to dictate that… You’re in no position to dictate what we’re going to feel. We’re going to feel very good and very strong.”

    Every of Zelensky’s moves to speak is blocked with non-stop talking and pitched voice: “You’re right now not in a very good position. You’ve allowed yourself to be in a very bad position. You don’t have the cards right now. With us, you start having cards.” And when the composed guest manages to chip in – “I’m not playing cards,” Trump retorts: “You’re gambling with the lives of millions of people. You’re gambling with World War 3.”

    The drama executed by Trump and Vance at the Oval Office was in bad taste. Diplomatically, it was snobbish, almost contemptuous of Ukraine’s sovereignty. The superiority complex was overflowing, suffocating and revolting. The refusal to accord the Ukrainian leadership the rights, protocol and respect of an independent state was all too glaring. Trump’s display was nothing short of a headmaster – pupil drill. The rule of equality of states was lost on the American President. Trump and Vance were conveniently blind to the reciprocal basis of bilateral relations. The fact that Ukraine needed help from the United States did not take away her corporate personality in the comity of nations with inherent rights of recognition and respect. Zelensky as the embodiment of that defining status had immunity from harassment which Trump trampled upon. In their fixation with deal, deal, and deal, the presidential pair disregarded Ukraine’s authority. Zelensky was the visible victim but the affront ultimately was against the state and people of Ukraine.

    Socially, Trump’s attitude was unfriendly, if not hostile. Hosts are supposed to be welcoming of their guests. Good hosts do not harangue their visitor. The atmosphere pervading the reception was tensed up by Trump’s rhetoric. It was incumbent on the US President to set – induct the tone and mood necessary for cordial engagement. Where did Zelenskyy breach the protocol of friendly visit? Was there a problem with his simple, folksy carriage?

    Read Also: Jibril enthuses about  FIFA Talent Development Scheme in Nigeria

    Whoever talks down on their invited guests? And in the full glare of the press and cameras? No two ways about it. Donald Trump was discourteous, rude and impolite to his guest. He lacked the patience and tact to steer the conversation to a productive end. And probably because he had gotten away with many outbursts in the past coupled with superpower consciousness, he couldn’t care about offending social etiquette.

    Politically, Trump’s behaviour was a disservice to the quest for a just world order. He reduced Russia’s aggression on Ukraine to an opportunity for America – Russia geo – political influence on the world stage. Trump’s alarm about a world war was cheap blackmail. Ukraine’s military responses to Russia attacks have largely remained defensive, not offensive. Besides, what happened to the deterrence strategy in conflict management? Zelenskyy was only seeking incorporation of protective and safety designs in cooperation agreement with the US. But Trump and his team would not admit they wanted the easiest route, which was appeasing Vladimir Putin’s empire complex. At what price? At the cost of slashing away Ukraine’s territory and encouraging other Putins to follow suit. Indeed, if Putin gets away with Ukraine today, why would he not annex parts of Poland tomorrow? And invade Norway next, and so on and so forth?

    Trump’s recipe for peace is worrying; as worrying as his own weird interest in Greenland and Canada becoming part of America. And the suspension of America’s military aid to Ukraine on Tuesday, February 4, shows how seized Trump is with his plan.

    Aside administration circles and traditional partisan support, Trump’s disruptive disposition was roundly condemned. CNN quoted American Senator Jack Reed as calling the Trump-Zelensky meeting “a political ambush and a shameful failure of American leadership. The day’s cruel and callous display does great harm to US standing in the world.”

    Speaking on Sky News, former British ambassador to Ukraine, Simon Smith, said the Ukrainian leader was “set up for torture.” He expressed concern on the pressures Ukraine’s leadership has faced in contrast with the deference to Russia’s Putin. “There is a really worrying question here about where the U.S. is going under Trump on this issue.”

    Weighing in on the controversy, Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau wrote on X: “Canada will continue to stand with Ukraine and Ukrainians in achieving a just and lasting peace.” Germany’s Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock harped on Trump’s disingenuous elevation of might: “Unfortunately, what we witnessed was not just an unsettling episode… We’re facing a new era of ruthlessness, the rule of brute force. No one longs for peace more than the Ukrainians. While diplomatic efforts remain crucial, peace must be built on justice and stability.”

    Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese was perhaps, the most eloquent. Reuters, March 1, quoted his dismissive view of Trump’s bullying. “The people of Ukraine are fighting not just for their own national sovereignty; they are fighting for the international rule of law. We will continue to stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes because this is the struggle of a democratic nation versus an authoritarian regime led by Vladimir Putin, who clearly has imperialistic designs not just on Ukraine but throughout that region.”

    Mercifully, at its London summit of February 2, the European Union intervened decisively on the side of international law and order. The bloc pledged billions in defence investment for Ukraine while advocating for substantial peace. On its own, Britain which gave Zelenskyy a rousing welcome at Downing Street, pledged thousands of air defence equipment. The solidarity with Zelenskyy and Ukraine is the path of responsibility and commitment. Although Zelenskyy has subsequently re-notified Washington of his readiness to align with their peace move, his flexibility is understandable in the light of Russia’s ferocious attacks. Zelensky has shown great leadership in the face of very difficult challenges.

    Putin never believed that the war will drag more than one year. But here is three years of unsparing violence by a military superpower against a small country and Ukraine, though bruised, is still standing. All thanks to the courage and sacrifices of Ukrainians and Zelenskyy. Support from the Joe Biden administration and other governments dedicated to the cause of freedom have been helpful. On account of the invaluable price of freedom, it is relieving that much of the civilized world has come out strongly to oppose Trump’s willingness to reward belligerence.

  • USAID and the fragility of foreign funding

    USAID and the fragility of foreign funding

    Sir: Shortly after he was sworn in, Pressident Donald Trump announced that he was freezing funding to the United States International Development Agency (USAID) to assess programmatic efficiencies and alignment with U.S. Foreign policy. While it was recently accused of sponsoring terrorism around the world, through a multitude of partners and collaborators implementing diverse programs around the world, USAID has over the years made many invaluable contributions in social development, funding many crucial interventions around the world.

    With Trump abruptly freezing funding for three months, many projects around the world have come to a grinding halt. This has also jeopardized the employment of many who counted on USAID funding to keep the critical contributions they make coming and to keep them in a job. About 28,000 health workers paid with the support of USAID have been affected by the funding freeze.  The whole episode is gradually unraveling into a catastrophe.

    Read Also: Nigerian pleads guilty to $3m romance scam targeting elderly Americans

    What has also been exposed is the brutal nature and unpredictability of reliance on foreign aid in any form. It also underlines once and for all the understated importance of self-sufficiency and self-reliance for government and individuals around the world. This is doubly important in a world where the aphorism that he who pays the piper dictates the tune has never been truer.

    Nigeria has been brutally affected by the USAID funding freeze. It is scrambling to absorb about 28,000 health workers whose salaries have been affected. With USAID holding Nigeria by the jugular in such a manner, Nigeria would struggle to do anything about the jarring revelation that USAID may be sponsoring terrorism in Nigeria.

    The model of reliance on aid or funding for key projects and interventions has never been sustainable. It is not about to be, especially under someone as unpredictable as President Donald Trump.

    •Kene Obiezu,keneobiezu@gmail.com

  • Russo-Ukranian war: Trump bullies Ukraine to submission

    Russo-Ukranian war: Trump bullies Ukraine to submission

    Last Thursday’s press conference by President Donald Trump and visiting United Kingdom prime minister Keir Starmer was quite revelatory, particularly on the subject of Ukraine. Firstly, despite the belief in some circles in England that their prime minister was dull and shifty, a part of which manifested during the questions and answers time, it was clear that he was a more prepared leader than his host. His opening remarks delivered in Received Pronunciation, which Mr Trump swooned over, was brilliant, nuanced, somewhat bold, and probably did not disappoint the European Union (EU). Conversely, the initial remarks of President Trump, while a clear improvement over those of President Joe Biden in the closing months of the latter’s presidency, were rambling, provocative, abusive, and coarse in the extreme. He would easily exceed that congenital coarseness in the course of the subsequent press conference, and the next day’s disgraceful ambush of and jousting with Ukrainian president Volodymr Zelensky.

