Friday’s Diplomatic Meltdown: What Happened After the Press Left the Oval Office
U.S. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz appeared on Fox & Friends Sunday morning to discuss what transpired in the Oval Office following Friday’s heated exchange between President Donald Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Perhaps the most interesting takeaway from the segment was Waltz’s observation that while Zelensky’s ambassador and adviser “were practically in tears,” he remained “argumentative.”
Co-host Charlie Hurt asked Waltz to describe the scene after the press was dismissed. Waltz explained that he, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and other Trump administration officials convened a meeting and unanimously concluded that there was no viable path forward following the tense exchange. They advised Trump that Zelensky should be asked to leave. Trump agreed, tasking Waltz and Rubio with delivering the message to Zelensky and his team.
Waltz firmly rejected reports suggesting the confrontation had been a preplanned “ambush” by Trump and Vance, calling such claims “absolutely and categorically false.”
Waltz told Hurt they “had [prepared] a beautiful setting in the East Room ready for both leaders to sign that would have bound the United States and Ukraine together economically for a generation for critical minerals that we need, economic investment that they need.”
Waltz referred to commitments recently made by leaders of the UK and France to “put boots on the ground” and NATO’s secretary general, whom Trump “had just spoken to about broader security guarantees.” So this really could have been – and should have been – a positive moment for Ukraine. And then we go to further negotiating with the Russians, bring this war to an end, move the world forward and stop the death and destruction.”
Waltz continued: “What became clear and I think what has the president so frustrated and, frankly, angry, is that it’s not clear that Zelensky truly wants to stop the fighting. And he came in, even though he was warned not to, determined to litigate all of that in front of the entire world.
“And the vice president said enough is enough. The president said enough is enough. And I gotta tell you, this was the wrong approach, wrong time in history, and definitely the wrong president to try to do this kind of a thing. This was not Joe Biden. This was Donald J. Trump. And I think the entire world saw that, crystal clear.”
Hurt asked how Zelensky reacted after the press left. “Was he surprised?”
Waltz said Zelensky was not surprised, but his team was. “His ambassador and adviser were practically in tears, wanting this to move forward. But Zelensky was still argumentative. Finally, I said, ‘Look Mr. President, time is not on your side here, … on the battlefield, … and in terms of the world situation. And most importantly, USAID and the taxpayers’ tolerance is not unlimited.”
Waltz is certain Zelensky “is used to hearing ‘as long as it takes,’ ‘as much as it takes,’ ‘blank check,’ and ‘the United States really doesn’t have much of a say. You can determine the outcome.’ … He has not gotten the memo that there is a new sheriff in town. This is a new president and we are determined to take a new approach towards peace.”
In the end, Waltz believes that Zelensky “did his country a true disservice. … If you disagree with how we’re gonna end the war – fine. But you do that behind closed doors, not the way this was done. It was wholly unacceptable.”
There may have been a brief window early in the war when Ukraine could have won. Russian President Vladimir Putin had not anticipated the magnitude of support Ukraine would receive from the international community. Had former President Joe Biden not slow walked essential military equipment from the start, the Ukrainian army, which had tremendous momentum, had a fighting chance.
But the conflict that Putin thought would take two weeks now grinds into its fourth year. It’s turned into a war of attrition. Without intervention, it could continue for years to come.
Fox News reported that during a meeting with Zelensky and European Union leaders on Sunday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer presented a framework for a peace deal, although he admits “it relies heavily on assumed U.S. support.”
According to Fox, Zelensky remains largely unapologetic [about Friday’s explosive Oval Office meeting], saying after Sunday’s meetings in Europe that the ‘best security guarantees are a strong Ukrainian army.'”
He added, “The failure of Ukraine would not just mean Putin’s success, it would be a failure for Europe, it would be a failure for the U.S.”
Zelensky must understand that Trump sees the situation quite a bit differently. Trump has taken the possibility of a U.S. security guarantee off the table and he’s not going to change his mind.
But Ukraine’s national security would plainly benefit from the presence of U.S. mining companies inside their country. Russia would think twice about an attack on Ukraine if U.S. business interests were involved.
In a Sunday appearance on Fox, Rubio expressed optimism that the U.S. and Ukraine can mend ties following the tense White House meeting. We’ll wait and see.
Elizabeth writes commentary for The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a member of the Editorial Board at The Sixteenth Council, a London think tank. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY