Dear editor,
If you watch TV, you likely have seen the mafiathemed commercial for the product Freshpet. One wise guy, upon finding Freshpet in a refrigerator, ask his friends, “You keep dog food in the fridge?” To which actor Steve Schirripa’s character responds, “That’s not dog food. That’s Freshpet, real meat, real veggies, for my boy, Junior.” Perplexed, the first man replies, “No disrespect, but what are we doing here?” Seemingly, the phrase “no disrespect” was interpreted as a deflection for underlying judgmentality as the subsequent scene suggests the comment results in him getting whacked.
In my view, I see what is depicted in the Freshpet commercial as analogous to the exchange between Ukrainian President Zelenskyy and President Trump and VP Vance on Feb. 28, which devolved into a confrontation in front of television cameras. The on-air meeting was meant to precede the signing of an economic and minerals agreement between the two countries but ended abruptly.
As Zelenskyy began focusing on a lasting peace agreement with Russia that would require U.S. security guarantees, Trump viewed the signing of the rare earth minerals deal as a preliminary step toward leveraging a peace deal with Russia. Trump became offended by what was perceived as a lack of gratitude on Zelenskyy’s part and a lack of urgency for seeking immediate peace. The tenor of the meeting no longer allowed for an agreeable outcome that involved accepting terms negotiated by the U.S.
During the days that followed, the Trump administration paused military aid to Ukraine and suspended the sharing of U.S. satellite imagery. These actions were defined by CIA Director John Ratcliffe as intended to make Zelenskyy rethink his approach to peace talks. Regardless, they have been interpreted as punitive by many.
Zelenskyy, who has presented throughout his presidency as authentic and relatable, had no political experience prior to being elected. It has been said he does not think strategically. As Ukraine has now entered a fourth year since Russia’s invasion, it is understandable that Zelenskyy can appear impatient, given his underlying desire for freedom for his country and the citizens of Ukraine.
In contrast to Mr. Trump, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, in a March 2 address to the House of Commons, said Britain “stands in unwavering support” of Ukraine. He said it is right that Europe “do the heavy lifting” to secure a lasting peace agreement while relying on U.S. backing. Starmer believes that defending Ukraine through “a coalition of the willing” is critical in order to avoid a broader conflict. He wants to keep aid flowing while Ukraine, European allies, and the U.S. share seats at the peace talk table to arrive at a strong, just, and lasting peace.
President Zelenskyy has since said his meeting with Trump “did not go the way it was supposed to be. It is regrettable that it happened that way. It is time to make things right.” Clearly, Zelenskyy is expressing an understanding of the impact of his role in the collapse of the Feb. 28 meeting and has hopes of rectifying the situation.
During this prayerful season of Lent, it is my hope that our president, as a symbolic demonstration of peacemaking, would offer a reciprocal mea culpa and own a share of responsibility for the fiasco. Such a gesture, signifying both contrition and compassion, would be welcomed by many.
Peter Wibell Rutledge