Trump hits back at Zelensky and brands him ‘not a good guy’ in blistering attack . hyn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKrxh3x0ou0

President Trump Hosts Rose Garden Lunch

Trump has hit out at Zelenskyy (Image: Getty)

Donald Trump has hit out at Volodymyr Zelenskyy branding him “not a good guy” in a new blistering attack. It comes just days after the pair fell out after the Ukrainian leader branded a US deal to buy Russian diesel a “gift” to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump and Zelenskyy’s are in the worst rift in months after the President announced that Vladimir Putin had agreed to release 300,000 tonnes of diesel immediately “to the American and global marketplace” followed by several other shipments.

Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform at the time: “I have just concluded a highly successful discussion with President Vladimir Putin, of Russia, wherein it was agreed that Russia will immediately supply over 300,000 Tons of Diesel Fuel to the American and Global Marketplace, another 500,000 Tons during the month of November, and 1,000,000 Tons immediately thereafter. Additionally, based on the condition of their Diesel Refineries, Russia will then deliver, within a short period of time, 3,000,000 Tons of Diesel Fuel.

He added: “Lower prices for Americans, especially our Great Farmers, Ranchers, and Truckers, is my Greatest Priority. This is a very big and important announcement.”

Get the latest news from around the world and more

Invalid email

You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.

The move sparked a furious response from Volodymyr Zelensky, who accused Trump of handing the Kremlin a “gift” and prolonging the war. He wrote on social media that the deal “plays into Russia’s hands – allowing it to kill more, wage war for longer, have even less respect for America, and inflict even greater losses and damage on the world.”

The row has been worsened by Zelenskyy’s order to his troops to target a refinery in Russia’s Ryazan region, south east of Moscow, which serves five per cent of the country’s output.

In a new blow to Zelenskyy Trump has branded him “not a good guy” in an interview with Newsmax.

In the interview Trump addressed the Russia – Ukraine war and was then asked “Have you lost faith in him [Zelenskyy]?” To which Trump replied: “Well, I think they’re going to end up with a settlement of some kind, they’re not going to do it with him, he doesn’t want to settle. He says he wants to settle but he doesnt. No I’m not a big fan of Zelenskyy they’ve destroyed that country.”

Trump went on to say: “Putin hates Zelenskyy and Zelenskyy hates Putin and when you have that kind of hatred it’s very hard to get something settled; but that’s a war that should have never started.”

Asked if the war will end before he leaves office Trump said: ” It should end soon I think they actually both would like to see it end. But I think I find Zelenskyy more difficult to deal with than Putin.”

Trump Hits Back at Zelensky and Brands Him ‘Not a Good Guy’ in Blistering Attack

US President Donald Trump has launched a fresh verbal attack on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, describing him as “not a good guy for us to deal with” and questioning whether Kyiv’s leader genuinely wants to negotiate an end to the war with Russia.

The remarks, made during an interview with Newsmax on October 15 and reported the following day, have intensified tensions between Washington and Kyiv at a critical moment in the conflict. The latest confrontation centres on Ukraine’s renewed attacks on Russian oil refineries, disagreements over a proposed ceasefire covering energy infrastructure and a controversial US-backed arrangement involving Russian diesel supplies. <Cite refs={[“turn806266news14″,”turn806266search0”]}/>

Trump’s criticism marks another sharp turn in an already strained relationship. While the US president argues that Ukraine’s military actions risk disrupting global energy supplies and complicating diplomatic efforts, Zelensky insists his country cannot be expected to restrain its attacks while Russia continues striking Ukrainian territory.

The dispute raises a difficult question for Western governments: can Washington persuade the two sides to negotiate when Kyiv and Moscow remain divided over the terms of a ceasefire, and when the American president and Ukrainian leader increasingly disagree over how to achieve peace?

Trump Questions Zelensky’s Commitment to a Settlement

During the Newsmax interview, Trump questioned whether Zelensky was genuinely prepared to reach an agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The American president said he believed the conflict would eventually end through some form of settlement but argued that it would not happen under Zelensky’s leadership. He also claimed that the Ukrainian president said he wanted peace without taking the steps necessary to secure it. <Cite refs={[“turn806266search11″,”turn806266news14”]}/>

Trump’s comments went beyond criticism of a specific military operation. By questioning Zelensky’s intentions and comparing the difficulty of dealing with him to negotiating with Putin, the president placed the Ukrainian leader’s credibility at the centre of the dispute.

For Kyiv, such language is particularly troubling because Ukraine depends heavily on Western support for its defence against Russia’s full-scale invasion, launched in February 2022. American intelligence, weapons and military assistance have played an important role in helping Ukrainian forces resist Russian attacks.

Trump, however, has repeatedly argued that his administration should prioritise ending the war and reducing the financial burden associated with supporting Ukraine. His latest remarks suggest that patience in Washington is wearing thin as diplomatic efforts collide with the continuing military campaign.

Yet the question of whether Zelensky wants peace cannot be resolved by rhetoric alone. It depends on the terms being offered, the security guarantees available to Ukraine and whether both sides are prepared to make reciprocal concessions.

Russian Oil Refineries Become the Latest Flashpoint

The immediate trigger for the latest confrontation was Ukraine’s decision to resume strikes on Russian oil infrastructure.

On October 15, Ukrainian forces struck a Rosneft refinery in Russia’s Ryazan region, southeast of Moscow. The attack followed a short pause in strikes on Russian refineries after US officials sought to encourage restraint as part of an effort to reduce tensions around energy infrastructure. <Cite refs={[“turn806266news14″,”turn806266news15”]}/>

Trump condemned the renewed attacks, arguing that targeting facilities producing diesel fuel could affect global supplies and contribute to higher energy prices. He said Ukraine had other targets available and criticised the decision to strike refineries at a time when the United States and its partners were attempting to pursue diplomatic solutions. <Cite refs={[“turn806266news14″,”turn806266news1”]}/>

For the Trump administration, energy security has become an important consideration. Higher fuel prices can affect transport costs, farming, manufacturing and household budgets. The president has therefore presented attacks on Russian refineries as a problem extending beyond the battlefield.

Ukraine sees the situation differently. Its government argues that Russia continues to attack Ukrainian energy facilities and civilian infrastructure, leaving Kyiv with little reason to accept a one-sided restriction on its own military operations.

Zelensky has said Ukraine cannot indefinitely hold back while Russian attacks continue. From Kyiv’s perspective, striking infrastructure that supports Russia’s war effort is a means of applying pressure on Moscow rather than an attempt to undermine peace.

The disagreement illustrates a fundamental obstacle to a ceasefire: both governments want the other side to stop attacking, but neither wants to surrender a military advantage without confidence that its opponent will do the same.

Discuss More news

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *