What we witnessed in the Oval Office should embarrass every American. In a single month, Trump and his administration have transformed America into a country we barely recognize. Once held in high regard across the globe for its commitment to the foundational principles of liberty and justice for all, the United States has long been a beacon of hope and strength. With the world’s most powerful military, largest economy, and strongest alliances, it took decades to build the US into a superpower on the world stage. Yet, it took only 30 days for Trump to undermine that legacy.
Republicans have always been associated with an obsession for masculinity. Their definition relies heavily on dominance, aggression, competitiveness, strength, confidence, and an unshakable belief that they are always right. The traits encapsulated in the stereotypical “alpha male”. It’s baffling, then, that they’ve chosen Donald J. Trump, arguably the weakest, most pathetic, and ignorant man, to represent their party. It’s hard to imagine anyone further from their vision of strength than Trump, and he underscored this last week in the Oval Office.
Signing Party
The Oval Office event was a prequel to the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, signing a deal with US President, Trump. Both presidents, the US Vice President, and the US Secretary of State were present, along with reporters hand-picked by Trump.
During the event, from Zelenskyy’s comments, it was obvious there were still some unsettled details in the deal, and really, this event was a negotiation for those final details. Having the press there was not standard and contributed to a very uncomfortable vibe.
Lasting about 49 minutes, the beginning went as well as expected. For the most part, Trump was as Trumpy as ever: touting fabricated numbers, boasting about demonstrably false achievements, rambling about irrelevant topics, and praising himself for how perfect his deal is. Taking obvious fielded questions, with the exception of a few, provided Trump the opportunity to brag as he always does. Throughout the event, Trump was extremely rude, making inconsiderate comments, interrupting Zelenskyy, and allowing the press to ask inappropriate questions of Zelenskyy. Meanwhile, Zelenskyy sat quietly, often making facial expressions that revealed his dismay but respectfully enduring the abuse, only speaking up to correct the record or defend his country.
The event took a sharp turn for the worse at nearly 35 minutes in when a reporter’s question seemed to trigger a realization in Trump. Shortly after, the meeting was abruptly ended, with Zelenskyy being escorted out of the White House without signing the deal.
Their Accusations are Always Admissions
You can set a clock to the fact that when Trump and his minions accuse someone of something, that something is the thing they are doing. So when you hear them say that Zelenskyy was disrespectful and rude, you know damn well it was Trump who was disrespectful and rude.
When trying to explain the deal that was to be signed, Trump, in the most untactful manner, couldn’t hide his true motive. He couldn’t stop talking about Ukraine as if there were not people being mercilessly killed by a tyrant who invaded a land that was not his. Trump repeatedly spoke about how much the US was going to benefit from the deal, never acknowledging the sacrifice Ukraine would be making.
Lack of Compassion, Understanding, Empathy, and Humanity
The optics of the situation are bad enough: a powerful nation leveraging its aid to secure a disproportionately advantageous economic agreement, but the proposed agreement is even worse, standing in stark contrast to America's professed values. Instead of promoting democracy, the US appears willing to undermine Ukraine's legislative processes. Instead of advocating for fair trade, the deal looks like exploitation. And instead of supporting sovereignty, the US seemed to be pressuring a vulnerable ally into a compromising position.
Ukraine has been fighting this war for three years. Very much the underdog, they have given Putin a serious run for his money. In all reality, Ukraine is winning this war for the simple fact that it is still ongoing. Ukraine has a really good chance of officially winning, but they need just a little more help. Zelenskyy has fought hard and long, his military is exhausted, and he is exhausted. Now, here Trump comes with a deal that is unreasonable and unfair- so much so that no one would consider it under any other circumstance- but Zelenskyy has not fought this long just to throw everything away now. So, of course, he is willing to sign a deal. Trump has basically said, Sign the deal or kiss our help goodbye. SO what choice does Zelenskyy have?
The Art Of The Deal
When a country is the wealthiest in the world and a self-proclaimed defender of justice, it’s hard not to question a deal that contradicts everything it claims to stand for. During the event, t/Trump was fixated on what he deemed the most critical aspect of the agreement: “raw earth.” He spoke at length about how these resources would make America greater than ever before. Yet, as Trump reduced Ukraine to a mere commodity - a country suffering under the weight of a vicious dictator who had invaded its land, killing and destroying everything in his path - Zelenskyy sat quietly, looking down at the floor with occasional flashes of pain crossing his face..
