How Trump’s history with Russia and Ukraine set the stage for a blowup with Zelensky

US President Donald Trump and Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky meet in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, February 28, 2025. (AFP)
US President Donald Trump and Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky meet in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, February 28, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 04 March 2025

How Trump’s history with Russia and Ukraine set the stage for a blowup with Zelensky

How Trump’s history with Russia and Ukraine set the stage for a blowup with Zelensky
  • Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation wrapped up in 2019 and left no doubt that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election in sweeping and criminal fashion and that the Trump campaign had welcomed the help

WASHINGTON: As his White House meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart devolved into a stunning blowup, President Donald Trump leaned on a familiar refrain to explain his unique kinship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
“Putin went through a hell of a lot with me,” Trump said Friday, raising his voice and gesturing with his hands as he recounted the long-since-concluded saga of a federal investigation in which both he and the Russian president played starring roles.
“He went through a phony witch hunt where they used him and Russia. Russia, Russia, Russia, ever hear of that deal?” Trump said.
The pointed reference to the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election underscored the extent to which Trump’s lingering fury over an inquiry he has misleadingly branded a “hoax” remains top of mind more than eight years after it began.
It also made clear that Trump’s view of a war Russia launched against Ukraine three years ago is colored not only by his relationship with Putin and the alliance he believes they share but also by his fraught past with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was a central player in the first of two impeachment cases against Trump during his first four years in office.
Here’s a look at what the American president means when he says “Russia, Russia, Russia“:
Investigations tied to Putin connections
Questions over Trump’s connections to Putin followed him into his first presidency and hung over him for most of his term, spurring investigations by the Justice Department and Congress and the appointment of a special counsel who brought criminal charges against multiple Trump allies.
While running for office, Trump cast doubt on the idea that Russian government hackers had stolen the emails of Democrats, including his 2016 rival Hillary Clinton, and orchestrated their public release in an effort to boost his candidacy and harm hers.
Then, as president, he broke with his own intelligence community’s firm finding that Russia and Russia alone was to blame for the hack. Even when he begrudgingly conceded that Russia might be responsible, he also suggested the culprit might be a “400-pound genius sitting in bed and playing with his computer.”
In July 2018, while standing alongside Putin in Helsinki, Trump appeared to embrace the Russian leader’s protestations over the conclusions of US intelligence officials by saying, “I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today.”
He added that “I don’t see any reason why it would be” Russia.
All the while, he memorably raged against the investigation, calling it a “hoax” and “witch hunt” and, as he did at the White House last week, repeatedly deriding all the “Russia, Russia, Russia” attention.
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation wrapped up in 2019 and left no doubt that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election in sweeping and criminal fashion and that the Trump campaign had welcomed the help. But the inquiry did not find sufficient evidence to prove that the two sides had illegally colluded to tip the outcome of the election.
‘Do us a favor’
If Trump’s history with Russia appears to have contributed to his worldview of the current conflict, so too has his past with Ukraine.
He held a call in 2019 with Zelensky and pushed him to investigate corruption allegations against Democratic rival Joe Biden and Biden’s son Hunter ahead of the 2020 election, which Joe Biden went on to win.
The call — which included Trump’s memorable line: “I would like you to do us a favor, though” — was reported by a CIA officer-turned-whistleblower who alleged that the president appeared to be soliciting interference from a foreign country in the US election.
After Trump’s call with Zelensky, the White House temporarily halted US aid to the struggling ally facing hostile Russian forces at its border. The money was eventually released as Congress intervened.
Trump was subsequently impeached by the House but acquitted by the Senate.
The president’s skepticism of Ukraine went beyond the call. During his first term, he also seemingly bought into a long-discredited conspiracy theory that connects Ukraine, not Russia, to the 2016 political interference and the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and repeatedly accused the FBI of a lackluster investigation that led to the blaming of the Kremlin.
What happens next?
The long-term repercussions of the Oval Office spat, in which Trump called Zelensky “disrespectful” in the most hostile public exchange in memory between world leaders at the White House, remain to be seen.
But the immediate consequences are clear, with Trump on Monday directing a “pause” to US assistance to Ukraine as he seeks to pressure Zelensky to engage in peace talks with Russia. Earlier, the US president again blasted the Ukrainian leader after Zelensky noted that a deal to end the war “is still very, very far away.”
Zelensky, meanwhile, left Washington without signing a minerals deal that Trump said would have moved Ukraine closer to ending its war with Russia. He’s not welcome back, Trump said on social media, until he’s “ready for Peace.”
With the US-Ukraine relationship now in jeopardy, Zelensky has used a series of posts on X to express his thanks to the American people, Trump and Congress for “all the support.”
European leaders, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, have embraced Zelensky in the aftermath of the White House fight.
In Russia, officials are relishing the conflict, sensing an opportunity to move closer to the US That window seemed to open last month when the US, in a dramatic reversal in position, split from European allies by refusing to blame Russia for its invasion of Ukraine in votes on UN resolutions seeking an end to the war.
In an interview with a Russian state TV reporter that aired Sunday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said the new US administration is “rapidly changing all foreign policy configurations.”
“This largely coincides with our vision,” he added.


