Disastrous Meeting

Hi Global Recap readers,

If you’ve been keeping up with the news, you’ve probably seen the fiery clash between President Zelenskyy and President Trump, along with VP Vance.

Some say this was a deliberate setup by the US to justify pulling support from Ukraine. But I see it a little differently.

I’ll have a lengthy opinion piece at the end. For those interested in my perspective, you can find it there, but if you’re just looking for the news, you know where to look.👇

🇨🇳 CHINA
Surprise Live-Fire Drill Near Australia

Pilots were caught off guard by a Chinese live-fire naval exercise near Australia, forcing some to change their flight paths.

The Unexpected Drill

Pilots first heard about the Chinese live-fire naval exercise while already in the air last week.

• The exercise took place in the Tasman Sea between Australia and New Zealand.

• Pilots received messages on the emergency radio channel, not through the usual Notice to Airmen (NOTAM).

Confusion in the Air

The unexpected drill caused confusion among pilots, dispatchers, and air traffic control.

• A Virgin Australia pilot picked up the Chinese navy broadcast at 9:58 a.m. Sydney time.

• Air traffic control started sending hazard alerts to nearby aircraft, including Singapore Airlines and Air New Zealand flights.

Legal but Irresponsible

Is this legal? Well, China's actions did comply with international law but fell short of best practices for notifications.

• Australia and New Zealand criticized the short notice, calling it “irresponsible.”

• Pilots had to self-manage maneuvering around the zone, increasing their workload.

Historical Context

This incident highlights the risks of live-fire exercises and the need for better communication.

• Civil aircraft have been shot down by military assets in the past, such as Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 over Ukraine in 2014.

• The Chinese warships were beyond Australia's 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone.

Context

• The Chinese navy has now moved south of Australia and is heading west.

• Both countries will likely review their protocols to prevent similar incidents in the future.

🇮🇳 INDIA
India and EU Set Trade Deadline

India and the European Union have finally committed to wrapping up their free trade deal by the end of 2025, after years of on-and-off negotiations.

Announcement

On February 28, 2025, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced their commitment to finalize the trade deal by the end of the year.

• Talks resumed in 2021 after an eight-year hiatus.

• The EU is India's largest trading partner in goods, with two-way trade reaching $137.5 billion in the 2023/24 fiscal year.

Key Areas of Focus

The trade deal aims to cover a wide range of industries, from batteries and pharmaceuticals to semiconductors and clean hydrogen.

• Modi mentioned a blueprint for collaboration in trade, technology, investment, innovation, green growth, security, skilling, and mobility.

• Von der Leyen called for an “ambitious” trade and investment deal.

Challenges Ahead

Despite the commitment, there are still significant hurdles to overcome.

• India needs to lower tariffs on imported cars, whiskey, and wine.

• The EU must ease visa restrictions on Indian professionals.

• India opposes the EU's proposed tariffs on high-carbon goods, including steel, aluminum, and cement.

Geopolitical Context

The announcement comes amid rising geopolitical tensions and threats of reciprocal tariffs from the US President Donald Trump.

• Von der Leyen emphasized the importance of cooperation and working together in a world of great-power competition.

🇲🇽 MEXICO
US Threatens Action on Cartels

It’s now being reported that the US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has warned Mexican officials that the US military is ready to take action against drug cartels if Mexico doesn't do more to stop the flow of fentanyl and migrants into the US.

Hegseth's Warning

During a call with top Mexican military officials on January 31, Hegseth said that the US might take “unilateral action” against drug cartels.

• The Pentagon chief urged Mexico to address the collusion between their government and violent criminal organizations.

• Mexican officials were reportedly “shocked and angered” by Hegseth’s comments.

Meeting with Mexican Officials

After the call, Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Attorney General Pam Bondi also met with Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs Juan Ramon de la Fuente on Thursday.

• The meeting aimed to discuss the ongoing issues with drug cartels and the flow of fentanyl and migrants.

• The US officials emphasized the need for Mexico to take more decisive action.

Political Reactions

The warning has sparked a range of reactions from both US and Mexican officials.

• Some US officials support the idea of taking unilateral action if Mexico doesn't step up its efforts.

• Mexican officials, however, are concerned about the potential implications of such actions on their sovereignty and relations with the US.

🇺🇦 UKRAINE
Zelenskyy Leaves
White House Furious

I know you're all busy and might not have time to watch the full 50-minute exchange between the two nations, but I strongly encourage you to do so.

If you only catch the short soundbites and highlight clips, it’s easy to believe this meeting was a premeditated ambush by US leaders to justify cutting funding to Ukraine. But, watching the entire conversation, you’ll see a different story unfold.

• It begins lightheartedly, with US leaders joking and showing mutual respect for President Zelenskyy—only for the tone to shift as the discussion progresses.

• In my view, around the 40-minute mark, the mood took a turn when President Zelenskyy began pressing the issue of morality and voicing his frustration with the US’s relentless push for diplomacy—something he clearly sees as futile when it comes to Putin.

But before diving deeper into the nuances of it, here’s a brief summary to get us started:

Cut Short

On February 28, 2025, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stormed out of the White House after a heated exchange with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, leaving a crucial minerals deal unsigned and a press conference canceled.

• Trump cut short the talks, leaving Zelenskyy without a deal for US access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals.

• The meeting devolved into a tense back-and-forth, with Trump and Vice President JD Vance criticizing Zelenskyy for his skepticism about Russia’s commitment to diplomacy.

• Trump also berated Zelenskyy during their meeting, accusing him of “gambling with millions of lives” and suggesting his actions could trigger World War III.

