featured
DC Elites Cling to Dillusions About Ukraine // Glenn Greenwald
Glenn Greenwald | Trusted Newsmaker
DC Elites Cling to Delusions About Ukraine While Trump Pushes for an End to the War
As 2025 unfolds, Washington remains gripped by an old script: U.S. leaders insist Ukraine can still win the war, even as evidence suggests otherwise. Meanwhile, Donald Trump positions himself as the only major political figure attempting to broker an end. This transcript-driven analysis highlights the growing divide between political rhetoric and on-the-ground realities.
Biden’s Optimism and the Vietnam Echo
In early 2025, President Biden publicly declared his belief that Ukraine could prevail as long as the West remained united. Yet the transcript draws a parallel to Vietnam: leaders selling a narrative of progress even when privately acknowledging stalemate. Just as Pentagon Papers revealed no real path to victory in Southeast Asia, many within the establishment already knew Ukraine’s military prospects were bleak by 2024.
The Harsh Battlefield Math
By 2024, Ukraine’s counteroffensive had stalled, and lines moved in Russia’s favor. Soldiers were exhausted, casualty numbers were mounting, and Western promises of breakthroughs proved empty. Comparisons were made to an unequal dogfight: no matter how tenacious, a smaller, tired force cannot match a larger, resource-rich adversary indefinitely. Ukraine faced a grim arithmetic—fewer fighters, declining morale, and dwindling manpower—while Russia simply had more reserves to expend.
The NATO and U.S. Narrative
Despite battlefield setbacks, NATO leaders and U.S. officials continued declaring that Ukraine “was winning” or that Russia had “failed.” Statements by officials like Ursula von der Leyen insisting victory was inevitable now ring hollow in light of the territorial map. From 2022 through 2024, triumphalist claims clashed with reality, yet elites repeated them, unwilling to admit miscalculations or risk losing political face.
The Trump Factor
Donald Trump enters this narrative as the one major figure openly pursuing negotiations. His efforts frustrated him—neither Zelensky nor Putin easily bent to U.S. pressure. Unlike in the 1990s or early 2000s when American dominance was unrivaled, the geopolitical landscape of 2025 is multipolar, with powers like China, India, and BRICS balancing U.S. influence. Trump’s threats of sanctions against Russia were countered when major economies aligned more closely with Moscow rather than Washington.
Shifting Trump’s Strategy
Initially, Trump projected confidence—insisting he could end the war with a phone call. But as negotiations dragged on, he adjusted his tone, conceding that diplomacy would be complex. By August 2025, after direct talks with Putin, Trump reframed the responsibility: Zelensky and European leaders now had to step forward if peace was to be achieved. Trump acknowledged Russia’s control of certain territories as a fixed reality, signaling a more pragmatic approach than the absolutist rhetoric of NATO.
The Russian Perspective
The transcript underscores how Russia views NATO expansion as an existential threat. Comparisons to the Cuban Missile Crisis highlight the double standard: just as the U.S. refused Soviet weapons near its border, Russia rejects NATO troops and weapons in Ukraine. From Moscow’s standpoint, security requires a buffer zone, recognition of control over Crimea and Donbass, and guarantees that Ukraine won’t join NATO. These conditions, however unpalatable to the West, are treated as non-negotiable by Russia.
The Western Elite’s Dilemma
Western leaders defined “victory” as the full expulsion of Russian forces from Ukraine—a goal that was never realistic. Accepting any deal with Russia would be framed as defeat, making compromise politically toxic. As a result, Washington and Brussels have preferred prolonging the conflict rather than acknowledging failure. The cost: thousands more Ukrainian and Russian lives, with little strategic gain.
Why Trump Gets Credit
Whether successful or not, Trump is portrayed as the only leader actively attempting to stop the bloodshed. Unlike NATO officials or U.S. foreign policy elites who double down on endless war narratives, Trump pushes for negotiations. Critics may call his efforts naive or self-serving, but the transcript emphasizes that absent his involvement, there would be virtually no major push for peace from the U.S. side.
The transcript paints a sobering picture: Washington elites cling to delusions about Ukraine’s chances, repeating slogans of victory long after the battlefield has disproven them. Russia has entrenched itself, Ukraine is exhausted, and NATO refuses to adjust its goals. Into this void steps Trump, whose pursuit of peace—however imperfect—marks the only visible path away from a grinding war. If the conflict ends soon, it will likely be because someone finally embraced reality instead of repeating slogans.
//
