The White House press conference that shook the world was three weeks ago, and I’ve had a turbulent journey of thoughts on it since. I’ve held disgust for the leaders of my country, but later came to understand at least some of their views. What follows is a chronicle of this journey, from analysis of the meeting itself, and the situation with Ukraine in general. With an acknowledgement of my limited perspective, and hoping for malice toward none, I’ll share the waves of opinions I’ve had on what was suppose to be a simple photo-op between presidents.

While I would hope for grace from any reader, I hope in particular that fans of Donald Trump will bear with me. The first paragraphs show the raw emotion I felt from first watching the press conference. The anger would have made for a scathing online post, likely to change the minds of no one, nor giving me peace on the matter. This isn’t to say I’ve done a 180 turn on my views, but the following days presented to me the best (and worst) of arguments from conservatives. From this, I’ve refined my opinions while in the end just hoping that our leaders will work things out for the world.

Friday, the Day of the Press Conference, around 3:00PM:

I saw the ten-minute clip of President Trump and Vice President Vance attacking President Zelensky, and I was in a bad mood the rest of the day. I just watched my country’s leaders berate a persecuted president who’s faced three years of invasion and war crimes from Russia. In particular, I was infuriated by Trump’s criticism of Zelensky for having great hatred for President Putin. As if there was no good reason for it. As if Ukraine had equal responsibility for the war. As if the murder and sadistic treatment of the his people shouldn’t fill Zelensky with rage. At best, the moment was a horrid lack of empathy for a suffering people, and at worst, it renewed suspicions that Trump is pro-Putin, and always has been. With all of this spinning in my mind, I drove home for the weekend with contempt for the leadership of the United States.

Keeping up with the story the next day, I listened to conservative media mock Zelensky. Some arguments were ad hominem. “He should have worn a suit!”* “He should go back to doing bad TV!” (As if the same thing couldn’t be said of the U.S. President.). But most of all, they said Zelensky was stupid and despicable for having a lack of gratitude for America. Vance, seeming to want a seat at the big-boy table of global politics, interjected himself in the meeting with the accusation, and his political base was following suit. The complete lack of respect and appreciation for Zelensky and his accomplishments was revolting to me. In short, conservatives came off as a—holes, deepening my bad mood and making my family dinner less enjoyable.**

By Sunday afternoon, I had read social media posts from people making similar pro-Trump arguments, and I tried to restrain myself from judgements. They’re not bad people, I told myself. Opinions don’t speak to who we are. They’re not pro-Russia. They want what’s best for others… even if they’re being inconsiderate of Ukraine. Political events bring us to spit out our inner monologues online, and it wasn’t fun to read certain posts on the event.*** Still, I tried to resolve to not hate people I’ve known in life to be decent. I don’t want to hate them, just as I didn’t want to hate anti-vaccine people through Covid, despite the media’s encouragement to do so. With this, I breathed in, breathed out, and I felt a little better to start the week.

The Following Week of Conservative Views:

I now listened to the Trump administration by watching a CNN interview with Marco Rubio, the U.S. Secretary of State. He explained the need to not agitate Russia – to not deter them from coming to negotiations. According to him, no matter what our feelings of Russia, it was important to restrain our criticisms, only for Zelensky to have publicly pushed the U.S. to condemn them. Trump himself made a similar point at the press conference – that if he says bad things about Putin, then where will that get us in stopping the war? As much as we want to condemn Russia, showing the (valid) righteousness of our side on all things Ukraine, maybe it’s reasonable for our government to not do this. It’s frustrating, but it made some sense.

Rubio also noted that the unsigned mineral deal would in itself have become a security guarantee for Ukraine, which is what Zelensky insisted on throughout the meeting (More on this later.). A similar thought had already crossed my mind: The fact that if the U.S. has an economic investment in Ukraine, then their concerns become our concerns. Therefore, Russia would face a significant deterrent in attacking again, and the world might enjoy a stable peace. I guess that makes sense, I thought. Still, I had heard Trump praise dictators too many times in the past to take a lot of comfort from the Secretary of State. By the end of the interview though, I wished Rubio the best of luck. For all of our sakes, and no matter who his boss might be.

Later, I listened to someone else in the administration talk about the risk of the U.S. publicly siding with Ukraine (I can’t remember who he was. Some older guy in a suit.). If the U.S. announced, “We now guarantee the sovereignty of Ukraine”, then the U.S. would seem to be promising all resources to fulfill that pledge. If Russia is fighting Ukraine in that moment, including in territory Ukraine has come to occupy, then couldn’t Russia consider it an act of war? When Trump attacked Zelensky at the conference for risking World War III, the argument now doesn’t seem so absurd, and Trump’s aggression seems a little more understandable. Take away every shady thing we think we know about Donald Trump, and maybe we can just see a guy who wants to stop a catastrophic world event. It’s a little harder for me now to condemn him, no matter what his manners or levels of empathy.