Zelenskyy spoke only a few times, and even then, he remained respectful and apologetic for interrupting. Early in the event, a reporter asked Trump about the provisions for Ukraine’s security- specifically, how the US planned to ensure that Putin would abide by any peace agreement or what measures would be taken to protect Ukraine from Russia if necessary. Trump snapped at the reporter:
“I don't want to talk about security yet because I want to get the deal done. You know, you fall into the same trap like everybody else a million times. I’ve said it over and over: I want to get the deal done. Security is so easy that it’s about 2% of the problem. I'm not worried about security. I'm worried about getting the deal done. The security is the easy part; security is very nice. Everybody stops shooting. And now, will Europe put people there? I know France is going to. I know the UK is going to. I know other countries are going to, and they happen to be right next door. We haven't committed, but we have security in a different form. We'll have workers there, digging, digging, digging. Taking the raw earth so that we can create a lot of great products in this country. I don't think you're going to need much security. I think, once this deal gets done, it's over. Russia is not going to want to go back.”
Then he moved on to another question.
Devil in the Details
On its surface, the proposed agreement offers Ukraine much-needed financial aid in exchange for a share of its “raw earth,” including rare earth elements, oil, and natural gas. However, the devil is in the details. The deal stipulates that Ukraine will hand over control of its mineral resources, allowing US corporations to exploit them for reindustrialization. In addition, all revenue from the sales of their minerals will be placed in a joint account that the US will control half of. This comes at a staggering cost to Ukraine of nearly double its GDP. If signed, the US would be entitled to about $7.5 trillion, between the value of “raw earth” for its use and half of Ukraine's “raw earth” revenue.
This agreement hints at overriding existing Ukrainian trade agreements, potentially jeopardizing the nation’s sovereignty over its own resources. This aggressive approach seems very much like economic colonization. Despite Trump’s insistence that the deal is a partnership, it feels more like the exploitation of a war-torn nation desperate for assistance.
Even worse, the agreement includes no provisions for protecting Ukraine. It only outlines what Ukraine must give up in exchange for Trump’s promise to negotiate a peace agreement with Russia. There is no guarantee that Putin will honor any agreement, and the US offers no protection if Russia decides to renege. Trump continues to defend the deal as a means of recouping financial aid given to Ukraine, but his arguments are riddled with lies and half-truths.
Correcting Lies and Misleading Statements
It is difficult to keep up with the lies and misleading information Trump provided during this Oval Office event. Below are corrections to the most egregious falsehoods presented:
Lie: Trump claims that the US has given over $350 billion in foreign aid to Ukraine.
Truth: The US has committed $128 billion to Ukraine. A significant portion of this amount went toward funding US government actions associated with the war, such as replenishing weapons and ammunition already stocked in US armories. These items were outdated, and transferring them to Ukraine allowed the US to modernize its arsenal. This not only updated our military supply but also created jobs and stimulated the economy, as the funds were used to purchase replacements from US manufacturers.
Lie: Trump claims that financial aid has been given to Ukraine, and no one knows what it was spent on.
Truth: Ukraine has one of the most robust systems in the world and has provided receipts for every expense.
The actual breakdown of US AId to Ukraine:
Direct funding: $31 billion was provided through World Bank accounts managed by USAID. This includes payment for administration and overhead. Funds are used to reimburse verified expenses, such as pensions and salaries for teachers and healthcare workers. Ukraine maintains detailed documentation of every disbursement.
Loans: $156 million was allocated for the purchase of 40 diesel Webtec locomotives. This loan, which will be repaid in full, also supported 800 new jobs in Western Pennsylvania.
Collateral: $25 billion (the value of ‘at-risk’ collateral). The US used $1.6 billion of its own funds and $23.4 billion of frozen Russian assets to secure loans for the recovery of Ukraine and Moldova.
Treasury Accounts Grants: $12.1 billion was procured in the US budget for weapons systems, munitions, maintenance, and services needed by the Ukrainian military. Note: Not all items have been delivered, so the exact amount of aid actually used is unclear. This is essentially a subsidy payment to the US defense industry; Ukraine pays market price for these weapons despite restrictions. The estimated value is only $5.5 billion.
