What top Zelensky advisor Mykhailo Podolyak expects a Trump presidency will mean for Ukraine
Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. presidential election, paired with his promise to end the war in “24 hours,” has been met with great alarm in Kyiv. Ukrainian officials fear that Trump could bring an end to critical American military support and derail the country’s NATO bid. While it remains unclear what Trump’s real plan for Russia and Ukraine is — or whether he even has one — everything leaked to the press so far looks deeply troubling for Kyiv. To learn more about how the Ukrainian authorities view the situation as Trump prepares to return to the White House, Meduza special correspondent Lilia Yapparova spoke to Mykhailo Podolyak, the top aide to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Despite Donald Trump’s repeated criticism of what he views as the excessive scale of U.S. aid to Kyiv, top Ukrainian presidential advisor Myhailo Podolyak told Meduza he remains cautiously optimistic that Trump might change his tune after taking office. Podolyak believes that once Trump is briefed by U.S. intelligence and defense officials, he may adopt a more pragmatic approach to supporting Ukraine. “He’ll receive a lot more information about the nature of this war and Putin’s real intentions,” Podolyak said. “I hope someone will finally put [a report] on his desk [analyzing] Putin’s psychological profile, explaining why he’s fundamentally not someone you can negotiate with.”
Podolyak argued that supporting Ukraine is in the strategic interests of the U.S., framing it as an investment in global leadership, security, and “the established system of international law that Putin is trying to overturn,” rather than a distant territorial dispute. He stressed that the United States has made significant commitments and said that abandoning them amid a major geopolitical struggle involving Russia, North Korea, and Iran would be politically damaging.
Meduza has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine from the very start, and we are committed to reporting objectively on a war we firmly oppose. Join Meduza in its mission to challenge the Kremlin’s censorship with the truth. Donate today.
Asked how this could be reconciled with Trump’s isolationist stance and promises to prioritize domestic issues and the American economy, Podolyak questioned how economic power can be built without addressing global instability. “Who will you be great compared to?” he asked. “Who will you sell your goods to?” He added:
[Trump] talks about making America great again, but you can’t achieve that by focusing solely on the domestic market. The U.S. will have to actively engage in resolving conflicts in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and the Pacific region. That’s why I’m more optimistic about Trump’s future actions than many might expect.
Podolyak also expressed hope that Trump’s “business-style decision-making” could streamline military aid and improve operational efficiency, countering bureaucratic delays that have previously hampered Ukraine’s efforts. “Democratic countries and European bureaucracies tend to spend a long time discussing necessary decisions or only implement them partially, leaving the problems for the next political generation,” he said. “Several Ukrainian offensives fell short simply because decisions weren’t made in time. I don’t think Trump’s approach would be worse. Perhaps, as a pragmatist, he’ll make highly effective decisions that could actually speed up the course of the war. In this conflict, timing is everything.”
Trump’s position that the European Union, not the United States, should take primary responsibility for aiding Kyiv is reasonable, Podolyak believes. He argued that the war has exposed Europe’s lack of readiness to defend itself and emphasized the need for the E.U. to strengthen its defense capabilities and take a more active role in supporting Ukraine. According to Podolyak, the E.U. “needs to rethink its relationship with Russia,” which is striving to “regain the influence it held [in the region] during the Soviet era.” As examples, he pointed to Russia’s interference in elections in Georgia and Moldova, its aggressive rhetoric toward the Baltic states, and its efforts to influence political processes in Central and Southern Europe by funding both far-left and far-right parties.
At the same time, Podolyak dismissed Trump’s idea of negotiating a swift end to the war as unrealistic, emphasizing that Ukraine is fighting an outright invasion, not a territorial dispute. “When people talk to me about negotiations, I can’t help but wonder: what exactly are we supposed to be negotiating?” Podolyak asked. “‘Look, we killed your people, took your land, and we’re going to stay there to build up our resources. In the meantime, you can think about whether you want to fight us again in the next round.’ Those are some negotiations!”
He argued that negotiating with Putin, who continues to make “absurd demands,” would only embolden further aggression and set a dangerous precedent for other authoritarian regimes, like North Korea. He explained that negotiating in a way that absolves Russia of responsibility for its aggression would reinforce a sense of impunity. “If we stop the war now on Moscow’s terms, we’ll have to prepare for a siege of all of Europe,” Podolyak warned. “The Russian sabotage operations we’re already seeing across the E.U. will only escalate. Putin’s Russia can only exist in a mode of constant expansion.”
Podolyak criticized proposals reportedly prepared by Trump’s team, which include concessions such as Ukraine delaying NATO membership and freezing the front line, as ineffective and akin to surrender. He stressed that any pause in the conflict would only give Russia time to regroup and destabilize European unity:
A frozen conflict would only serve as a temporary pause for Russia, giving it time to continue mobilization, ramp up military production, and replenish resources. It would also spend vast amounts of money on propaganda efforts in Europe to break the coalition supporting Ukraine, convincing the public to “focus on their own problems.”
On the subject of Ukraine’s NATO ambitions, Podolyak emphasized the importance of strong negotiations and clear communication to make the case for Ukraine’s strategic value to the U.S. He expressed confidence in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s ability to present these arguments persuasively.
Figures from the populist wing of the Republican Party have suggested that if Kyiv rejects a deal proposed by Trump, the White House might cut off military and financial support for Ukraine. Podolyak, however, declined to speculate on what demands or ultimatums Trump might make, noting that it’s too early to predict scenarios before negotiations begin and concrete proposals are presented. Still, he stressed that Ukraine remains a valuable investment for the U.S., pointing to the tangible benefits Washington has already gained: reputational boosts and the weakening of Russia’s military strength.
On the other hand, it was Trump who, in 2017, gave the green light to supply lethal weapons to Ukraine — a step Barack Obama had long refused to take. Now, the Biden administration is restricting Kyiv from using long-range American missiles to strike Russian territory. Asked if he’s counting on Trump’s support in this matter, Podolyak said he is:
We’re counting on full support for Ukraine’s proposal because it’s based on concrete facts: what long-range strikes are, the specific targets in Russia we intend to hit, and how these strikes could change the course of the war. Besides, it’s absurd to follow restrictions that the aggressor country doesn’t adhere to. If we’re going to enshrine in international law that a country defending itself is prohibited from effectively protecting its people, then we might as well admit that we’re willing to watch a population face genocide.
Dealing with aggressors requires a show of force, Podolyak explained, and Kyiv hopes Trump’s “peace through strength” approach will support this. “If someone starts a major war in violation of international law, they must be punished,” Podolyak said. “You can’t reason with someone who believes they have the right to kill; they don’t respond to arguments — they fight like a street brawler. If you want peace, you have to show strength.” He added:
You can’t just sit at some imaginary “chessboard” and calculate, “We’ll trade this piece here and gain something there.” That doesn’t work. In reality, it goes like this: at some point, a big fight breaks out, and you deliver a decisive counterblow to the one who started it — in this case, Russia.
Interview by Lilia Yapparova