Power, Politics, and the Chessboard of Ambitions: A New Move – Trump vs. Zelensky. Who Won?
By: Raja Zahid Akhtar Khanzada
The atmosphere in the Oval Office was thick with tension. President Trump’s eyes carried the same signature anger and indifference that set him apart. Across from him stood Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky—like a weary yet resolute soldier, clutching onto the last threads of hope for his war-torn nation. But in the game of power politics, hope holds little weight against cold realities, and Trump made sure to place that weight squarely on Zelensky’s shoulders.
“This war is becoming more ours than Ukraine’s, and we will not accept that!”Trump’s thunderous voice echoed off the walls of the Oval Office.
To his right sat Vice President J.D. Vance, to his left, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and beside them, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent—all with their heads bowed, as if already aware that this outburst signaled a major shift.
Zelensky had come seeking U.S. support, but what he received was not just unexpected—it was a calculated power move on the global chessboard. Trump made his stance crystal clear:
“There will be no negotiations with him. Tell him to get out with his team!”
The White House had laid out a lavish meal, but for Zelensky and his delegation, the hospitality had lost all meaning. They had come searching for power and support—neither of which was being offered by Trump. Yet, there was no look of defeat on Zelensky’s face. Instead, he carried the expression of a seasoned player waiting for his next move.
The moment he stepped out of the Oval Office, European leaders were on the line. Germany, Spain, Poland, Lithuania, and Estonia reaffirmed their loyalty. But the real question remained—does Europe have the courage to face Russia without America? Probably not. And that very hesitation was shaping the foundation of America’s new foreign policy. Meanwhile, the U.S. was not just distancing itself from Ukraine; it was actively reclaiming lost ground elsewhere. America demanded the return of its abandoned military equipment from Afghanistan’s Bagram Airbase, a clear sign that it was now counting every investment, every dollar, and every piece of power it had left behind.
Quietly, in the backdrop, another player was becoming increasingly significant—Pakistan. Increased funding for the oversight of F-16 fighter jets, a rise in military contractor activities, and an invitation for Pakistan to align itself against China—these were all signals of a shifting power structure. But was Pakistan ready to align with America’s new policies? This was no longer the post-9/11 world. Decisions were now far more complicated.
Then there was Saudi Arabia—a nation where millions of Pakistanis live and work. Its growing closeness to America could create a fragile situation for Pakistan.
It would be easy to say that Zelensky was humiliated. But the reality is never that simple. When a weaker party stands its ground against a great power, it has already secured a victory of its own. America wanted Zelensky to submit. He did not.
His entry into the White House, his simple attire, his disregard for formal protocol—it all sent a clear message: he did not come to bow; he came to stand tall.
Can any Muslim leader display such defiance? Probably not. Surrendering before the powerful has become a norm. But Zelensky refused.
Some Democratic senators claim that the entire episode was a staged drama—Trump’s attempt to rally his voter base. But in doing so, America has suffered a deeper loss. The world’s “big brother” image has weakened. A new global chessboard is being laid out, where the definition of power is changing.
In the end, one thing is undeniable—Zelensky has guts. We may disagree with him, but the truth remains: he showed the courage that few possess. The world is changing, and with it, the rules of war, diplomacy, and leadership.
The real question is—who will make the next move?