Pakistan to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize

Updated 3 sec ago

Pakistan to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize

Pakistan to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan said on Saturday it would recommend US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, an accolade that he has said he craves, for his work in helping to resolve the recent conflict between India and Pakistan.
Some analysts in Pakistan said the move might persuade Trump to think again about potentially joining Israel in striking Iran’s nuclear facilities. Pakistan has condemned Israel’s action as a violation of international law and a threat to regional stability.
In May, a surprise announcement by Trump of a ceasefire brought an abrupt end to a four-day conflict between nuclear-armed foes India and Pakistan. Trump has since repeatedly said that he averted a nuclear war, saved millions of lives, and grumbled that he got no credit for it.
Pakistan agrees that US diplomatic intervention ended the fighting, but India says it was a bilateral agreement between the two militaries.
“President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi, which de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation,” Pakistan said. “This intervention stands as a testament to his role as a genuine peacemaker.”
Governments can nominate people for the Nobel Peace Prize. There was no immediate response from Washington. A spokesperson for the Indian government did not respond to a request for comment.
Trump has repeatedly said that he’s willing to mediate between India and Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region, their main source of enmity. Islamabad, which has long called for international attention to Kashmir, is delighted.
But his stance has upended US policy in South Asia, which had favored India as a counterweight to China, and put in question previously close relations between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
In a social media post on Friday, Trump gave a long list of conflicts he said he had resolved, including India and Pakistan and the Abraham accords in his first term between Israel and some Muslim-majority countries. He added: “I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do.”
Pakistan’s move to nominate Trump came in the same week its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met the US leader for lunch. It was the first time that a Pakistani military leader had been invited to the White House when a civilian government was in place in Islamabad.
Trump’s planned meeting with Modi at the G7 summit in Canada last week did not take place after the US president left early, but the two later spoke by phone, in which Modi said “India does not and will never accept mediation” in its dispute with Pakistan, according to the Indian government.
Mushahid Hussain, a former chair of the Senate Defense Committee in Pakistan’s parliament, suggested nominating Trump for the peace prize was justified.
“Trump is good for Pakistan,” he said. “If this panders to Trump’s ego, so be it. All the European leaders have been sucking up to him big time.”
But the move was not universally applauded in Pakistan, where Trump’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza has inflamed passions.
“Israel’s sugar daddy in Gaza and cheerleader of its attacks on Iran isn’t a candidate for any prize,” said Talat Hussain, a prominent Pakistani television political talk show host, in a post on X. “And what if he starts to kiss Modi on both cheeks again after a few months?”

Pope Leo warns politicians of the challenges posed by AI

Pope Leo warns politicians of the challenges posed by AI
Updated 35 sec ago

Pope Leo warns politicians of the challenges posed by AI

Pope Leo warns politicians of the challenges posed by AI

VATICAN CITY: Pope Leo warned politicians on Saturday of the challenges posed by the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), addressing its potential impact on younger people as a prime concern.
Speaking at an event attended by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and parliamentary delegations from 68 countries, Leo revisited a topic that he has raised on a number of occasions during the first few weeks of his papacy.
“In particular, it must not be forgotten that artificial intelligence functions as a tool for the good of human beings, not to diminish them or even to replace them,” Leo said at an event held as part of the Roman Catholic Jubilee or Holy Year.
AI proponents say it will speed up scientific and technological progress and help people to carry out routine tasks, granting them more time to pursue higher-value and creative work.
The US-born pontiff said attention was needed to protect “healthy, fair and sound lifestyles, especially for the good of younger generations.”
He noted that AI’s “static memory” was in no way comparable to the “creative, dynamic” power of human memory.
“Our personal life has greater value than any algorithm, and social relationships require spaces for development that far transcend the limited patterns that any soulless machine can pre-package,” he said.
Leo, who became pope in May, has spoken previously of the threat posed by AI to jobs and has called on journalists to use it responsibly.


