Zelenskyy’s Halo Has Shattered, and the EU Is Left Holding the Bag

The moralizing West must now face the reality oCIDf Ukraine’s unwinnable war without America’s unwavering support.

For years, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was a darling of the Western elites, a beacon of democracy standing up to Russian aggression. But in one brutal confrontation at the Oval Office earlier this week, U.S. President Donald Trump and his deputy, J.D. Vance shattered that illusion. He called Zelenskyy out as a ‘dictator’ who refuses to hold elections, sidelined him from peace negotiations, and made it clear that Ukraine’s future will not be dictated by virtue-signalling Europeans but by cold, hard pragmatism.

Zelenskyy, ever since the war with Russia broke out three years ago, was wildly hailed as a kind of ‘modern-day Churchill’ draped in khaki fatigues, showered with applause in parliaments across Europe and North America. He was the plucky wartime leader standing against the Russian behemoth, the ‘evil’ Putin.

However, the Oval Office confrontation saw Trump shatter that illusion and render Zelenskyy as a defiant client-state leader whose bravado had worn thin.

Trump’s message was brutal but simple: elections must be held, grandstanding must stop, and if Zelenskyy wanted continued support, he must act like a statesman, not a martyr. The conversation wasn’t just a turning point for Ukraine’s leader but marked the collapse of the West’s and European Union’s carefully crafted narrative.

Shattered Illusion

Zelenskyy’s myth-making didn’t begin in 2022 when the full-scale war erupted. It was crafted much earlier, in 2019, when he became central to Trump’s first impeachment. He was depicted as a beleaguered figure, allegedly strong-armed by Trump in a quid-pro-quo scandal. The media and political class needed him propped up, protecting him from scrutiny. Western elites, particularly in the European Union, continued to lionize him even as he banned opposition parties, controlled the press, and indefinitely postponed elections.

Now, the carefully constructed image has collapsed. And for all their moralizing, the Europeans are now left to back Ukraine alone. The usual chorus of liberal commentators is once again invoking 1938, likening Putin to Hitler and Ukraine to Czechoslovakia. But these comparisons are as tired as they are banal. History does not repeat itself in neat cycles, and screaming “appeasement” at every call for negotiations is not a strategy but an excuse for endless war. J.D. Vance made this clear when he crossed swords with historian Niall Fergusson (who is ironically more on Vance’s side), dismissing the latter’s talk of standing up for Ukraine as “moralizing garbage.

Empty Grandstanding

The European Union has long positioned itself as a bastion of liberal democracy and moral righteousness. It has lectured the world on values, imposed digital censorship laws under the guise of fighting disinformation, and championed migration policies that have alienated their own citizens. But when it comes to Ukraine, the EU has been reduced to little more than hand-wringing and wishful thinking.

The numbers paint a grim picture. Ukraine is bleeding white, with a casualty ratio reportedly 1:5 in Russia’s favour. Over 1.5 million Ukrainian soldiers have been killed or maimed. The West’s strategy has been incoherent—arming Kyiv just enough to keep the war going but not enough to decisively turn the tide. And yet, European leaders cling to an empty moral superiority, believing that ‘praying and paying’ will somehow save Ukraine.

The EU’s strategic failures go beyond Ukraine. Germany’s misguided energy policy, championed by Angela Merkel, made the continent dependent on Russian gas. The knee-jerk reaction to shut down nuclear plants post-invasion has only worsened Europe’s economic vulnerability. Even now, the EU’s response is disjointed - more sanctions, more rhetorical condemnations and an unwavering belief that their ‘values’ will triumph over Russia’s brute force.

Trump’s approach to Ukraine is pragmatic, not ideological. He is willing to engage Putin, to leverage negotiation as a tool, and above all, to ensure that American interests take precedence. His strategy may be distasteful to the European elite, but history suggests that engagement, however unpalatable, often yields results.

Richard Nixon visited Beijing in 1972 to end the Vietnam War by engaging Mao Zedong, the 20th century’s greatest mass murderer. Churchill and Roosevelt allied with Stalin to defeat Hitler. Talking to autocrats isn’t appeasement; it’s often a necessity. The EU, in contrast, has backed itself into a corner by failing to deter Russia in 2014, failing to prepare for war in 2022 and now failing to articulate an exit strategy.

Trump’s message to Europe is clear: the U.S. will not bankroll an endless war. If the EU wants to continue supporting Ukraine, it must do so without assuming that American taxpayers will foot the bill indefinitely. The reality is harsh—without U.S. backing, the EU’s military and economic weight is insufficient to sustain Ukraine’s resistance.

Powerless EU

Even as Europe faces the consequences of its own miscalculations, it continues to project weakness. The Digital Services Act, championed by Thierry Breton, is just the latest example of the EU’s self-defeating strategy: attempting to suppress dissent rather than addressing the root causes of its declining influence. Meanwhile, internal crises mount: uncontrolled migration, economic stagnation, and growing disillusionment among voters.

Europe is at best playing third fiddle to the U.S. Yet, rather than adapting, EU elites continue to antagonize figures like Trump and J.D. Vance, dismissing them as populist threats rather than recognizing the shifting geopolitical reality. The EU needs America far more than America needs the EU.

The liberal commentariat warns that Trump’s approach signals a betrayal of ‘democratic values.’ But the real question is whether Europe even understands democracy anymore. State censorship, election manipulation, and an unwillingness to engage with political realities have hollowed out the very principles they claim to defend.

For Ukraine, the reckoning is already here. Eleven years after Russia annexed Crimea, Europe has yet to build a credible deterrent. Olaf Scholz hesitated for weeks before sending a handful of tanks to Ukraine, an embarrassing display of indecision that reinforced Europe’s strategic impotence. In contrast, when East Berliners rose against Soviet rule in 1953, 600 T-34 tanks rolled in within hours. That was deterrence. That was power. Today’s Europe can only offer moral posturing.

As Ukraine’s fate hangs in the balance, Europe must now ask itself: can it sustain this war alone? The answer is likely no. Trump’s confrontation with Zelenskyy was a reality check. The halo has shattered, and the West must now grapple with the consequences of its own failures.

In 1989, the last leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, famously warned the Communist leader of East Germany, Erich Honecker, saying: ‘Life punishes those who are late.’ Today, that warning applies to Europe. Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Ukraine’s future is uncertain. What is certain, however, is that Trump has exposed the uncomfortable truth that Europe, for all its rhetoric, must now face this war alone. After all, empty rhetoric won’t stop the bloodshed, only hard-nosed realism will. And if the EU doesn’t wake up, it will find itself abandoned - not by Trump, but by reality itself.

(Christoph Ernst is a German historian and novelist who writes historically-aware crime fiction and a long-time EU watcher. Views personal.)