Trump’s Speech: Why Not Call It an Invasion?
Published in Sankei Shimbun
(Japan) on 7 March 2025
by (link to original)
U.S. President Donald Trump delivered a policy speech to Congress.
The speech, which, at about 100 minutes, was the longest such speech in history, focused on domestic affairs, such as criticism of the former administration and appeals for policy shifts, with only a little bit of time left for foreign policy.
Regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Trump emphasized that he is “working tirelessly to end the savage conflict in Ukraine.”
It is appropriate for Trump to seek a cease-fire between Ukraine and Russia. However, in the speech, it was dubious that he did not call the war, which Russian President Vladimir Putin initiated, an invasion.
Trump called the conflict “savage” and “brutal,” but his manner of speaking could be interpreted as looking at Ukraine as the one causing the war.
Russia is conducting a savage and brutal war, while Ukraine is exercising its right to self-defense, as stipulated by international law. Trump also talked about ending "this senseless war,” but Ukraine's fight and sacrifice to defend its sovereignty and territory are not “senseless.” That is precisely why the U.S. has been expected to support Ukraine.
The pursuit of peace is also natural, but it is a mistake to keep silent about who the aggressor is. Stopping Vladimir Putin's violence and preventing a repeat is what will lead to true peace.
A summit meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ended in a breakdown, and the U.S. placed a moratorium on military support for Ukraine.
In his speech, Trump announced that he had “received an important letter from President Zelenskyy.” The letter said that Zelenskyy is “ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership,” also conveying that Ukraine is “ready to sign” an “agreement on [joint development with the U.S. of] minerals ... at any time that is convenient for you [Trump].”
This letter expressed that Ukraine values "how much America has done to help Ukraine.” If this is the case, the U.S. ought to resume the military support it was providing during the earlier stages of the conflict.
In last year's State of the Union address, former U.S. President Joe Biden alluded to securing peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, but regrettably, Trump did not include any such mention in his speech.
We hope that Trump realizes that his aim of a “golden age of America” will not come to fruition if he neglects to implement a steadfast response and appropriate measures to curb the lawlessness of autocratic states.
The speech, which, at about 100 minutes, was the longest such speech in history, focused on domestic affairs, such as criticism of the former administration and appeals for policy shifts, with only a little bit of time left for foreign policy.
Regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Trump emphasized that he is “working tirelessly to end the savage conflict in Ukraine.”
It is appropriate for Trump to seek a cease-fire between Ukraine and Russia. However, in the speech, it was dubious that he did not call the war, which Russian President Vladimir Putin initiated, an invasion.
Trump called the conflict “savage” and “brutal,” but his manner of speaking could be interpreted as looking at Ukraine as the one causing the war.
Russia is conducting a savage and brutal war, while Ukraine is exercising its right to self-defense, as stipulated by international law. Trump also talked about ending "this senseless war,” but Ukraine's fight and sacrifice to defend its sovereignty and territory are not “senseless.” That is precisely why the U.S. has been expected to support Ukraine.
The pursuit of peace is also natural, but it is a mistake to keep silent about who the aggressor is. Stopping Vladimir Putin's violence and preventing a repeat is what will lead to true peace.
A summit meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ended in a breakdown, and the U.S. placed a moratorium on military support for Ukraine.
In his speech, Trump announced that he had “received an important letter from President Zelenskyy.” The letter said that Zelenskyy is “ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership,” also conveying that Ukraine is “ready to sign” an “agreement on [joint development with the U.S. of] minerals ... at any time that is convenient for you [Trump].”
This letter expressed that Ukraine values "how much America has done to help Ukraine.” If this is the case, the U.S. ought to resume the military support it was providing during the earlier stages of the conflict.
In last year's State of the Union address, former U.S. President Joe Biden alluded to securing peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, but regrettably, Trump did not include any such mention in his speech.
We hope that Trump realizes that his aim of a “golden age of America” will not come to fruition if he neglects to implement a steadfast response and appropriate measures to curb the lawlessness of autocratic states.
Previous article![]( "The War in Ukraine and America’s Foreign Policy Direction")
Next article![]( "Who Will Replace Trump?*")