Direct equipment transfers: $31 billion through the Presidential Drawdown Authority, which has been used 55 times since the war started. This is based on an approximate value of equipment and munitions already in existing US stockpiles, calculated using DOD accounting and replacement values rather than actual market value. Most of the equipment sent to Ukraine was no longer in active use by the US military or was earmarked for recycling.
Indirect equipment transfers: $20 billion was invested in Poland’s defense industry, and only about $340 million specifically accounts for capabilities that Poland gave to Ukraine. Since Poland is a NATO member, these investments are not considered aid for Ukraine.
Misleading Statement: Trump claims this “raw earth” deal is necessary to ensure the US is treated fairly and repaid for its help.
Truth: The only party treated unfairly in this deal is Ukraine. Trump’s “raw earth” agreement gives the US access to half of Ukraine’s revenue from its natural resources, with no cap or end date. Revenue from the sales of resources as well as resources gathered for the US to use far exceeds any amount of aid the US has provided to Ukraine, at the tune of about $7.5 trillion
The US is not treating other countries fairly, as it stands to make a substantial profit from upholding the Budapest Agreement, which was designed to protect Ukraine from being overtaken by the US, Russia, or the UK.
Lie: Trump claims Ukraine has to repay all aid from other countries but not aid from the US.
Truth: Most aid provided by other countries has been gifted to Ukraine. Some aid is in the form of loans, but the US also provided a $20 billion loan that Ukraine must repay with interest.
Lie: Trump claims the US has contributed more than any other country to help Ukraine continue the war.
Truth: Europe has provided more aid to Ukraine than the US. European countries have contributed approximately $143.5 billion, with an additional $125 billion set to be allocated soon. While the US and Europe are the largest contributors in absolute terms, the US ranks 17th when aid is measured as a percentage of GDP. The US has contributed only 0.5% of its GDP, while countries like Estonia have contributed over 2% of their GDP. To put it in perspective, $1,000 is pocket change to a billionaire but a significant amount to an average working-class individual. Similarly, the US contribution pales in comparison to Countries like Estonia, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Poland, all contributing a much higher percentage of their GDP than the US.
Misleading Statement: Putin will keep his word when a peace agreement is made without needing security guarantees.
Truth: Trump either vastly overestimates his ability to influence Putin or is naively optimistic. Putin has a long history of breaking promises, violating treaties, and breaching agreements. The current war in Ukraine is a direct result of Putin's reneging on previous commitments.
Trump’s Tone and Zelenskyy’s Response
Throughout the Oval Office event, Trump’s tone toward Zelenskyy was accusatory, as if the Ukrainian president were responsible for starting the war. This was evident when Zelenskyy felt compelled to interrupt and clarify:
“...about any negotiations, first of all, I think that everybody understands that Ukrainians- nobody want to stop this war [more] but at the future any negotiations- it's understandable that two sides of the war- not Russia and the United States, because this is not the war between Russia and the United States. This is [a] War of Russia against Ukraine…”
Zelenskyy’s dignified response highlights the absurdity of Trump’s framing, emphasizing that Ukraine is the victim of Russian aggression, not a party to bilateral conflict between the US and Russia.
Trump has consistently framed the Ukraine- Russia conflict as if both sides are equally at fault, portraying Russia as a reasonable actor and Zelenskyy as the obstacle to peace. This narrative is not only false but also deeply offensive to the people of Ukraine, who have endured unimaginable suffering at the hands of Russian aggression. Ending this war is not complicated: The person who brought armed troops into another country, killed innocent civilians, and seized land that isn’t theirs should simply pack up their military, withdraw their weapons, and return to Russia. No negotiation should be necessary. This isn’t a dispute between two parties coming to the table in good faith- it’s an unprovoked invasion by a hostile power.
Why should Ukraine be forced to forfeit more than it already has? Zelenskyy was governing his country, minding his own business, when Putin decided to invade and steal land that doesn’t belong to him. Ukraine is the victim here, not a participant in some bilateral disagreement. Yet Trump’s rhetoric and actions suggest that Ukraine should make concessions to appease Russia, as if the aggressor and the victim are on equal footing.
A Mar-a-Lago Analogy
To put it in terms Trump might understand: imagine if someone showed up at Mar-a-Lago, walked into the lobby, and demanded a room without a reservation or payment. When asked for a deposit, the intruder flashes a gun and insists on being taken to a room. From that point forward, the intruder threatens other guests, forces them to give up their rooms, and brings in buddies to occupy those rooms as well.
