Why did President Wolodyymyr Senskyj not succeed in placing his personally personally? During the conversation with Donald Trump, the provocation was in the air from the start.
A shell experience: Trump and Senskyj in the White House – with an exchange of successes that are not worthy of both president. Trump, who demanded gratitude, Senskyj, who was not ready to give. Senskyj was probably clear from the start that the American president is unpredictable and also not a proven friend of Ukraine. The fact that, as a Ukrainian president, he is forced to go through Europe and the United States on a “bailing tour” for three years, his position against something that is currently the almighty. And that provocation was in the air from the start by Trump’s remark: “One was fine.”
In exceptional cases, why did Senskyj actually “finished” in this important conversation for this Ukraine? Why was he unable to better hide his growing aversion to Trump in terms of body?
State table level is not surprising
And why did he formulate a “thank you” at least once in a direct conversation with the US president and his vice, rather than to rely on the fact that he would have often thanked the Americans for their help?
The fact that Trump drives over his conversation partner does not let him end, behaves in a fast and level level and therefore provokes his VIS-A-VIS, it is not surprising when it comes to knowing this man. But why was President Senskyj provoked?
This more and more heated argument has made me the impression that the duel between two egos for men eventually was about the game. And it is probably. With a very uneven starting point: thousands of thousands of dying in Ukraine – they don’t do that in the United States. Is it not the task of the Ukrainian president to set his own sensitivities?
Senskyj did not show any diplomatic skill
If you are unable to show the wrong man for this job in such a difficult situation with an extremely powerful and uncontrollable opposite of diplomatic skills. “It was a great television,” Trump said at the end of this conversation. Not incorrect, but what cynicism when you consider what is at stake.
Source: Krone
I am George Kunkel, an author working for Today Times Live. I specialize in opinion pieces and cover stories that are both informative and thought-provoking – helping to shape public discourse on key issues. My work is regularly featured across the network’s many platforms, including print media and social media.
