In an effort to pressure Ukraine into a peace deal favourable to U.S. interests, President Trump openly referred to Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a "dictator without elections."

Details. Since the 19th of February, U.S. President Donald Trump has begun to openly put pressure on Ukraine, both on social media and in press conferences.

► Trump initially posted on Truth Social: “A Dictator without Elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left,” in reference to Russia’s special military operation’s land captures.

► Zelenskyy claimed Donald Trump was “living in a disinformation space” fuelled by Russia.

► While addressing investors and executives in Miami, Trump doubled down on his remarks, again calling Zelenskyy a "dictator" and suggesting that the Ukrainian president was prolonging the war to "keep the gravy train going" — referring to U.S. military aid.

► U.S. Vice President JD Vance warned Zelenskyy against "badmouthing" Trump.

► Trump falsely claimed Zelenskyy’s approval rating was just 4%

Context. Tensions between U.S. and Ukrainian leadership emerged after the U.S. restored relations with Russia and excluded Ukraine from ceasefire negotiations.

► High-level negotiations regarding a ceasefire in Ukraine between US and Russian officials in Saudi Arabia proceeded without Ukraine’s involvement, reflecting a US policy shift favouring a deal with Moscow.

► Zelenskyy previously refused to sign a U.S. agreement on rare minerals—covering 50% of its mineral resources—citing the lack of security guarantees.

► Amid disagreements with the US, some EU leaders are trying to pursue a policy of supporting Ukraine’s military separately from the US. Still, talks concluded with agreements to increase domestic military spending.

Important to know. This open negative rhetoric toward a supposed “allied” leader marks a significant change in U.S. foreign policy.

► It is the first time the U.S. has taken an openly hostile position toward Ukrainian leadership since the conflict began.

► Trump has previously emphasized that both sides should make concessions. Regarding Ukraine's pre-2014 borders, he stated, "Some of that land will come back," implying that concessions should include reversing Russian gains. In response to Zelenskyy’s pushback against ceding land to Russia, Trump has intensified his pressure.

► Zelenskyy’s term expired on May 20, 2024, but due to martial law, elections have been postponed. Despite this, his popularity is declining — currently, his trust rating stands at 57%, a significant drop from the 90% approval rating at the start of the conflict.

► Additionally, when martial law was declared, television news was nationalized and "pro-Russian" opposition parties were banned.

► Given the recent thaw in U.S.-Russian relations, Trump might be inclined to support a pro-Russian candidate in future Ukrainian elections—one who could "fairly" divide resources between Russian and American capitalist interests and their Ukrainian representatives.

Conclusion. As the U.S. reorients its foreign policy to an "America First" agenda, the nature of imperialist "alliances" and "rivalries" is revealed. Namely, they are based solely on a policy of profitability. The U.S. wants to restore its former hegemonic position and is willing to use both economic and rhetorical pressure to secure what is favourable to its imperialist interests.

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy refused to sign the US proposal for agreements on rare earth minerals.

Details: During a conference in Munich, Germany, on February 15, 2025, Zelenskyy told journalists that he had instructed his ministers to reject the U.S. proposal because it was too U.S.-focused.

► Zelenskyy stated, “I didn’t let the ministers sign a relevant agreement because in my view it is not ready to protect us, our interest.”

► The proposal didn’t offer any security guarantees that in return for the minerals would protect Ukraine from Russia. In this regard, The Ukrainian PM said, “For me is very important the connection between some kind of security guarantees and some kind of investment”

► The U.S. proposal was intended to “compensate” for the aid provided under the Biden administration and to serve as payment for future assistance under the Trump administration.

Context. Since the inauguration of Trump’s administration, the U.S. has adopted a hawkish foreign policy towards their supposed “allies”, using threats of tariffs to advance policies favorable to American interests.

► Donald Trump has criticized Zelenskyy for prolonging the conflict, suggesting that the Ukrainian leader should have ended it sooner, and has even referred to him as a “dictator”.

► According to the Kiev Institute of the World Economy's Aid Tracker for Ukraine, the U.S. has provided nearly $120 billion in aid. Although Europe collectively has contributed more, no single European country has matched the U.S. contribution.

Important to Know. The U.S. is leveraging Ukraine’s reliance on American military aid to negotiate favorable terms for rare earth materials, aiming to reduce its own dependence on China. The U.S. wishes to openly reassert their global dominance.

► These rare earth materials are crucial for the aerospace, defense, and nuclear industries.

► Zelenskyy is open to signing the deal if it includes proper guarantees for protection and investment. Much of the national industry has already been privatized during and before the conflict.

► As of February 5, 2025, Zelenskyy reported that more than 45,100 Ukrainian soldiers have lost their lives since the conflict began, with workers on both sides having died in service of capital interests.

Conclusion. In the end, the Ukrainian prime minister refused to sign the deal, not out of principle, but because of the lack of security guarantees and investment. Capitalist states represent the interests of capitalists and are therefore happy to keep their states entrenched in dependency as long as there are profits to be made. The common working people pay the price.

EU countries have reacted negatively to Trump’s intentions to initiate peace talks over the conflict in Ukraine.

Details. On 18th February talks began in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio without Ukraine and the EU.

► EU countries have reacted negatively to this news. The phrase “no peace for Ukraine, without Ukraine” is being repeated by many European leaders.

► European leaders have gathered in Paris for an emergency summit on Ukraine. The Polish Prime Minister said that no decisions should be made without Ukraine and Europe.

► The UK Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has said that "recent statements by the US administration should not come as a surprise" and that Europe will need to "take responsibility" for its security. He has also proposed to act as a bridge between Europe and the United States.

► The Paris talks also concluded that Europe should increase military spending and Starmer has stated he might consider deploying peacekeeping troops to Ukraine.

Context. As of January 2025, the EU has given approximately $145 billion in aid to Ukraine.

► Since Trump’s inauguration, the US has taken a more openly domineering stance with various other countries, including their allies: threats to annex Greenland (a part of Denmark – EU and NATO member), or threats to introduce tariffs on European goods.

► The crisis has had a significant economic impact on the European economy. EU firms have to deal with higher energy prices, reduced trade and potentially higher funding costs as banks try to avoid risk. In the year after the start of the conflict, the percentage of firms at risk of defaulting on their debt has surged from 10% to 17%.

► Additionally, Vice-President of the United States, JD Vance, recently gave a speech at the Munich Security Conference, where he attacked the EU for suppression of free speech and mishandling of migration. In his speech, he also defended the German far-right party, AfD.

Important to Know. EU concerns over Trump’s handling of the peace talks are not over genuine worry for the Ukrainian people, but rather due to conflicting interests between the USA and the EU.

► Trump attempts to gain control of a significant part of Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, valued at 500 billion USD. The US tries to reassert dominance over its sphere of influence and to force concessions out of other less powerful countries through the threat of tariffs.

► This is putting it directly into confrontation with the EU’s imperialist interests. Some European countries intend to lower tariffs on US goods to appease Trump, whilst others prepare retaliatory measures.

► Despite the tensions between the two blocs, Trump is still pushing for NATO members — many of whom are in the EU — to increase military spending. In the past, he has threatened to pull out of the military alliance should this demand not be met.

► However, military spending in the EU has already been increasing over the past eight years as they must ensure they are prepared for possible future conflicts.

Conclusion. The crisis over the Ukrainian peace talks, along with heightened tensions between the US and the EU, only exemplifies how capitalist alliances are temporary. New imperialist powers emerge and old ones fight to maintain or better their positions, a bitter struggle for the re-division of the world takes place. Workers of all nationalities are pitted against each other in the name of profit.