    Two, during the question time, Mr Starmer appeared more less assured than his brilliant opening remarks indicated, and his mastery of the subjects in discussion was tentative and superficial. It is a revelation, an indication that despite all the years spent preparing for leadership of the UK, his ideas and style have not enjoyed the dialectical thoroughness the prime minister’s office demand. Yet, he was a far better performer than his host. He spoke of aid to Ukraine, not loans, to help fight off the Russian invasion, and he was empathetic to the sufferings of Ukrainians, hoping for a deal, as he put it, that would not leave the victim holding the short end of the stick. For personal and perhaps other more nebulous reasons, Mr Trump couldn’t care less. He was determined to reclaim the funds ‘loaned’ Ukraine in the ongoing war, and he condemned Ukrainian president Volodymr Zelensky for embarking on a war that should never have been started. More, and unabashedly, he insisted that the United States would secure a rare earth minerals deal from Ukraine that would help repay the loans he unilaterally spoke about. The predatory deal, however, fell through the next day.

    Sadly, the press conference merely reinforced Mr Trump’s realpolitik as well as absolute disdain for Ukraine, a country still at war, and one which his predecessor backed, rightly or wrongly, selfishly or altruistically, with the resources of the US. As far as President Trump is concerned, however, Ukraine can be damned. What matters to him is making America (or US businessmen and contractors) rich, regardless of whose ox is gored. While obsessing over Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, a deal first mooted by Ukraine to tantalise the American president, he promised nothing in return. He would not give any security guarantees to Ukraine, would not help police any peace deal he was determined to fashion even in the absence of Ukraine from the negotiating table, and was prepared to take the issue of Ukraine’s Nato membership off the table. After all, as he put it about two weeks ago, though he tried to walk that statement back, Mr Zelensky was both incompetent and dictatorial. In fact during the said press conference, Mr Starmer tried to remind Mr Trump, and was bold enough to put it in his remarks, that Russian aggression should not be rewarded.

    Read Also: Leave me out of Natasha Akpoti’s Affairs, Omokri begs Nigerians

    After the euphoria of the past three years fighting a brutal, bloody and destructive war against a meddlesome Russia, Ukraine found itself abandoned and holding the short end of the stick because Mr Zelensky failed to pander to the whims of the oversensitive and pampered US president. Mr Trump was, before the Friday diplomatic catastrophe, pressuring Ukraine to accept a peace deal whose terms had not been fully disclosed. But enough had been disclosed to let Ukraine know that all it has fought for could end up in smoke. It would not recover most, if not all, the land it lost to Russia; it would not get Nato membership; if care is not taken it could become isolated, deprived of Nato and EU membership; and in many insidious ways it faces the grim prospect of being subjugated either by force or circumstances under Russian influence. To boot, its cities and infrastructure lie in ruins, not to talk of the hundreds of thousands killed or injured. The Trump peace deal is probably the most galling ever, a deal that rewards the aggressor and punishes the victim, a deal which traumatises whole generations for many lifetimes. While peace is admittedly always desirable, Mr Trump has, however, made it both transactional and a zero-sum game.

    Mr Trump has done very little to pressure Russia into anything, into even making the smallest of concessions. Indeed, the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has become more emboldened to rule out any concession whatsoever to Ukraine. For him, with the help of Mr Trump casting him as the winner of the war, that winner must ineluctably take all. And he is determined to take all. And, as many European nations fear, like Adolf Hitler projecting the policy of Lebensraum, the Russian president will not be satisfied or placated. They fear that for the next four years, and for reasons they cannot quite fathom, Mr Putin will be Mr Trump’s kryptonite. Not only did the US unprecedentedly side with Russia in the United Nations (UN) resolution condemning the invasion of Ukraine, Mr Trump appears bent on demystifying the EU, dividing them by singling out the UK for trade deals while imposing tariffs on the others, and indirectly furthering Russia’s global agenda. Eastern Europe and the Baltic States will now live on pins and needles, unsure of their fate as Mr Trump shatters, or at least shows his utmost disinterest in, the Transatlantic Alliance that had served America well and helped the world stave off another world war.

