25.09.2025

US President Donald Trump decided to remind the world at the UN General Assembly that he had not forgotten his favorite role – a provocateur and critic of everyone and everything. The UN itself was hit, which, according to the US president, is long overdue to look in the mirror and admit its own inefficiency, and European countries, which, according to him, are “rolling into hell” due to helplessness in the face of mass immigration. Europe received another “gift” – Trump once again reproached it for its dependence on Russian energy sources. China and India also came under fire. According to Trump, they are not neutral observers at all, but interested players who continue to buy Russian oil at a discount and thereby fuel the “conflict”. His attempt to convince the audience once again that he is the one capable of ending the war “very quickly” but that everyone else is preventing him from doing so was a special note. Europe, China, India, the UN, and he is only the one who “could.”

After the speech, the American leader met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Since Trump’s return to the White House, Zelensky has followed one rule: never miss an opportunity for even a brief contact, because this is another attempt to remind Washington that the war is ongoing, and Putin is not going to stop. If during the speech at the UN we observed the usual Trump, then the second part of the evening with his participation was somewhat surprising. For example, he unexpectedly stated that Ukraine, with the support of the EU and to some extent NATO, can restore all pre-war borders and even “achieve more.” This is a sharp turn from his previous calls for territorial concessions to Moscow. He called Russia a “paper tiger” in the economic crisis and called on Ukraine to act. In Ukraine, these words were received with great optimism. For example, Volodymyr Zelensky noted that “Trump’s position has changed, he understands the impossibility of exchanging territories.” At the same time, the EU expressed doubts that this would be followed by a real increase in pressure on Russia. Fears are heightened by the fact that Trump is known for his fickleness – his position can change after one call from dictator Putin.

Ukrainian diplomat and politician Roman Bezsmertny shared his thoughts on these and other issues in an exclusive interview with OBOZ.UA.

– I would like to start with Trump’s latest statement about the possibility for Ukraine to restore its borders, a weak Russia, and other things, which were received very positively in Ukraine. Let’s analyze it in more detail. We still have a partial change in rhetoric. But in the message itself there is not a word about US commitments – only “Ukraine, with the support of the EU, should fight.” “We will sell weapons to NATO, and NATO should do whatever it wants with them.” How do you comment on this signal? Some believe that Trump openly shifted responsibility for the war to Europe and “said goodbye .”

– To understand more deeply what Trump is saying, we need to look at who he acted in this situation – what exactly he showed as a person. This is like a “steep turn” in his position: on the one hand, new rhetoric, on the other, behavior that we already know well. And this gives an answer to what he puts into the slogans that he periodically utters. I had to work with presidents who always adhered to the position that was formed by the last meetings – the last circle of people they spoke with. This meeting between Zelensky and Trump formed this position.

Why did this happen? There is an important nuance here. Trump clearly enjoyed handing out “outfits” at the General Assembly. In fact, everything was done clearly: everyone had their own “title”, everyone had their own role – and he enjoyed it. And to this “hot furnace” President Zelensky apparently added, as Donald Trump says, “good coals”. And this is what gave rise to that post on the social network that you have spread on the shelves.

Therefore, we need to treat this as the result of those meetings – nothing more and nothing less. I am convinced that very soon his statement will be corrected. Moreover, they have already been: after the meetings at the General Assembly, a Security Council meeting was held, where, in particular, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke. And during his speech, Rubio clearly shifts the emphasis to claims against both sides – both Russia and Ukraine. This must be understood, because the Secretary of State is closer to domestic political details and is well aware that yesterday’s wind can change with today’s nuances. So you should not get too carried away by Trump’s post, this does not mean that all US policy has changed instantly.

– By the way, Rubio said the day before that Ukraine should agree to agreements. But he did not specify which ones.

– Exactly. And this is very important to hear: not to get carried away, because, most likely, we saw the game of “good cop and bad cop”. And here also added the specific mood of Donald Trump himself – he was obviously pleased to feel like the master of the situation. It seems to me that he felt like a “pahan” to whom they came with their problems, and he had to decide who would do what.

– Speaking specifically about his phrase: “with time, patience, and financial support from Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original borders from which this war began may well be an option” – isn’t this the same as what he said earlier, that the US would withdraw from the process if no active steps were taken?

– I understand your implication – that Trump seemed to say “goodbye”. But no, he didn’t directly say “goodbye”. Moreover, he perceives everything as a constant opportunity for additional income – and this applies to the sale of weapons. He understands that you can sell NATO weapons, and then “let them do whatever they want”. And from this point of view, it is not surprising that some of these weapons enter circulation, but not necessarily directly to Ukraine.

There is another thing: pay attention to how Trump – and America in general – has changed its position on frozen Russian funds. A week ago, they said that this issue is legal and should be resolved within the framework of the law. But recently, the idea has been increasingly voiced that these funds should be transferred to Ukraine. However, this is not the final goal: they are obviously interested in obtaining contracts for reconstruction – construction, restoration of infrastructure, and possibly military infrastructure for conducting operations.

