Every morning, I wake up eager to watch the news. Was I this engaged in morning current affairs a year ago? No. But with Trump back in office, there’s a headline every day—often chaotic, sometimes entertaining, but always significant.
Last week, I woke up to what felt like a political skit unfolding on live television. World leaders were fiercely debating, a rare glimpse into the kind of high-stakes diplomatic sparring that usually happens behind closed doors. But thanks to President Trump’s unconventional approach, the world got a front-row seat to one of the most revealing moments in international politics—the exposure of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a fraud.
Trump’s Truth Social Post and the Zelenskyy Controversy
Tensions had already been simmering before the now-infamous diplomatic meeting and press conference. But it was Trump’s Truth Social post that sent shockwaves across the world, sparking outrage and analysis from every political angle.
Now, as much as I support Trump, his post wasn’t without flaws. One of his biggest points—that Zelenskyy is essentially a dictator for refusing to hold elections—sounds damning at first. However, it’s important to note that Ukraine legally does not hold elections under martial law. Zelenskyy’s approval ratings may be plummeting, but skipping elections isn’t entirely his choice.
Another point of contention was Trump’s claim that the U.S. has given Ukraine $350 billion. Media outlets rushed to dispute the number, arguing that total U.S. aid is actually lower when factoring in non-military assistance and pledged rather than delivered funds. While the exact figure may be debatable, there’s no denying that Ukraine has received unprecedented financial support from America with little accountability.
This led many pundits—even some on the right—to question whether Trump’s stance plays into Russian propaganda. But here’s the real takeaway: Regardless of how Trump phrases things, the bigger issue is the corruption in Ukraine and the lack of a clear strategy to end the war.
The Harsh Reality – Ukraine Can’t Win Without America
Here’s my stance. Putin is the aggressor—a ruthless leader bent on expanding Russian territory and restoring Soviet-era dominance. There’s no question that Russia started this war, and Ukraine has every right to defend itself.
But there’s also an uncomfortable truth that many refuse to acknowledge: Zelenskyy has allowed this war to drag on, while Ukraine continues to receive billions in foreign aid. Has he made serious attempts to negotiate peace? No. Has he personally benefited from this war? Absolutely. War makes people rich, and Zelenskyy is no exception.
Now, enter Trump. Unlike previous U.S. presidents who blindly funneled money into endless foreign conflicts, Trump is treating Ukraine like a business deal. His offer? Aid in exchange for U.S. access to Ukraine’s critical mineral resources. It’s unconventional, sure. But Trump has never played by the traditional rules of diplomacy, and he’s not about to start now.
Meanwhile, Ukraine is running out of time. With U.S. aid drying up, it simply cannot sustain this war much longer. And while no one wants to see Putin rewarded for his aggression, the harsh reality is that Ukraine is unlikely to reclaim all its lost territory. The war needs to end before more Ukrainian soldiers needlessly die.
What This Means for Australia
Trump’s America First policy makes one thing clear: America is done being the world’s police. This has global consequences, including for Australia and the broader Western alliance.
Some critics argue that a more isolationist U.S. benefits only Putin and Xi Jinping. The Guardian recently stated, “America’s record at keeping global order is deeply flawed, but the only winners from its drift towards isolationism will be Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin.”
But let’s break that down.
Yes, under Trump, America will likely step back from unnecessary foreign entanglements. But that doesn’t mean Australia is abandoned. If anything, Trump has demonstrated time and again that he fiercely protects America’s key allies—whether it’s Israel, Japan, or Australia.
In the worst-case scenario, if Australia were ever truly threatened—whether by Chinese expansionism or another regional crisis—Trump wouldn’t hesitate to step in. Why? Because Australia is in America’s strategic interest. It’s not about sentimental alliances; it’s about realpolitik.
Final Thoughts
The Ukraine war has dragged on long enough. While I firmly oppose Putin’s aggression, I also see the flaws in continuing to pour endless money into a conflict that Ukraine cannot win alone. Trump’s strategy—cutting off the blank checks and pushing for a minerals-for-aid deal—may be unconventional, but it’s rooted in logic.
And for Australia? We need to prepare for a world where America is more selective with its involvement. That doesn’t mean we’re on our own, but it does mean we must strengthen our own defense, economy, and regional alliances.
The days of America playing global babysitter are over. Whether that’s a good or bad thing depends on how well the West adapts.