President Donald Trump said he is “not a big fan” of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, then claimed Zelensky helped “destroy” his own country. That is a striking thing for the U.S. president to say about the leader of a country still under Russian attack.
Trump made the comments in a Newsmax interview published on October 15. He was asked about Ukraine resuming strikes on Russian energy targets after Trump had asked Kyiv to stop them.
“Zelensky is not a good guy for us to deal with,” Trump said. “I’m not a big fan of Zelensky. They’ve destroyed that country.”
Let me pause on that last line, because it deserves a second look.
Ukraine did not invade itself. Russia launched a full-scale invasion in February 2022, and the war has flattened cities, displaced millions, and killed and wounded countless Ukrainians. Trump’s wording puts the damage on Zelensky and Ukrainians in a way that skips the invader entirely.
That is the part where the room gets quiet.
What Trump actually said
Trump also said he finds Zelensky “more difficult to deal with than Putin.” He argued that Zelensky does not truly want to settle the war, even though Zelensky says he does.
“He says he wants to settle, but he doesn’t,” Trump said. He added that Putin and Zelensky hate each other, which he called a barrier to an agreement.
Trump has also pushed the idea that Ukraine should hold elections. In the same interview, he said, “I think you need an election,” and suggested Ukrainians may not be satisfied with leaders while missiles hit apartment buildings.
That is a serious political demand. Ukraine is under martial law because of Russia’s invasion, and its constitution restricts elections during that period. Whether Ukraine should hold a wartime vote is a real debate, but it is not a decision the U.S. president gets to schedule from Washington.
The timing matters
The remarks landed while Ukraine’s air-defense situation looked grim. CNN reported that Ukraine had run out of missiles for its U.S.-made Patriot air-defense system.
Zelensky later told Bloomberg that the United States was delaying Patriot interceptor missiles that had already been paid for through a NATO-coordinated purchasing initiative. He said Washington was supplying about 12 Patriot interceptors per month, roughly one-quarter of the amount provided under former President Joe Biden.
The U.S. government has not publicly confirmed those figures or explained the reported delays. That distinction matters. Zelensky’s account is a claim from Ukraine’s president; the U.S. side has not laid out its own public explanation.
And here is the detour that brings us back: Trump’s harsh words about Zelensky are not happening in a vacuum. They come as Ukraine says it needs those interceptors to defend cities from Russian missile and drone attacks.
When the president of the United States publicly says he is not a fan of Ukraine’s leader, people hear more than personal dislike. Allies hear a signal. So does Moscow.
The dispute underneath
The immediate fight is over energy strikes. Trump asked Zelensky to stop attacks on Russian oil refineries. Ukraine resumed them anyway.
Trump called the strikes a “disgrace” and said they were hurting global diesel markets, including in the United States.
Zelensky’s position is different. He said Russia had repeatedly violated an energy ceasefire Trump announced on October 11. He also said Russia attacked Ukrainian energy and oil-and-gas facilities 76 times after that announcement, leaving tens of thousands of families without electricity.
So one side sees strikes on refineries as reckless escalation. The other sees them as a response to continued attacks on Ukrainian power and fuel infrastructure. Both things can be true at once: the strikes carry economic risks, and Ukraine says it is defending itself against ongoing Russian attacks.
Trump can say he doesn’t like Zelensky. Presidents have disliked plenty of foreign leaders. But the United States is not a neutral bystander here. It supplies weapons, intelligence, and political weight that affect whether Ukraine can keep defending itself.
That is why the language matters. A president calling an allied wartime leader “not a good guy” while describing Russia’s president as easier to deal with changes the tone of the entire relationship.
It also creates a dangerous opening for a simpler story: that Ukraine’s suffering is primarily its own government’s fault. That story is not supported by the basic fact of Russia’s invasion.
I do not think anyone should pretend negotiations are easy. Wars end through hard, ugly compromises, and leaders can be difficult. But there is a difference between pressing an ally toward a deal and publicly blaming the invaded country for the wreckage caused by the invasion.
What remains unclear
We do not know whether Trump’s comments will lead to a formal change in U.S. policy. We do not know the full reason for the reported Patriot delays, or how many missiles Ukraine will receive in the coming weeks.
We also do not know whether Zelensky can maintain political support at home if Washington keeps pressuring him in public. Trump has already suggested Ukraine needs new leadership and elections.
What we do know is this: Trump’s words arrived at a moment when Ukraine says its air defenses are stretched thin, Russia continues striking Ukrainian infrastructure, and the two governments are openly clashing over how to end the war.
A president can be frustrated with an ally. That happens. But when the frustration sounds like blame, and the ally is the one being bombed, people will hear something else. They will hear a question about whether American support still means what it used to mean.
More on: Executive Branch