As the UN turns 80, its crucial humanitarian aid work faces a clouded future

As the UN turns 80, its crucial humanitarian aid work faces a clouded future
Updated 21 June 2025

As the UN turns 80, its crucial humanitarian aid work faces a clouded future

As the UN turns 80, its crucial humanitarian aid work faces a clouded future
  • Aside from the cuts and dangers faced by humanitarian workers, political conflict has at times overshadowed or impeded their work

KAKUMA: At a refugee camp in northern Kenya, Aujene Cimanimpaye waits as a hot lunch of lentils and sorghum is ladled out for her and her nine children — all born while she has received United Nations assistance since fleeing her violence-wracked home in Congo in 2007.
“We cannot go back home because people are still being killed,” the 41-year-old said at the Kakuma camp, where the UN World Food Program and UN refugee agency help support more than 300,000 refugees.
Her family moved from Nakivale Refugee Settlement in neighboring Uganda three years ago to Kenya, now home to more than a million refugees from conflict-hit east African countries.
A few kilometers (miles) away at the Kalobeyei Refugee Settlement, fellow Congolese refugee Bahati Musaba, a mother of five, said that since 2016, “UN agencies have supported my children’s education — we get food and water and even medicine,” as well as cash support from WFP to buy food and other basics.
This year, those cash transfers — and many other UN aid activities — have stopped, threatening to upend or jeopardize millions of lives.
As the UN marks its 80th anniversary this month, its humanitarian agencies are facing one of the greatest crises in their history: The biggest funder — the United States — under the Trump administration and other Western donors have slashed international aid spending. Some want to use the money to build up national defense.
Some UN agencies are increasingly pointing fingers at one another as they battle over a shrinking pool of funding, said a diplomat from a top donor country who spoke on condition of anonymity to comment freely about the funding crisis faced by some UN agencies.
Such pressures, humanitarian groups say, diminish the pivotal role of the UN and its partners in efforts to save millions of lives — by providing tents, food and water to people fleeing unrest in places like Myanmar, Sudan, Syria and Venezuela, or helping stamp out smallpox decades ago.
“It’s the most abrupt upheaval of humanitarian work in the UN in my 40 years as a humanitarian worker, by far,” said Jan Egeland, a former UN humanitarian aid chief who now heads the Norwegian Refugee Council. “And it will make the gap between exploding needs and contributions to aid work even bigger.”
‘Brutal’ cuts to humanitarian aid programs
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has asked the heads of UN agencies to find ways to cut 20 percent of their staffs, and his office in New York has floated sweeping ideas about reform that could vastly reshape the way the United Nations doles out aid.
Humanitarian workers often face dangers and go where many others don’t — to slums to collect data on emerging viruses or drought-stricken areas to deliver water.
The UN says 2024 was the deadliest year for humanitarian personnel on record, mainly due to the war in Gaza. In February, it suspended aid operations in the stronghold of Yemen’s Houthi rebels, who have detained dozens of UN and other aid workers.
Proponents say UN aid operations have helped millions around the world affected by poverty, illness, conflict, hunger and other troubles.
Critics insist many operations have become bloated, replete with bureaucratic perks and a lack of accountability, and are too distant from in-the-field needs. They say postcolonial Western donations have fostered dependency and corruption, which stifles the ability of countries to develop on their own, while often UN-backed aid programs that should be time-specific instead linger for many years with no end in sight.
In the case of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning WFP and the UN’s refugee and migration agencies, the US has represented at least 40 percent of their total budgets, and Trump administration cuts to roughly $60 billion in US foreign assistance have hit hard. Each UN agency has been cutting thousands of jobs and revising aid spending.
“It’s too brutal what has happened,” said Egeland, alluding to cuts that have jolted the global aid community. “However, it has forced us to make priorities ... what I hope is that we will be able to shift more of our resources to the front lines of humanity and have less people sitting in offices talking about the problem.”
With the UN Security Council’s divisions over wars in Ukraine and the Middle East hindering its ability to prevent or end conflict in recent years, humanitarian efforts to vaccinate children against polio or shelter and feed refugees have been a bright spot of UN activity. That’s dimming now.
Not just funding cuts cloud the future of UN humanitarian work
Aside from the cuts and dangers faced by humanitarian workers, political conflict has at times overshadowed or impeded their work.
UNRWA, the aid agency for Palestinian refugees, has delivered an array of services to millions — food, education, jobs and much more — in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan as well as in the West Bank and Gaza since its founding in 1948.
Israel claims the agency’s schools fan antisemitic and anti-Israel sentiment, which the agency denies. Israel says Hamas siphons off UN aid in Gaza to profit from it, while UN officials insist most aid gets delivered directly to the needy.
“UNRWA is like one of the foundations of your home. If you remove it, everything falls apart,” said Issa Hajj Hassan, 38, after a checkup at a small clinic at the Mar Elias Palestinian refugee camp in Beirut.
UNRWA covers his diabetes and blood pressure medication, as well as his wife’s heart medicine. The United States, Israel’s top ally, has stopped contributing to UNRWA; it once provided a third of its funding. Earlier this year, Israel banned the aid group, which has strived to continue its work nonetheless.
Ibtisam Salem, a single mother of five in her 50s who shares a small one-room apartment in Beirut with relatives who sleep on the floor, said: “If it wasn’t for UNRWA we would die of starvation. ... They helped build my home, and they give me health care. My children went to their schools.”
Especially when it comes to food and hunger, needs worldwide are growing even as funding to address them shrinks.
“This year, we have estimated around 343 million acutely food insecure people,” said Carl Skau, WFP deputy executive director. “It’s a threefold increase if we compare four years ago. And this year, our funding is dropping 40 percent. So obviously that’s an equation that doesn’t come together easily.”
Billing itself as the world’s largest humanitarian organization, WFP has announced plans to cut about a quarter of its 22,000 staff.
The aid landscape is shifting
One question is how the United Nations remains relevant as an aid provider when global cooperation is on the outs, and national self-interest and self-defense are on the upswing.
The United Nations is not alone: Many of its aid partners are feeling the pinch. Groups like GAVI, which tries to ensure fair distribution of vaccines around the world, and the Global Fund, which spends billions each year to help battle HIV, tuberculosis and malaria, have been hit by Trump administration cuts to the US Agency for International Development.
Some private-sector, government-backed groups also are cropping up, including the divisive Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which has been providing some food to Palestinians. But violence has erupted as crowds try to reach the distribution sites.
No private-sector donor or well-heeled country — China and oil-rich Gulf states are often mentioned by aid groups — have filled the significant gaps from shrinking US and other Western spending.
The future of UN aid, experts say, will rest where it belongs — with the world body’s 193 member countries.
“We need to take that debate back into our countries, into our capitals, because it is there that you either empower the UN to act and succeed — or you paralyze it,” said Achim Steiner, administrator of the UN Development Program.