Last week, American publications reported on how private American firms could participate in the restoration of front-line infrastructure: trenches, security systems, bomb shelters, and other local and regional infrastructure systems. That is, Trump is acting as he did before: he has long since decided to “make money on war.” This is felt in his approach. That is why Ukraine has become “wonderful,” Zelenskyy is “wonderful,” and the Europeans are “well done, let them pay.”

– As always, he just wants to make money in Europe too.

– Yes, let them pay for gas, let them pay for weapons, and so on. And the Europeans – the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen – clearly stated Europe’s position in an interview. She said: energy – we will do it in Europe. Every kilowatt will be produced in Europe. This is the first thing. Secondly – ​​regarding weapons: “readiness 2030” means that from January 1, 2027, 90% of purchases will already be made in Europe. This must be understood – only in Europe. And by 2030, the full complex, including intelligence data – satellite, aerial reconnaissance, etc. Therefore, on the one hand, Trump’s public duel and outrage are interesting, but on the other – Europe is actually saying: “Okay, you earn today, but tomorrow it will be ours.”

– Trump wants to make money, that’s clear. But does his rhetoric matter? It’s one thing when he says that Ukraine must give up part of its territory to end the war. It’s another thing when he already talks about “restoring the borders from which the war began” – it sounds like a change in rhetoric. The President of Ukraine considers this a cardinal change – a big positive. Is this really the case, or will everything be different again tomorrow?

– Yes, it is positive, but short-lived, in my opinion. Tomorrow everything can change dramatically, unfortunately. I perceive these words in the same way as the previous ones. There is no fundamental difference. Of course, new variants of positions may appear – but the thesis “Trump earns” also answers the question of “stopping the war”. If he earns, then “stopping” is primarily words.

– If we put aside the beautiful words for Ukraine – what do we have specifically? Volodymyr Zelenskyy came with two issues: security guarantees and sanctions. Security guarantees – let’s see, we will discuss something further, Trump said – that is, nothing concrete for now. Sanctions – “Europe should put pressure on China and India, and then we will put pressure on Russia; maybe I will join if they fulfill my whims” – are also not very substantive. So, these two key points have not yet been resolved.

– The words about oil and gas are a way to show that he will not do anything. In the game with Orban, Donald Trump is putting pressure, and Orban is using his position. But Europe can “cut off oxygen” to Orban – and it is already clear that some countries are moving towards it. Several enterprises need to be technologically reconstructed, but they will do it.

As for guarantees, Trump has never given real guarantees and will not give them on behalf of the United States. This is already clear to Europe, and it is talking about it. It is no coincidence that the French and British took on the issue of air cover. What remains are air defense systems and intelligence data located precisely in Europe. Pay attention to how air defense systems operated during incidents with drones over Poland or in other cases – Belgian, Dutch, British forces acted precisely as national units, not American bases.

So Donald Trump is preparing to “wave his hand” at NATO and Europe – and it is no coincidence that in that interview von der Leyen talks about the autonomy and European control of the defense part. She says: 30 of the 32 NATO countries are European states. And other leaders point out: why not have a European command? This reinforces the idea that the EU defense-industrial complex is taking responsibility – and the picture is very clear.

And what about financing Ukraine? Zelenskyy is talking about 60 billion. In an interview, von der Leyen mentioned a “reparation loan” – supposedly there is a willingness to issue Ukraine a loan that Russia must repay. All this provides a powerful argument in the discussion with Trump.

– Regarding Trump’s remarks about Orban. He said: “I will call – and the issue of refusing to buy oil from Russia will be resolved.” So how to interpret this? Is this the traditional Trump, who will forget his own words tomorrow, or is he really going to solve something with a call?

– First, regarding Orban – Trump will not deal with this issue. He needs Orban not as a partner, but as a torpedo within the European Union. And he will definitely look for similar “useful counterparties”. Trump has been sharpening his teeth at the European Union for a long time. And the problem here is not Ursula von der Leyen, not Merck or Macron. The American politician generally perceives Europe as a competitor. And a key competitor.

His phrases about the calls and Orban have no meaning. He will not say anything to Orban. But if Orban wins the elections, he will turn into a real torpedo that will hit Europe in all directions. Therefore, Trump will not resolve the issue with Orban. Deep down, I am even sure that these words of the head of the Hungarian Foreign Ministry, Szijjártó, that “we will not give up,” are a ready-made scenario: Orban will remain silent, and Szijjártó will explain everything.

– So it turns out that the Orban problem can only be solved in Europe itself?

– It will be solved by the European Union. Because Orban underestimates neither Ursula von der Leyen nor Kaya Kallas. These are not the women who will approach the problem with a “female heart.” They are tough and consistent.

I would say – not just capable, but also ready. In nine months of this year, she has already survived right-wing “riots” in the European Parliament twice. In an interview, she is asked directly: “How do you assess this?” And she calmly answers: “Everyone should do their job. I am not going to waste time on those who want to destroy the EU.” That is, she understands perfectly well what is happening.