Security Guarantees

Zelenskyy’s main goal was to secure US backing for Ukraine’s security, but Trump focused on the minerals deal instead.

• Trump dismissed Zelenskyy’s concerns about trusting Russian President Vladimir Putin, claiming Putin hadn’t broken agreements with him.

• Zelenskyy warned against moving too close to Russia, citing Moscow’s history of broken commitments.

The Situation

I won’t include short clips from the interview here because, in my view, they do more to mislead than inform. Instead, here’s the reality as I see it:

Ukraine’s position

President Zelenskyy and Ukraine are undeniably in a weaker position—militarily, financially, and in many other ways.

• This leaves Ukraine with little negotiating power when dealing with the US, aside from appealing to ethics and public sentiment.

• With support fading, its strongest argument remains the idea that it is Europe’s last line of defense against Putin’s autocracy.

United States

Trump and Vance were elected on the promise of ending the war in Ukraine quickly.

• Their top priority is delivering on that pledge—or at the very least, making it look like they are, for those who remain skeptical.

Feud

Many critics argue that Zelenskyy is guilt-tripping Americans into backing the war against Putin.

• In this very conversation, he does it again—warning that the US will “feel” the consequences of not supporting Ukraine and allowing Putin back onto the world stage. This, of course, seemed to tip Trump over the edge.

• Now, put yourself in the shoes of the US President—the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth, holding all the leverage. How would it feel to be lectured by a country that has almost none?

• Vice President Vance calls this out, asking Zelenskyy why he isn’t showing more gratitude for the support the US has already provided. He also pushed back against Zelenskyy, seemingly lecturing them in front of the press instead of trying to resolve disagreements behind closed doors.

Trump Problem

At one point, President Trump clarifies that he’s not bad-mouthing Putin because he can’t insult someone and then expect them to graciously sign a peace deal.

• However, this becomes problematic because Trump has previously called Zelenskyy a "dictator" on Truth Social and criticized him for seemingly wanting more war than peace.

• In the eyes of his critics, it's easy to see why they would view him as pro-Russia.

My Take (Finally)

I think they are both at fault.

This is because both sides were focused on two different things: The US wants a ceasefire at all costs, while Ukraine is pushing for continued US military support (without allowing diplomacy with Putin).

• I feel sympathetic toward President Zelenskyy, especially considering that English isn't his first language and his country is fighting for its survival. However, he’s not without his faults.

• But from a pragmatist’s point of view, I am going to put aside moral and ethical implications and focus on the technicals of engagement.

But before doing so, here’s an interview President Zelenskyy gave Fox. The network did a great job not interrupting him and giving us a glimpse of what he’s feeling:

US: VP Vance was the most influential on the temperature of the conversation.

• He seemed to get angry when Zelenskyy tried to tell him why diplomacy wouldn’t work with Putin in front of the press.

• I think Vance had an opportunity to deescalate here, but perhaps Zelenskyy’s crossed arms only reinforced the perception of him being "ungrateful," or he felt like he was being lectured. Instead, Vance let his emotions get the better of him and turned up the heat even more in this moment.

• President Trump began to get frustrated at this point as well, directly pointing out that Zelenskyy has no leverage and accusing him of allowing his own people to die when he believes peace could be achieved through diplomacy.

• However, Zelenskyy responds, arguing that stopping the fight would only increase his people’s anxiety over the possibility of a renewed invasion by Putin.

As for President Zelenskyy, being in the position of asking for help, there are certainly things he could have handled differently.

Some may argue why Zelenskyy should bow down to the US, but the reality is that Ukraine needs the US far more. Ukraine simply does not hold any diplomatic cards—that’s the reality.

The US is a global superpower with control over the global economy, the military, and much more. This, of course, doesn’t mean that Zelenskyy should sacrifice his dignity, but he could have handled the situation more strategically.

• Clothes: He’s probably aware of the criticism surrounding his attire. While some may view it as trivial, the reality is that many people have questioned why he doesn’t wear a suit to formal events, interpreting it as a sign of disrespect. Yet, he chose not to hear it again. When you're in a position of seeking help, it's often best to minimize any friction. Here, one of the first things Trump says to him is a comment about his clothes:

• Body Language: I get that Zelenskyy was emotionally charged during this conversation—I'd be impatient too if my country were fighting for its survival every day. However, when you have been criticized in the past for appearing "ungrateful," crossing your arms in the Oval Office and appearing to lecture the VP of the most powerful nation, right in front the press with the world watching, isn't the best move. Even if the President and VP seem not to understand the nuances of Putin’s evil. Once again, any way to lessen friction.

• Arguing: A more "diplomatic" approach would have been to save any disagreements for behind closed doors, away from the cameras. Instead, Zelenskyy chose to directly challenge the VP on his views of diplomacy. However, we are all human—emotions get the best of us all.

Closing Thoughts

• Once again, not many can relate to the anxiety President Zelenskyy must be feeling since we are not currently getting pummeled by Russia.

• But it’s also true that President Zelenskyy can’t fully grasp the frustration American taxpayers have felt since 2022 as inflation continues to erode their savings.

These two problems aren’t the same, but pain is subjective.

A paper cut can feel more painful to someone than vicariously feeling the suffering of others in a war.

To conclude, Putin’s horrendous actions must be condemned, but this situation isn’t black and white. It’s not a team sport where you pick a side and bash the other.

Everyone has faults, and no one can fully feel the pain of another. Treating this like a team sport, as if you are the only one who understands 100% of the situation, will only deepen the political and moral divisions we’re already grappling with within our borders.