    Ukraine may appear to be the only country at the receiving end of Mr Trump’s eccentricities; they are, however, not the only one. It is clear that the world will become less safe and unpredictable, and dictatorships everywhere will flower as long as they can flatter the US president and stay out of his way. But sooner or later, countries which call Mr Trump’s bluff will discover that his bark is far more than his bite, despite America’s military power; and that, worse, there is no method to his madness. The world is also about to discover that Mr Trump and the US are not invincible. Because America is wealthy and militarily powerful, it has turned on its friends and allies who had sided with it since World War I, while lionising dictators and those secretly plotting the collapse of America. The Soviet Union collapsed in December 1991 without a shot being fired, literally; why should America not also collapse from within? US enemies muse.

    What the world may be witnessing in Mr Trump and the US is the difficult, entangled dynamics of leadership. The American presidential system has been fortunate to produce some excellent and visionary leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and a few others who both exemplified and embodied not just what America stands for but also what America should stand for. America’s raison d’etre was not always intrinsic to its founding; it was partly epiphanic, with some of their great leaders experiencing eureka moments and inspiring and imbuing their country with great domestic and international ideals. On its own, the presidential system does not possess the innate quality to guarantee the emergence of great leaders. In fact, the British parliamentary system has had better luck in producing great leaders than the American system, despite the brilliance of the US constitution. As the dysfunctional Mr Trump has shown by his actions, in the hands of a political vagrant, that brilliant constitution can be bastardised. The Chinese system cobbled under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping (Paramount leader between 1978 and 1989) has performed far better in producing competent leaders than both the presidential and parliamentary systems year-on-year. Yet, even the Chinese system, as President Xi Jinping has shown by his 2018 constitutional amendments to remove term limits, is not immutable or infallible.

    A leadership and character portrait of Mr Trump shows that American voters and the rest of the world are dealing with an unusual but greatly flawed personality unable to anchor his policies on great principles. He prefers ad hocism, transactional policies, and sentiments. This explains why Ukraine is in a quandary as it struggles to convince Mr Trump to recognise Mr Putin as the most pressing danger to American values and system in this century. The turmoil is not explained just by the incompetence of Mr Trump, but also by his lack of finesse and ideological mooring. As far as competence is concerned, no leadership institution mentored or apprenticed him, unlike France’s Emmanuel Macron who virtually humiliated him during last week’s visit to the White House. The US president’s private businesses have been products of bluff and bluster, record falsifications, and tax evasions. His first term in office (2016-2020) witnessed horrendous turnover of aides and cabinet members to the point that today many of them still speak ill of his capacity as a leader. It is curious that America elected into office for a second term a man whose ability his extended family and cabinet dismissed with brutal candour. Ukraine may have made many mistakes in its war with Russia, but that war was not always inevitable, despite the turbulence of the preceding years, Russia’s political voyeurism, and the mismanagement of the war of words with an equally deluded Mr Putin who still longs for the years of empire. Mr Biden and the EU recognised that the war might become drawn-out, for after all, there have been wars that lasted for more than four, five, six or even 100 years until a victor emerged. Therefore, seeking peace at the price of humiliating Ukraine and ceding land to an insatiable and rapacious Mr Putin may not help that peace to last.

    A peace deal is sorely needed. But it must be one that is based on justice and can endure. Mr Trump’s lack of capacity, however, complicates the search for peace. His lack of leadership character, shortsightedness, mercantilist approach to politics, and almost total repudiation of Western values and rules-based system present analysts with an irresoluble dilemma of how societies produce one great leader after another? Are great constitutions and brilliant political structures/systems enough to guarantee stability, greatness, and longevity? Every empire from antiquity has had to grapple with that dilemma, whether it was the Chaldeans, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, or the Ottomans. There are never any guarantees, as the Chinese also exemplify by sustaining term limits over only four leadership successions. It was always taken for granted in the US that having produced presidents like Washington, Lincoln, and Roosevelt, no utter incompetent could ever emerge, at least not someone like Mr Trump. They have been proved wrong.

