Trump spoke for the first time about Ukraine's return to 1991 borders: expert commented on the change in US president's rhetoric
Kyiv • UNN
After a trip to Great Britain and a meeting with Zelensky, Trump's rhetoric regarding Ukraine softened, and he allowed the return of all Ukrainian lands. Political scientist Oleh Lisnyi explained that this is a pleasant surprise, but the US is not rushing to take effective steps, as it does not have a clear plan.
After a trip to Great Britain and a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the UN, US President Donald Trump's tone regarding Ukraine became unexpectedly soft; he even allowed the country to return all Ukrainian territories. This came as a pleasant surprise for Ukrainians, but the US president is not in a hurry with effective steps, as he does not have a consistent and clear plan to end the war between Ukraine and Russia. Political scientist Oleh Lisnyi told UNN about this.
If we take the Ukrainian case, this is a pleasant surprise, because before, even a few hours earlier, the statements of Rubio himself were somewhat alarming to me personally. For example, about the fact that Ukraine will be forced to sign an agreement that there will be no sanctions. He explained why it is not profitable for the United States at the current stage to impose sanctions against Russia. And this created an unpleasant flair beforehand.
The political scientist explained that this gave certain reasons to be wary of how Zelenskyy's conversation with Trump would go. However, "judging by the statements of both presidents, and, first of all, Zelenskyy, this dialogue was more or less constructive and even positive," the expert says. At least regarding the part that was made public, since Zelenskyy repeatedly emphasized that there are certain developments that he will not talk about.
"That is, now it is not the time to talk about it, but he did not say that these guarantees (of security - ed.) will not be provided. It is also very important, as I understood from Trump's post and statements, that the United States will supply us with weapons in one form or another through NATO countries. Also, among the positive aspects that were not there before, is that Trump assessed the situation on the battlefield somewhere as it is in reality," the political scientist emphasized.
At the same time, he reminded that until recently there were many disagreements on this matter. Probably because Trump's team "drew this information more from some Russian sources, or directly from communication with Putin," Lisnyi pointed out.
"Here we see that the American team worked well and showed reliable information. I think that the United States has a colossal toolkit for obtaining such information. And it's strange that earlier these materials, most likely, did not get to Trump's desk, and now they have," the expert explains the probable reason for the change in Trump's rhetoric.
British influence
I also make a cautious assumption that such a tone, which I somewhat predicted, is one of the results of Trump's visit to Britain. As far as I understand and as history shows, Britain has a very well-developed "work in the shadows," what happens behind the scenes. And I think that the British were still able to work with Trump's perception in terms of "who is bad, who is good," who needs to be pressured, and who doesn't.
The political scientist explained that he came to this conclusion because shortly before this trip, the American leader made categorical statements that Ukraine "would have to" sign an agreement, which sounded "dangerous for us," Lisnyi emphasized.
Now his rhetoric has fundamentally changed. The political scientist also attributes this to the good preparation of the Ukrainian delegation, in particular Zelenskyy, who, "based on previous experience, found the form of communication that allows continuing the dialogue with Trump and not entering a negative plane."
"We haven't heard such a 'gentle Trump,' or one positively disposed towards Ukraine, for a very long time. And here there is only an interesting point, why there is a dissonance between the statements of the same Rubio beforehand, right? And Trump during the conversation. Here there is such a discrepancy. Perhaps this is some kind of move. A few hours before Trump's speech, Rubio said that he would torpedo the UN, saying that it is an ineffective body, right? This happened. But those statements concerning Ukraine, they did not happen," the political scientist emphasized, noting that this moment seemed very strange to him.
Lisnyi suggested that "something happened" directly on the sidelines of the UN, which changed the possible scenario of communication, and did not rule out that it could have concerned a personal conversation between the presidents.
"This evolution in statements is very positive, which has been observed for the last week, maybe a little more. From the moment Trump recognized Putin as an aggressor and Russia as an aggressor, and to this day, it is growing. And here the only thing is that the effective component lags behind the verbal one," the expert emphasized.
He explained that Trump's post on Truth Social about Ukraine's ability to regain all its territories requires a certain set of coordinated actions in the form of sanctions and political pressure from partners, and weapons in particular.
"What we can implement on the battlefield today is the PURL program, under which we are supplied with weapons. That's what there is. The sanctions element of the United States is absent. The sanctions element of the US plus Europe is absent. Political pressure on Putin is also absent, although we can consider these statements as an element of this pressure," the expert emphasized.
Trump for the first time admitted that territories could be returned to the 1991 borders, and this confused at least the expert community. Facebook is simply ablaze in the good sense of the word. But, again, against the background of this slight euphoria, realism appears. Will all the nomenclature of weapons be under this statement? And the support that was not there until yesterday. Does Trump have the determination to go further than those words? Not sure. Was it a technological step, as an element of pressure on Putin? Most likely. Therefore, this is an act of support for Ukraine. Moral. And pressure on Russia is also moral.
Regarding deadlines for Putin
Regarding why Trump once again outlined a one-month period after which he would say "how he feels about Putin," the expert explained that this is also a kind of technology that Trump invented for himself. In particular, in order to give himself and his team time. After all, according to Lisnyi, the United States does not have a clear, consistent, and comprehensive strategy or plan for ending the war in Ukraine.
"These deadlines are an element of postponement in the plane of imposed expectation. There is no longer this emotional connection between the date and its expectations. There is a calculation. This is already, let's say, the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, which will be after it, you understand. The meaning... I would say that there is no real plan of what to do with Putin," the expert says.
He added that Trump has repeatedly postponed the deadlines for his statements precisely for this reason.
"I think I won't be very wrong if I say that there is no plan. And because of this, and these postponements of all these dates, the advocacy of Putin, well, let's be realistic, happens very often: explanations of Putin's actions not by Putin, but by Europeans, Americans. They did it because of this, because it's a big country, that is, Putin doesn't even have to explain why he does it," the expert explained.
He added that for this reason, in particular, the "agenda is mostly dictated by the Russian Federation. And now it is becoming impudent and even starting to attack where it should not attack," referring to the crossing of Polish, Romanian, and Estonian airspace.
NATO will not shoot down Russian planes: Rubio outlines conditions23.09.25, 21:48 • 23741 view
"This is because Putin understands that in the short term, nothing threatens him except the Ukrainian army," the political scientist noted.
He also noted that "flashes of activity" are still present in Trump, but they are not consistent, systemic. In other words, if some strategy works - good, if it doesn't work - it is not refined, but rather postponed.
Security guarantees
As for the plan for security guarantees, the expert suggested that the process of its compilation is most likely underway, but far from completion.
"From what I heard, this is again a subjective assessment from Zelenskyy's interview, the process exists, I will say very correctly, but it is definitely not at the final stage. It is somewhere very, very, very, if we take the case of the United States, very at the beginning. But not hopeless," the political scientist concluded.
Addition
Earlier, UNN wrote that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy noted US President Donald Trump's positive rhetoric regarding the return of all Ukrainian territories and emphasized that both countries seek to end the war as soon as possible.