At some point later in the week, I listened to Ben Shapiro dissect the press conference, with an emphasis on the first 40 minutes. These were the minutes I hadn’t listened to yet. The minutes that many in media ignored since they didn’t have the fireworks of the later ten- minute exchange. Zelensky several times insisted on the need for security guarantees. Shapiro, while saying it’s a reasonable concern for Ukraine, describes Zelensky as adversarial with this throughout. While I wouldn’t put it so harshly, I can see how the public insistence could be counter-productive to negotiations. It’s reasonable for Ukraine to want guarantees, with the ambitions of Putin and years of Russian aggression. But presidents would normally demand such things behind closed doors, and after 40 minutes of public insistence in broken English, Trump felt the need to push back. Again, the behaviors of the U.S. president now felt a little more reasonable.

With all of this, I tried to have some respect for the aims of the Trump administration, and my possible short-sightedness on how to stop global wars. I still think their inconsiderations of Ukraine were repulsive, but I will hope for their success in solving it all. After the meeting, Trump was emphatic that he wants peace, and it seems odd to argue against that.

My Personal Opinions on the Whole Thing, Three Weeks Later:

A few final thoughts:

1. I still get angry when hearing complaints of the U.S. spending billions to help Ukraine. With a war-torn nation facing constant bombings and atrocities by foreign armies, it’s hard to care much about the billions we’ve spent to help Ukraine (I’m not sure where President Trump gets the $350 billion number, but the amount from news coverage makes it appear around $120.). The U.S. has defended a democracy while helping to bleed the resources of a dictatorial nation for three years. These things are a reward in itself for America, just as it had been through decades of the Cold War. With the U.S. having $37 trillion of rising national debt, our support for Ukraine isn’t breaking the bank. We’ll be fine. Ukraine is not.

2. On the mineral treaty left unsigned by Zelensky, I have mixed feelings. America strikes me as a mafia leader in the deal, extorting Ukraine for wealth in exchange for protection. I have scenes from Goodfellas in mind as I imagine our extractions of minerals from a nation that will need all the resources it can get to rebuild. On the other hand, as someone who is a fiscal hawk who laments of America’s massive debts, it’s appealing to have a means of recovering the money. While the amount spent isn’t $37 trillion, it’s not nothing either. Also, as noted, the agreement would give the U.S. an economic interest in Ukraine, making an informal guarantee by the U.S. to protect them. It’s hard for me to hate the idea, though it’s also hard to love it.

3. Was Zelensky at fault for the fiasco of the press conference? I’ll resolve now that three things could be true at once: 

     a. Ukraine is on the right side of history.

     b. Trump and Vance were inconsiderate jerks to Zelensky.

     c. Zelensky was misguided.

If Zelensky’s goal was to shore up financial support from Europe by making America appear unreliable, then he succeeded as he later toured the E.U. to raise more billions. But if he wanted to show a righteous aggression for his cause, then it wasn’t necessary to do it at an event that was nothing more than a forgettable photo-op. He could have known that Trump and Vance were not the friendliest allies, and would bite back if pushed. While I’m not a foreign policy expert, maybe Zelensky’s persistence was an unforced error.

—

I’ve avoided news the past couple weeks, as I do when markets crash, raising worries on things I can’t control. But I’ve seen headlines on the U.S. and Ukraine discussing a ceasefire with Russia. “The ball is in their court,” Marco Rubio said, and so it sounds like Zelensky and Trump made some level of peace after the conference. So maybe the spectacle, as dramatic as it appeared, will become inconsequential. Or maybe the argument will affect foreign affairs for years to come. Who knows for sure. But in the end, most of us can do nothing about it but hope the world doesn’t spin further in chaos. Maybe peace will be created, whether by the imperfect leaders of the world, or God’s good grace.

*I can understand how some might not accept this as an ad hominem argument. One can say that if Zelensky truly respected his relationship to America, then he would accept the customs of formal dress and throw on a coat and tie. Still, the topic of his attire was outside the events of his country, and it seemed like those who would mock Zelensky were just looking to throw anything they could at him. So it’s hard for me to take it as a relevant point to the conversation.

**Though who am I kidding? The meal was Chick-Fil-A, and it was great as always.

***This is another reminder to me that while I might pay attention to social media, I wish social media didn’t exist. And it’s interesting that many from Gen Z would back me up on this: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/17/opinion/social-media-smartphones-harm-regret.html