Charles’s diplomacy cited in Zelensky aide’s claim of Trump Ukraine shift

Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s top adviser said King Charles III played a pivotal role in persuading Donald Trump to shift his stance on Ukraine during the U.K. monarch’s state visit last week. Andriy Yermak, Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, said the monarch’s discussions with the U.S. president were “very important” to Trump’s apparent policy reversal, coming as Washington signaled a more robust backing for Kyiv amid ongoing fighting.

Trump’s remarks in New York and on social media in the days after the United Nations General Assembly meetings marked a marked departure from his earlier position that Ukraine would need to cede territory to Russia for peace. In a post on Truth Social, he argued that Ukraine, with the support of the European Union and NATO, could retake all of the territory Ukraine lost since the invasion and hinted that the original borders were an option if time, patience and Western backing prevail. U.S. officials and Kyiv aides noted the tone and the timing of his comments as signaling an evolved stance, even as the White House cautioned against reading too much into a single statement.

Charles hosted the Trump delegation at Windsor Castle, where he spoke at the State Banquet and underscored the historical bond between Britain and Ukraine’s defenders. In his address, the King recalled the two world wars in which Britain and Ukraine fought side by side against tyranny and urged continued unity to deter aggression and press for peace. Trump, in a dinner speech at the event, called the King a “very, very special man” and thanked him for hospitality, framing the visit as a symbol of allied resolve in Europe’s security framework. Ukrainian aides who accompanied the delegation credited the royal diplomacy and the prime minister’s standing with shaping Trump’s approach, though they stopped short of outlining a single, enforceable policy shift tied to the visit.

The Kremlin quickly dismissed the Trump U-turn as a tactical miscalculation, arguing that Russia’s economy is capable of sustaining its military effort and that Ukraine would not be able to reclaim territory. The change in posture comes at a time of heightened tension on Europe’s eastern flank, including incursions by Russian drones into Polish airspace and Russian jets operating near NATO airspace, events that underscored the fragile balance of deterrence, diplomacy and military readiness on the continent.

In Kyiv, analysts urged caution about how far a shift in Washington’s rhetoric translates into battlefield outcomes. Colonel Philip Ingram (ret.), a former British Army officer and security analyst, noted that reclaiming all occupied territory would be extremely challenging militarily, while acknowledging a broader geopolitical path could exist if Russian production and logistics strain under sustained sanctions and Ukrainian countermeasures. “From a pure military perspective, it would be very difficult for the Ukrainians to push the Russians out quickly,” Ingram said. “But from a wider operational perspective, where you bring in the geopolitical factors, there is a realistic option—but it would take a long time and would require sustained Western support, particularly to undermine Russia’s ability to sustain its war effort.”

The war in Ukraine has entered its fourth year of brutal combat. Russia occupies roughly 19 percent of Ukrainian territory, including Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk, and Donetsk regions, following Moscow’s 2022 invasion and subsequent captures. Russia also annexed Crimea in 2014. Kyiv maintains that international support—military, economic and political—remains essential to resisting Moscow’s advances, while Western capitals weigh the proper balance of sanctions, aid and diplomacy to deter further aggression. The ongoing conflict has seen extensive trench networks, minefields and fortified lines, described by Western defense officials as among the densest in the world, complicating any potential effort to restore full Ukrainian sovereignty in the near term.

As Kyiv and its allies parse the implications of Trump’s stated shift, questions remain about how the United States and its partners will translate rhetoric into sustained action. Washington has signaled a commitment to providing NATO partners with weapons, vehicles and other munitions to support Ukraine’s defense, while also advocating for a broader, long-term European security architecture that can deter future aggression. The timeline for any potential battlefield gains remains uncertain, but the diplomacy surrounding the Windsor visit has injected new momentum into Kyiv’s efforts to secure international backing as it seeks to reverse years of gains by Moscow on the ground.