Netanyahu using Iran war to stay in power ‘forever’: former US president Clinton

Netanyahu using Iran war to stay in power ‘forever’: former US president Clinton
Updated 21 June 2025

Netanyahu using Iran war to stay in power ‘forever’: former US president Clinton

Netanyahu using Iran war to stay in power ‘forever’: former US president Clinton
  • Clinton said he called on President Trump to “defuse” the current conflict between Israel and Iran
  • He emphasized the importance of the US protecting its allies in the region

DUBAI: Former US president Bill Clinton said Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been wanting to fight Iran for a longtime because that way he can stay in the office forever.
“Netanyahu has long wanted to fight Iran because that way he can stay in office forever and ever. I mean, he’s been there most of the last 20 years,” the former president said during an appearance on “The Daily Show”.
Clinton said he called on US President Donald Trump to “defuse” the current conflict between Israel and Iran, and end the “outright constant killing of civilians.”
“But I think we should be trying to defuse it, and I hope President Trump will do that.”

The former president said he does not think either Netanyahu or Trump want to trigger a full-scale regional disaster. 
He also emphasized the importance of the US protecting its allies in the region, while simultaneously advocating for restraint.
“We have to convince our friends in the Middle East that we’ll stand with them and try to protect them,” he stated.
“But choosing undeclared wars in which the primary victims are civilians, who are not politically involved, one way or the other, who just want to live decent lives, is not a very good solution.”
The US by far has stayed out of direct action in the conflict between Iran and Israel. But it has helped Israel shoot down missiles from Tehran and has supplied it with military equipment.


Putin says Russia has told Israel there’s no evidence Iran wants nuclear weapons, Sky News Arabia reports

Putin says Russia has told Israel there’s no evidence Iran wants nuclear weapons, Sky News Arabia reports
Updated 21 June 2025

Putin says Russia has told Israel there’s no evidence Iran wants nuclear weapons, Sky News Arabia reports

Putin says Russia has told Israel there’s no evidence Iran wants nuclear weapons, Sky News Arabia reports
  • Putin: Russia is ready to support Iran in developing a peaceful nuclear program, and has the right to do so

MOSCOW: Russia has repeatedly told Israel that there is no evidence Iran is aiming to get nuclear weapons, Sky News Arabia on Saturday quoted Russian President Vladimir Putin as saying in an interview.

“Russia, as well as the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), has never had any evidence that Iran is preparing to obtain nuclear weapons, as we have repeatedly put the Israeli leadership on notice,” Sky News Arabia quoted Putin as saying.

Russia is ready to support Iran in developing a peaceful nuclear program, Putin was quoted as saying, adding that Iran has the right to do so.

Speaking at an economic forum in St. Petersburg on Friday, Putin said Russia was sharing its ideas on how to stop the bloodshed in the Iran-Israel conflict with both sides.

He did not give details of those ideas.