Now, imagine Trump being asked to negotiate with this armed intruder. The intruder says, “Okay, I’ll stop shooting your guests and stop scaring them with threats if you give me a permanent room: preferably the presidential suite. I realize I didn’t have a reservation, nor did I pay for the time I’ve occupied the room I’m in. I’ve also taken over the other guest rooms, and those guests will probably never come back. I know this has caused you an inconvenience and money, and I don’t have any right to be here. I’m still not actually going to leave, but if you give me the free room permanently, I’ll stop threatening your guests.”
Does anyone believe Trump would sit down at the table and agree to these terms? Of course not. He’d have the intruder escorted out of the hotel in handcuffs, and rightly so. Yet, when it comes to Ukraine, Trump expects Zelenskyy to negotiate with an armed aggressor who has no legitimate claim to the land he’s stolen.
Hypocrisy of Trump’s Approach
Trump’s willingness to entertain Putin’s demands while pressuring Ukraine to make concessions reveals a profound hypocrisy.It also underscores his failure to grasp the basic principles of justice and sovereignty. Ukraine is not asking for special treatment—it is asking for the return of its land and the safety of its people. These are not unreasonable demands; they are the bare minimum any nation would expect in the face of an unprovoked invasion.
By framing the conflict as a negotiation between equals, Trump not only legitimizes Russia’s aggression but also undermines Ukraine’s right to defend itself. His approach is not just misguided—it’s dangerous. It sends a message to authoritarian regimes around the world that they can invade their neighbors, seize their land, and then demand concessions under the guise of “peace talks.” But it certainly seems like that might just be Trump’s point.
Zelenskyy’s Dignity in the Face of Absurdity
Throughout this ordeal, Zelenskyy has shown remarkable dignity and resolve. He has repeatedly emphasized that this is not a conflict between Russia and the United States but a war of Russian aggression against Ukraine. His willingness to defend his country’s sovereignty, even in the face of pressure from a supposed ally like the U.S., is a testament to his leadership.
Trump’s behavior in the Oval Office, on the other hand, was a disgrace. His dismissive tone, his false claims, and his willingness to side with an aggressor over a victim should embarrass every American. The United States has long been a champion of justice and freedom on the global stage. Under Trump, it has become an enabler of tyranny.
The real reason the deal was not signed
In Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), behavior is analyzed using a framework called ABC data: Antecedent (what happens before the behavior), Behavior (the action itself), and Consequence (what happens after). Applying this framework to the Oval Office event reveals the true trigger for its dramatic shift—and why the deal ultimately wasn’t signed.
For the first 37 minutes of the 49-minute event, the conversation followed a predictable pattern. Trump dominated the discussion, steering the narrative, while Zelenskyy remained mostly silent, speaking only when necessary to correct the record or defend his country. Nothing significant changed during this time—Trump continued to tout his deal, make misleading claims, and dismiss concerns about security guarantees.
The shift came when a reporter asked a pointed question for the second time, this time with greater clarity:
“On the minerals deal, Mr. President, some of those minerals are in the east of Ukraine, not far from the front lines, and in areas that Russia has occupied. Will you direct President Putin to withdraw his forces from those areas if there is U.S. interest there?”
Remember, I pointed out above, when asked a similar question about security guarantees, earlier, Trump had brushed it off:
“I don't want to talk about security yet because I want to get the deal done. You know, you fall into the same trap, like everybody else, a million times. You said it over and over. I want to get the deal done. Security is so easy. That's about 2% of the problem. I'm not worried about security. I'm worried about getting the deal done. The security is the easy part; security is very nice. Everybody stops shooting…”
But this time, the question seemed to hit differently. Trump’s response was hesitant and evasive:
“Well, we'll take a look at that time. We have a lot of area… It's a very big area we're talking about. So we'll take a look. I'll study that. I'll see…”
The reporter pressed further: “And who would protect those minerals if they are U.S. interests? Would that be Ukrainian forces?”
Suddenly, Trump changed his tune, claiming the agreement itself would provide protection—a stark contrast to his earlier insistence that security was a minor issue and that the deal contained no such provisions:
“They’ll be protected. The agreement will protect them. Yeah, we’re signing an agreement…”
This exchange marked a turning point. Trump’s demeanor shifted noticeably. He became defensive and confrontational, and Vice President JD Vance stepped in to defend him, joining in with aggressive and disrespectful remarks directed at Zelenskyy.