– How do you decipher two different statements about Russian planes? Marco Rubio says: “We will not shoot down unless there is a direct threat.” What kind of threat is needed, the US Secretary of State does not say. And Trump says: “If they cross the border, let them shoot down.”

– Both of them hardly realize what they are saying. Because there are clear regulations. If it is a civilian plane, one scenario applies. If it is a military plane, it is completely different. These rules are mandatory and are not subject to “political fantasies”. They cannot be violated, because this destabilizes the situation.

Remember 2015 and Turkey: the Russians flew in for a few seconds – and the plane was shot down. The same will happen in Europe, but after the warning, which is already there. Look at the speech of the Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski at the UN Security Council. He clearly said: “We are warning you.” This is part of the protocol: if warned, the next flight will mean defeat. And Poland will do this. This is an official statement, it cannot be ignored.

Pay attention, other statements came from Copenhagen and Brussels – they are softer. But there it was about drones. In Estonia – about combat aircraft, also equipped with ammunition. This is a different level, different regulations.

– In your opinion, will Putin continue to test after these statements? It’s of no use to him, and he will once again be testing the reaction? Will everything really be as, for example, Sikorsky said?

– Putin will continue this. And he will do it in the format of hybrid war. These will be sabotage. These will be entries of ships into territorial waters. These will be violations of airspace by aircraft and drones. We need to distinguish. For example, in the case of Poland, there were military drones. Yes, they did not carry explosives, but this is “Geranium” – a military drone. And in the case of Copenhagen or Oslo – drones hung in the sky, which can be bought in any store. A little tinkering – and you can scare anyone.

All of this matters. And here it is important that those who make statements rely on the current procedures. Because if they are followed, then in the case of combat aircraft, the Estonians had the right to act in the same way as Erdogan once acted. But the difference is that Erdogan officially warned a week before the incident: any violation of the air or land border will receive an immediate response. Sikorski’s words mean approximately the same thing: as soon as the Polish border is crossed – in the air, on the ground or on the water – the Poles will open fire. That is why it is important to adhere to this order. Look at the Estonians – they did not declare that they would act immediately.

– Yes, they said that decisions are made not in Estonia, but at the central headquarters of NATO European Command.

– Exactly. Because they do not have their own air defense systems. Accordingly, these are different competencies, different procedures. And Poland has already announced how it will act, and this position will be implemented. Therefore, the logic is clear: everything complies with the current rules for the use of weapons.

If we summarize what we heard in New York – from Trump, from the President of Ukraine, from other politicians – what awaits us? The negotiation process, even the Istanbul one, is being rejected, the war continues, Europe and Ukraine are being consolidated even more. Trump promises to continue the armaments and this is the maximum of his participation? Is this the development of events?

First. Trump’s words are just words. Second, you can believe them, at best, a quarter. Third, the future of Ukraine as a European state is unambiguous, and it is connected with security in Europe. We need to cooperate with America, we need to “get along.” But we can’t hope that America will fight for us. America will make money. This has already been clearly outlined.

Now about the mechanisms. We absolutely need to build systemic relations in the field of air defense with Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia. The situation is getting to the point where, no matter how it sounds, Ukraine will provide them with security guarantees. No matter how they behave now, whether they are high-ranking or not, Ukraine will become a guarantor for them.

The situation is extremely dangerous. I understand that Trump’s rhetoric has created the illusion of change. But we should not hope for something that will not happen. Militarization continues. Arms buildup continues. A “drone wall” is being built. New defense infrastructure is being created. The European security architecture is really getting back on its feet.

Now pay attention to the publication in the Telegraph by Kofler, an American intelligence officer. She directly hints: the accumulation of such a large number of weapons automatically escalates the situation. It’s a classic principle – if there’s a gun hanging on the stage, it will definitely fire.

– So you are actually talking about a pan-European war?

– Yes. That’s exactly what I’m hinting at – the temperature is rising. And here we need to look not only at the camp of allies, but also at the camp of enemies. After such statements by Trump, do you think that Putin will sit like a frog and wait? No. He will build up. He will mobilize, squeeze the last veins. And now add China, Iran, North Korea. Will they stay away? Of course not. They will react.

– It is obvious that Putin will now try to raise the temperature of the war…

– If Trump continues to hold this note, Putin will raise the temperature, and then point his finger and say: “See? He abandoned you.” I can roughly imagine what will happen next. Look at how the signal about the extension of the Strategic Offensive Arms Treaty sounded synchronously from Moscow. In his text at the UN, Trump wrote that the most important issue now is nuclear security. And here’s what it means: he actually agreed to a dialogue about extending the treaty. That’s why Putin “picked it up”: they say, Trump wants to slip away? No, my friend, sit down at the table.

– So tomorrow Trump can say: “We must save the world from nuclear war ” to argue why he is cooperating with Putin again?

– That’s right.

https://www.obozrevatel.com/ukr/politics-news/pozitivnij-signal-zelenskij-vidreaguvav-na-slova-trampa-scho-ukraina-mozhe-povernuti-vsi-svoi-okupovani-teritorii.htm