AP

By Daniel Béland, Juliet Johnson, and Maria Popova   

March 1, 2025

In a stunning scene at the White House on Friday, US President Donald J. Trump and Vice-President J. D. Vance verbally attacked Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky in an Oval Office media “pool spray”, accusing him of “disrespect” and being ungrateful for US assistance.

Zelensky had, correctly, questioned the US administration’s insistence that Russian president Vladimir Putin could be trusted to uphold his end of a ceasefire in the absence of security guarantees for Ukraine. The two sides had been expected to sign a deal that day giving the US mineral concessions in Ukraine. Instead, the irate Trump team reportedly insisted Zelensky leave the White House.

Although Trump insists that Putin wants peace and Zelensky is being obstructionist, Russia could end the war today by withdrawing from its sovereign neighbour’s territory and returning to internationally recognized borders. However, Putin’s so-called “peace” terms require Ukraine’s capitulation to Russian demands. Putin seems to be counting on the Trump administration to do his dirty work for him by browbeating Ukraine into conceding via coercion what Russia has so far been unable to win for itself on the battlefield.

Ample evidence shows that Putin seeks Ukraine’s complete surrender. During the March 2022 Istanbul negotiations, Russia sought to reduce the Ukrainian army to barely 100,000 troops, an insignificant number for a country of Ukraine’s size. Russia further demanded the removal of President Zelensky and his government, an end to Ukraine’s NATO aspirations, and a ban on any country providing future security assistance to Ukraine without Russia’s consent. Putin characterized Ukraine’s refusal of these clearly unacceptable terms as Ukraine scuppering a “peace deal.” Russia maintains these maximalist demands today.

As a starting point for negotiations, Russia wants Ukraine not only to recognize its current territorial losses but to voluntarily incur additional ones by withdrawing from parts of Eastern and Southern Ukraine that it still holds and handing that territory over to Russia. Russian diplomats also continue to reject any proposals for third-party peacekeeping troops or security guarantees to Ukraine.

While Ukraine is the immediate target of Russia’s imperialist expansion, if Russia were to achieve its goals now — especially with American collusion — it would be unlikely to stop at Ukraine. Back-channel diplomacy has revealed Putin’s ambition to turn as many European countries as feasible into vassal states along the lines of Belarus, formally independent but de facto under Russia’s political control. Think also of Russia’s persistent threats to Poland and the Baltic states, its demand to roll back NATO to its pre-1997 borders, and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s suggestion that US troops may withdraw from Europe as part of a deal with Russia. Russian interference in European democracies through the sponsorship of extremist parties, disinformation, industrial and shipping sabotage, and potentially even terrorist acts further demonstrates its resolve to destabilize Europe and the democratic, liberal order that it represents.

The Trump administration’s dismissal of Ukraine’s national sovereignty parallels President Trump’s stated contempt for the sovereignty of other traditional US allies, including Canada.

If the budding Russo-American alliance under Trump manages to compel Ukraine to agree to a disadvantageous and unstable ceasefire, not only would Russia be significantly emboldened, the entire world order would be upended by the definitive demise of the territorial integrity norm. More erstwhile American allies could find themselves bullied into disadvantageous deals and concessions by an aggressive and powerful Russo-American partnership.

The Trump administration’s dismissal of Ukraine’s national sovereignty parallels President Trump’s stated contempt for the sovereignty of other traditional US allies, including Canada. The US president has openly mused about making Canada the 51st US state, insulted our Prime Minister by repeatedly referring to him as “Governor” Trudeau, stated that Canada is not a viable country, and claimed that its border with the United States is artificial. This language echoes the rhetoric that the Putin regime has long used to justify its aggression against Ukraine.

What happened on Friday in the Oval Office is thus not only deeply meaningful for Ukraine and Europe, but should also set off loud alarm bells here in Canada. It makes clearer than ever before that the Trump administration serves the agenda of Putin’s Russia. This is bad news for Canada, especially with regard to our sovereignty and natural resources in the Arctic, as Russia and the United States might collaborate to increase their presence in the region to our detriment.

More generally, Friday’s public attack on Zelensky illustrated in a most dramatic fashion the intemperate modus operandi of the Trump administration. Trump and Vance bullied the elected leader of a sovereign state who has spent three years courageously resisting an invasion of his country. It is not hard to imagine the Trump administration attempting to inflict this kind of public shaming on a Canadian prime minister, regardless of party.

Friday’s bullying of Zelensky reflects the preferred negotiation tactics of the current White House, even if threats against U.S. allies like Canada are for the time being uttered behind closed doors rather than in public. For example, the Wall Street Journal recently revealed that, during recent discussion with top Mexican military officials, Hegseth claimed “that if Mexico didn’t deal with the collusion between the country’s government and drug cartels, the U.S. military was prepared to take unilateral action.” If the Trump administration can threaten military intervention against a close trading partner like Mexico, it is easy to imagine similar threats being directed at Canada.

In short, what happened to President Zelensky on Friday in the White House was not a shocking aberration or one-off interaction, but part of a broader pattern of contemptuous aggression by President Trump and his administration that constitutes a direct threat to Canada and all other traditional allies of the United States. Instead of exposing weakness by trying to appease Trump as UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer did in the Oval Office the day before Zelensky’s visit, we must foster a strong international coalition that will stand up to the White House bullies and reshape our economic and national security in the context of the emerging and existentially threatening Russo-American alliance.

Daniel Béland is James McGill Professor of Political Science at McGill University and Director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada. He has published several books and many academic papers on politics and public policy in both Canada and the United States.

Juliet Johnson is Professor of Political Science at McGill University and former president of the international Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies (ASEEES).

Maria Popova is Associate Professor of Political Science at McGill University and Co-Director of the Jean Monnet Centre Montreal. With Oxana Shevel, she recently published a book titled Russia and Ukraine: Entangled Histories, Diverging States.