Zelenskyy’s Breaking Point
Throughout most of the event, Zelenskyy had maintained a level of passivity, likely out of necessity. After all, he was dealing with the leader of a country whose support Ukraine desperately needed. But there’s only so much one can tolerate, especially when the disrespect comes not just from the person in power but also from their subordinates.
Zelenskyy’s reaction to Vance was markedly different from his interactions with Trump but still not disrespectful. While he had endured Trump’s dismissive tone and misleading statements, he was unwilling to let Vance—a “sidekick minion” —talk down to him. Zelenskyy spoke up, his tone more stern and assertive, refusing to let Vance talk over him the way Trump had. This moment revealed the limits of Zelenskyy’s patience and his refusal to be disrespected by someone he clearly did not view as an equal.
A Hidden Deal - In My Opinion
The way Trump spoke during the Oval Office event—and the fragments of information he revealed—strongly suggest that he and Putin have already struck a secret deal. It seems logical that Trump agreed to allow Putin to keep any Ukrainian territory currently occupied by Russian forces and that he intentionally avoided putting any provisions that guarantee security in the “raw earth” deal, which would prevent Putin from launching future attacks. In exchange, Putin would give Trump a political win, allowing him to claim credit for bringing peace to the war.
Trump likely thought he was being clever. Not only would he secure a victory with Putin, but he also believed he could strong-arm Ukraine into surrendering vast amounts of money and access to its “raw earth” resources. It’s clear that the reporter’s question forced Trump to confront a reality he hadn’t considered. The “raw earth” deal he had been so eager to tout was now a liability.
If the “raw earth” agreement had been signed, Trump would have found himself in an untenable position. The deal’s success hinged on access to Ukraine’s mineral resources, many of which are located in the eastern regions currently occupied by Russian forces. This creates a glaring contradiction: if Trump had already made a secret agreement with Putin allowing Russia to keep the occupied territories, then the “raw earth” deal would have been impossible to fulfill without exposing Trump’s duplicity.
The Art of the Deal - -Or Not
Trump has built his entire political brand on the idea that he is a master negotiator. If it became clear that he had signed two conflicting agreements—one with Ukraine and one with Russia—without realizing their incompatibility, it would shatter the myth of his dealmaking prowess. Instead of being seen as a shrewd businessman, he would be exposed as reckless and incompetent.
The Oval Office event was a stark reminder of the importance of integrity and foresight in leadership. Trump’s inability to anticipate the consequences of his actions, his willingness to make secret deals with authoritarian regimes, and his reliance on bluster and diversion tactics stand in sharp contrast to the qualities of a true leader.
Zelenskyy, on the other hand, demonstrated the kind of strength and dignity that commands respect. By refusing to sign a deal that would have exploited his country and by standing up to Trump’s bullying, he showed the world what real leadership looks like.
References
Austin, H., & Madani, D. (2025, March 2). U.K.’s Keir Starmer pledges $2 billion to help Ukraine buy missiles. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/ukraine-zelenskyy-europe-russia-war-rcna194381
Baskaran, G., & Schwartz, M. (2025, February 27). Breaking down the U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal. CSIS. https://www.csis.org/analysis/breaking-down-us-ukraine-minerals-deal
Kiel. (2025, March 1). Ukraine support tracker - A database of military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine. Kiel Institute. https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
Licon, A. G. (2025, February 28). A transcript of Trump and Zelenskyy’s Oval Office argument. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/trump-zelenskyy-vance-transcript-oval-office-80685f5727628c64065da81525f8f0cf
Mastio, D. (2025, March 1). Trump’s Oval Office fumble with Zelensky makes America weak. Yahoo News. https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-oval-office-fumble-zelensky-113545145.html
Norton, B. (2025, March 2). Trump plans to make Ukraine a US economic colony, exploiting its critical minerals. Geopolitical Economy Report. https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2025/03/02/trump-ukraine-us-economic-colony-minerals/
Venditti, B. (2025, March 1). Mapped: Ukraine’s mineral resources. Visual Capitalist. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-ukraines-mineral-resources/
Wolf, C., & Davis, E., Jr. (2024, February 23). Countries that have committed the most aid to Ukraine. U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/these-countries-have-committed-the-most-aid-to-ukraine