    Like all fallen empires, the US is also exposing its Achilles heel through a president who repudiates alliances, despises friendships, courts dictators, elevates personal interest above national interest, and displays a shocking and disgraceful lack of understanding of the consequences of the choices and statements he makes, whether regarding Ukraine, the EU, or tariffs. In the Russo-Ukranian war, Mr Trump has indifferently tied Ukraine’s hands behind their back, causing them to groan in private over the enormous losses they have sustained. If Mr Zelensky cannot dissuade Mr Trump from backing Russia and Mr Putin, Ukraine will be left with the choice of either surrendering to American wishes or committing suicide by defying the US president’s wishes. Neither choice is palatable. But the forces being unleashed by Mr Trump, both domestically and foreign, will not only haunt the US for decades to come, it may determine the fate of the American Century.  

  • The Trump and Zelensky televised debacle

    The Trump and Zelensky televised debacle

     The unprecedented diplomatic meltdown between United States president Donald Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenski last Friday before the press, obviously at the instigation of the pitiless US vice president J.D Vance, himself a notable Ukraine and European Union hater, will have lasting consequences for Europe and America. Immediately Vice President Vance, as if cued, described Mr Zelensky as disrespectful and ungrateful during a heated televised exchange on Friday at the White House in Washington, the Ukrainian leader unfortunately took the bait by entering into a shouting match with the US president and his vice, losing his patience just when he needed it the most. As a result, the US has called off any deal with Ukraine, jeopardised further military help for the beleaguered nation, mocked them for being powerless in the face of Russian attacks, and signaled that they would not mind the Ukrainian president stepping down. The very public and uncensored falling out on live television played into the hands of President Vladimir Putin who had plotted for decades to drive a wedge between Europe and the US, sunder the Transatlantic Alliance, and regain imperialistic control of Ukraine.

    It is shocking that the US administration has no clue what the implication of a defeated Ukraine would mean to Europe and America. Before the eyes of this generation, the world witnessed the dissolution of the Soviet Empire. Now the same eyes are also witnessing the dismantling of the Western Alliance, inspired by the unwise US president, his truculent vice president, and the ingratiating and sniveling Republican Party. The world should simply brace for unprecedented turbulence in the near term. Talking about healing the rift between President Trump and President Zelensky glosses over the dismal fact that the US president and his deputy are fundamentally opposed to Ukraine for different reasons, much of it inexplicable, inscrutable and private. There was little the Ukrainian leader could have done to get the security guarantees his country needed to proceed with a ceasefire or peace deal. Mr Trump had alluded to this impossibility even before he succumbed to France’s pressures to meet with Mr Zelensky.

    Read Also: Nigeria should be the most developed, says Tinubu

    Perhaps there is something European leaders can still do to reset the relationship between an increasingly insular US and a bedraggled Ukraine. In reality, however, Europe is now alone to face the hordes from the East. They will have to reconceptualise their foreign and security policies doctrine. It is not clear how long Ukraine can hold out against a clearly exultant and emboldened Russia buoyed by feuding Western Alliance leaders, but it is now at least obvious that America is returning to isolationism or predatory foreign policy, Europe will begin the process of rearming, thus triggering a new arms race, while powerful dictatorships will begin to give in to temptations to embark on dangerous expansionism.

    In World War II, both US president Franklin Roosevelt and United Kingdom prime minister never liked France’s Charles de Gaulle, leader of the Free French Army, whom they described as supercilious. But they had their eyes on the greater goal and good of checkmating German expansionism, and were willing more than anything to bury their differences. And they did, and won the war. But President Trump and Mr Vance, who have both strangely and effectively become stooges of dictatorships, sadly cite their minor differences with President Zelensky to renege on everything America had stood for. Will the US ever recover from this abysmal new low of its leaders’ appalling personal biases, not to talk of using the ‘shouting match’ at the White House as a pretext to imperil their collective security? Mr Trump does not also have the capacity to understand that the annexations of countries he so glibly speaks about could indirectly legitimise the annexations China and Russia have in the pipeline. The US has its flaws, but it was for a long time the only sound mind superpower not greedy about territories. Now, the world has become a more dangerous place, and Mr Trump is the new and ugly public face of that madness, a trivial man for whom the manners of President Zelensky obviously means so much more than the strategic interest of his country and the sometimes stabilising influence of the Western Alliance.